►
From YouTube: Committee on Rules & Administration on July 8, 2021
Description
Docket #0504 - Hearing to review Central Staff policies, procedures, performance and regulations
A
This
matter
was
sponsored
by
council
lydia
edwards
and
was
referred
to
the
committee
on
rules
and
administration
on
april
7th
of
this
year,
in
accordance
with
chapter
20
of
the
acts
of
2021
modifying
certain
requirements
of
the
open
meeting
law
and
religion
and
relieving
public
bodies
of
certain
requirements,
including
the
requirement
that
public
bodies
conduct
its
meetings
in
a
public
place
that
is
open
and
physically
accessible
to
the
public.
The
city
council
will
be
conducting
this
hearing.
A
Virtually
this
enables
the
council
to
carry
out
its
responsibilities
while
adhering
to
public
health
recommendations
and
ensuring
public
access
to
its
deliberations
through
adequate
alternative
means.
The
public
may
watch
this
meeting
via
live
stream
at
cityofboston.gov
or
boston,
dot,
gov,
slash
city
dash,
council
dash
tv
or
on
broadcast
television
channel
xfinity
channel
8,
rcn
channel
82
and
verizon
fios
channel
964..
A
A
I
am
joined
by
several
colleagues,
including
the
sponsor
counselor
lydia
edwards,
as
well
as
counselor
ricardo
arroyo,
councillor,
liz
braden
and
constant
michelle
wu
apologies.
If
that
wasn't
your
exact
order
of
a
best
and
curious,
I'm
gonna
invite
the
sponsor
for
a
brief
opening
statement
and
then
other
counselors
may
do
so
and
then
we
will
get
into.
I
believe
our
remarkable
central
staff
director
lady
valdez
may
kick
off
some
of
the
the
panel
speaking
so
counselor
edwards
the
floor
is
yours.
I
thank
you
for
introducing
this
topic.
B
Thank
you
very
much.
You
know
I
I'm
here
not
only
because
I'm
a
district
city
councilor,
I'm
chair
of
government
ops,
but
I'm
also
proud.
Member
of
the
uaw,
and
I
have
been
a
worker's
rights
attorney
for
for
some
time,
and
so
I
wanted
to
introduce
this
and
want
to
have
this
comprehensive
conversation
about
central
staff
and
every
city,
councillor
staff
who
I
believe
are
uniquely
vulnerable.
B
They
are
uniquely
vulnerable
because
they
cannot
form
a
union.
They
are
uniquely
vulnerable
because
they're
90
day
employees
because
they
have
at
least
for
central
staff.
They
have
13
supervisors.
Every
single
one
of
the
city
councillors
is
a
supervisor
of
central
staff
collectively
and,
of
course,
for
our
own
internal
staffers.
We
are
elected
officials
and
a
lot
of
their
careers
and
their
ability
to
grow
and
be
in
in
this
building
is
dependent
upon
an
elected
official,
maintaining
their
employment,
and
I
find
that
to
be
again
a
combination
for
unique
vulnerabilities.
B
Now
this
body
in
many
cases,
has
come
out
with
powerful
resolutions
standing
up
for
by
and
with
workers
on
strike
workers
who
are
fighting
for
living
wages,
workers
who
are
fighting
for
sexual
harassment
policies
on
their
own.
We
have
been
there
all
the
time
and
I
think
it's
time
that
we
we
we
are
reflective
of
how
things
are
for
the
workers
who
work
for
us.
B
I
most
workplaces
have
a
complaint
process,
a
redress
process
and
anti-retaliation
process
that
are
clear
and
understood,
and
I
don't
believe
that
these
workers
have
those
things.
Moreover,
a
lot
of
workplaces
are
required
to
have
a
list
of
the
rights
of
workers
posted
in
a
common
area.
Again,
I
don't
know
that
all
workers
here
have
that
same
protection.
B
So
my
goal
today
is
to
make
sure
that
central
staffers
understand
that
we
see
them.
We
value
them
that
each
one
of
the
staffers
in
our
offices
feel
seen
and
valued
as
well,
and
I
would
like
to
walk
away
with
a
clear
process
and
updated
processes
that
assure
that
the
staff,
any
staff
person
that
may
have
a
complaint
concern
or
feel
that
they
have
been
abused
by
any
city.
B
Councilor
knows
a
direct
route
knows
how
that
route
is
going
to
be
played
out
and
knows
that
they
are
protected
if
they
come
forward,
and
that
could
be-
and
I
want
it
to
be
an
internal
one.
They
always
always
can
go,
of
course,
to
the
mcad
and
other
other
agencies.
I
also
want
to
make
sure
that
in
as
much
as
we
as
city
councilors
have
concerns
about
staff
performance,
we
are
clear
about
how
we
are
supposed
to
bring
those
complaints.
B
Those
concerns
how
we
hire
how
we
fire
all
of
that
and
how
that
is
supposed
to
go,
and
I
I
I
could
tell
you
right
now:
it's
not
absolutely
crystal
clear
in
all
the
things
that
I
have
read.
