04/05/2011 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.,~ Michael Ubaldi City of North Olmsted Public Hearing March 26, 2011 Page 13 Page 15 i MR. LIMPERT: Oh, I thought we i authority is the key thing here and that 2 have to call the motion, then discuss z was totally disregarded. Thank you. a our -- s MR. SCHUMANN: Mr. President? 4 MR. GAREAU: Motion then -- 4 MR. LIMPERT: Councilman Schumann. ~ s MR. LIMPERT: In that case, is s MR. SCHUMANN: Mr. President, I s there any discussion? s would like to make a couple comments and I ~ MR. BARKER: Mr. President? ~ want to apologize, I have a bad cold so I s MR. LIMPERT: Yes, Councilman s made some notes when I had a moment of 9 Barker. s clarity. I don't know Mr. Ubaldi, but I io MR. BARKER: First I want to thank io had heard his name before and I am aware of ii Mr. Carson and Mr. Jamison for their work 11 his family's public service. I think it iz in this hearing. Also Mr. Ubaldi and Mayor 1z makes this process all the more difficult. 13 Kennedy for their, for being here tonight, 13 Unfortunately, I don't think his past i4 on Tuesday and today, and also Mr. Gareau is performance should be evidence in this is for his guidance, and Mr. Limpert for is case. i6 running this hearing. i6 The reasons for his dismissal may i~ I'm drawn to the words of i~ seem trivial or a technicality, but I ie appointing authority. To me that starts is believe based on the evidence that was i9 the whole process, a notice from the i9 presented to us he was technically wrong. zo appointing authority. It, the way I read zo I don't believe the Mayor conspired to fire zi the rules, it's improper to request test zi him. I did not hear nor see any evidence 22 dates on rumors or news articles which 22 to support that claim. 1 would have liked 23 speculate upon an approaching position of z3 to hear from Mr. Ubaldi on that, so I think z4 vacancy, and in the subject of 2010.66 24 we need to throw that right out. 25 which created new language in the zs I served one of those thankless Page 14 Page 16 i reorganization of the safety department, i i jobs as a commissioner, and there has been 2 brought about several amendments to Rule 8 2 many times when we were advised or even 3 which was amended in February of 2010. 3 directed by the law department and we 4 And in the above stated section 4 didn't always follow the advice or accept s which we heard the other day, Sections 1 5 the opinion, but I don't remember not s and 2 under B, those were, there were staking direction as to procedure. It's ~ amendments made and it was stated that ~ really important that we have people that s Chairman Ubaldi was on the Civil Service shave expertise in proper procedure. I s Commission for seven or eight years, s think it's a foundation for the rule of io indicating to me that he was part of the io law. We couldn't be having this hearing if ii process that amended the rules of this ii we didn't have people with expertise in iz Commission on February 22nd, which states iz proper procedure. 13 that an appointing authority needs to make 13 I keep coming back to this, would 14 a notice, needs to notify the Commission 14 it have been so hard for the Commission to is before any procedure can start. is wait until they received notice by the i6 So that's where I keep going back i6 appointing authority? Certainly the threat i~ to the appointing authority. Mr. O'Malley i~ of possible litigation should have given ; is repeated many times listening to the , is the Commission pause. At least one of the !, i9 minutes, reading the minutes and testimony i9 commissioners did argue this position. As ', 20 of his guidance on that, and as a zo a member of this body protecting the city's 21 councilman and as board and commission 21 money entrusted to us, it's paramount. As 2z members, I feel it's important to listen to 22 to the behavior after the meeting in z3 the guidance given to us by the law 23 question, the evidence presented 24 department. That's what they're there for. z4 demonstrated that Mr. Ubaldi acted someone z5 So I just have a feel that the appointing 2s erratic, and there was no defense of this Mehler & Hagestrom (4) Pages 13 -16 800.822.0650