My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8/2/1988
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1988
>
8/2/1988
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:00:11 PM
Creation date
6/12/2015 2:24:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
08/02/1988
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
r <br />more appropriate for someone else to sit as a hearing officer. <br />In fact, as late as yesterday, he called Mrs. Kiser's attorney. <br />Wayne McDonough, and suggested to him that it would be fine if <br />they wished to have a 3 -party hearing officer. Attorney <br />McDonough wanted to discuss it with his client. Administrator <br />Balczun stated that it makes no difference to him, but he felt <br />that if we do that, in all probability, his guess would be that <br />we would want to engage an attorney to sit as a hearing officer, <br />in which case there might be some cost. <br />Commissioner Eggert realized there would be some cost, but <br />felt it would be worth it in the long run. When she spoke to <br />Attorney Vitunac about the possibility, he did not object. <br />Attorney Vitunac advised that labor law encourages an <br />impartial hearing officer, and in this case, where Mr. <br />Blankenship will not be available, someone is going to have to <br />present the County's case, which might even be Administrator <br />Balczun. Thparefore, it was fine with him to get an outside <br />lawyer, and he could undertake proposals from local lawyers who <br />could sit as such. <br />Chairman Scurlock felt it should be a mutually acceptable <br />person between Attorney McDonough and the County. Personally, he <br />felt the County should follow the personnel policy on rules and <br />regulations, administer them impartially, and properly document <br />those cases when we have a personnel problem. In this particular <br />case, because it has dragged on for so long and has not been <br />brought to a head, he felt that what we face now is that <br />virtually every staff member, as well as the Commissioners <br />themselves, could be called as witnesses in this hearing. That <br />makes it very, very difficult, and his personal opinion would be <br />to very strongly support an impartial hearing of all the facts <br />with a recommendation back to the Board for a final decision. <br />There is, of course, a provision to appeal the Board's decision. <br />Administrator Balczun asked for clarification, and Chairman <br />Scurlock explained that the Board would authorize Attorney <br />28 <br />AUG 2 1988 BooK 73 339 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.