I
want
you
to
know
to
my
colleagues.
I
did
invite
hr
to
come
here
today.
I
know,
of
course,
with
with
council
o'malley.
B
I
think
they
have
been
involved
in
investigations
and
I
think
they
have
been
involved
in
back
and
forth
of
the
council
and
my
I'm
disappointed
that
they're
not
here
to
help
clarify
that
and
also
to
help
us
build
together
and
understand
ways
in
which
all
workers
feel
safe
here.
So
I
will
just
say
this.
B
If
I
leave
this
with
more
questions
and
answers,
I
will
be
putting
in
a
17f,
that's
detailed
and
is
asking
them
specifically
about
their
roles
in
the
past
and
and
rules
in
the
future
about
how
hr
is
expected
to
work
with
this
body.
So
again,
I'm
here
today,
because
we
show
up
every
place
else
for
other
workers
and
it's
about
time
that
we
acknowledge
that
our
own
workers
need
protections
and
clarification.
A
C
Thank
you
counselor
or
mr
chair
in
terms
of
I'll,
keep
my
statements
brief.
So
we
can
have
sort
of
a
working
sort
of
session
in
this
hearing.
But
I
I
was
under
the
impression
we
were
talking
about
specifically
our
central
staff
protocol,
but
it
sounds
like
this
is
also
about
our
own
personal
offices.
C
So
it's
about
our
own
personal
staff
and
central
staff,
which
I'm
interested
in
hearing
how
how
we
wrap
those
things
in,
because
there's
obviously
places
where
I
think,
for
instance,
with
the
sexual
harassment
notice
that
they
all
have
to
sign
and
things
like
that.
There's
there's
trainings
where
they
mutually
meet,
but
I'm
not
sure
how
deep
in
the
weeds
we're
going
into
each
person's
individual
offices
and
how
we
structure
that.
C
So
I'm
interested
in
terms
of
just
that
conversation
and
where
we're
touching
on
that,
I'm
actually
very
much
interested
in
hearing
as
well.
How
we
go
about
reviewing
work
right,
because
this
is
now
we're
now
july,
8th
2021.
I've
been
here
since
january
of
2020
and
I
don't
think
we've
had
any
formal
review.
C
I've
certainly
not
been
solicited
for
my
review
of
any
individual
central
staffers
job
performance
or
specific
tasks
that
were
conducted
or
not
conducted,
and
so
I
think
that's
something
that
we
should
certainly
set
up
since
I
know
that
the
rules
committee
is
built
to
do
that,
and
it
might
make
sense
for
us
to
have
quarterly
or
regularly
annually
or
something
sort
of
review
things
where
we
we
do
it
back
and
forth.
So,
for
instance,
I
have
certain
staff
members
who
report
to
me
how
I'm
doing
with
them
and
vice
versa.
C
Right
like
we
have
these
yearly
check-ins
on
both
persons,
job
performances
with
them,
so
how
they
they
appreciate
my
leadership
or
how
they
don't
and
vice
versa.
And
so
those
are
the
kinds
of
things
that
I
don't
think
we
do
with
central
staff.
I
don't
know
if
the
central
city
council
president
does
that
necessarily
on
a
regular
schedule
either,
but
that
might
be
something
that
just
for
I
can
imagine
for
central
staff.
A
B
To
be
clear,
the
reason
why
we'd
be
talking
about
it's,
not
individual
offices,
but
because
the
2018
policy
for
sexual
harassment
involves
all
of
those
individuals
who
are
employed.
It
does
touch
on
our
offices.
So
that's
that's
where
the
overlap
happens.
It's
in
our
own
harassment
policy
and
I
still
think
that
that
policy
needs
to
be
updated.
D
D
So
I
welcome
that
and
as
a
new
counselor
who
was
10
10
weeks
in
city
hall
and
just
adapting
to
the
culture
and
figuring
out
how
how
things
work,
I
really
value-
and
I
think
it'll
be
valuable
for
our
new
colleagues
coming
on
board
next
year
to
have
some
sort
of
a
road
map
to
to
follow
in
terms
of
office
procedure
and
and
and
how
we
manage
all
these
various
pieces.
So
I
really
value
the
opportunity
to
to
get
dive
into
this
conversation.
E
I
think,
especially
with
the
structure
of
the
council,
where
the
council
president
tends
to
change
over
fairly
frequently
there's
an
instability
there
and
having
more
codified
guidance,
whether
it
is
a
commitment
to
ongoing
regular
performance,
evaluations
and
mechanisms
for
tying
that
to
cost
compensation,
etc
or
guaranteed.
Cost
of
living
could
be
helpful
as
well.
So
just
here
in
case
any
of
that
information
over
the
last
eight
years
is
helpful.
F
F
We
literally
don't
allow
people
to
hold
two
terms
in
a
row
as
council
president,
so
I
think
as
long
as
that's
the
council's
rule
for
its
own
governance,
we
need
to
have
sort
of
complementary
rules
that
introduce
more
stability
for
central
staff,
so
I
I
certainly
found
coming
in
as
a
new
counselor
that
the
the
kind
of
lack
of
standard
and
model
documents
to
use
I
mean,
even
even
in
sort
of
creating
job
offers.
With
my
office.
F
I
think
regularization
of
of
check-ins,
of
those
procedures
on
both
sides,
for
staff
and
for
counselors
of
reporting
of
of
you
know,
reporting
when
there's
a
challenge
I
think
is
important
and,
and
it
just
it
seems
to
me-
I
mean
certainly.
Mr
president,
I
think
I
one
thing
I
think
would
make
sense
from
here
would
be
to
kind
of
identify
what
are
the
documents
that
need
updating?
F
Sometimes,
and
so
I
just
think
that
the
onus
is
really
high
on
us
to
to
make
sure
that
we're
creating
procedures
that
are
that
are
fair
and
they
give
people
a
recourse
in
light
of
that
power
balance
so
just
as
usual,
very
much
appreciate
my
friend
counselor
edwards
for
this,
and
and
definitely
I'm
volunteering
to
be
involved
in
the
weeds
of
some
of
our
document
and
process
updates.
So
thank
you,
mr
president.
A
G
A
Thank
you,
councillor
flynn,
I
believe
that's
all
for
colleagues,
we
may
have
some
others
joining
us
as
the
time
progresses.
I
just
wanted
to
take
this
opportunity
to
thank
the
maker,
councilor
edwards
for
her
work
and
partnership
here,
as
I
mentioned
at
the
last
council
meeting,
I'm
somewhat
of
an
accidental
council
president.
A
The
first
things
I
did
was
just
meet
individually
with
each
and
every
member
of
central
staff
to
make
sure
that
they're
valid
that
they
know
how
valued
they
are,
how
important
the
work
they're
doing,
and
particularly
during
this
challenging
challenging
year
of
a
pandemic.
I
think
that
everyone
worked
exceptionally
well
and
agree
that
we
want
to
make
sure
folks
feel
supported
and
to
the
the
maker's
point.
A
I
think
that
this
is
a
good
opportunity
to
just
check
in
on
what
our
policies
procedures
are
see,
how
we
can
make
them
stronger,
see
how
we
can
make
them
better
and
that's
precisely
what
what
we
will
do.
We
will
do
you
know,
through
this
hearing
and
and
likely
beyond,
as
counselor
box
said,
is
doing
a
deep
dive
of
some
of
the
things
just
brief
conversations
with
counselor
edwards.
A
I
know
there's
already
some
some
verbiage
and
some
terminology
and
some
you
know
heretofore
established
rules
that
are
problematic,
that
we
just
want
to
strengthen
and
make
better.
So
I
am
welcome
welcome
to
the
collaborative
approach
and
spirit
that
all
of
us
take
to
this
work
and
look
forward
to
to
making
things
better,
so
counselor
edwards,
I'm
gonna,
although
sharing
it
wanted
to
sort
of
give
you
an
opportunity.
A
B
Okay,
so
it
might
make
sense,
yes
for
you,
lady,
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
procedures
as
as
we
understand
them
and
then
just
to
walk
through
like
so
both
both
angles.
If
you
will
you,
lady,
if
there's
a
concern
about
performance
from
central
staff
from
the
counselor,
what
a
counselor
traditionally
should
do
and
would
do
if
they
have
a
concern
about
central
staff
and
then,
if
you
could
walk
through
if
central
staff
or
staffers
have
concerns
or
issues
about
a
counselor
or
another
staffer,
what
they?
H
Yes,
good
afternoon,
everyone,
I
am
julie,
I'm
central
staff
director
and
to
answer
your
question:
counselor
edwards,
usually
the
normal
procedure.
If
a
central,
staffer
or
any
staff
member
has
a
concern,
they
will
go
to
the
staff
director
or
the
president's
or
the
president's
office
directly
if
they
choose
to
depending
on
what
the
complaint
is,
then
we
that
that's
how
we
would
proceed
if
it's
something
internal
performance
wise.
H
B
And
then,
if,
if
I
can,
I
use
you
as
an
example,
so
there's
no!
Yes,
okay,
let's
just
say
I
am.
I
am
not
happy
with
the
performance
or
I
I
found
something
incorrectly
done
by
you.
What
do
I
do
as
a
city
as
a
supervisor
and
again
I
think
it's
clear.
We
must
iterate
to
everyone.
You,
as
the
staff
director
and
central
staffers,
have
13
supervisors
each
one
of
us
correct.
So
how
do
we
as
supervisors,
supervise.
H
H
B
H
B
So,
and
my
other
question
is
what
is
difficult
for
me-
is
hr's
recent
statement
that
they
have
nothing
to
do
with
our
internal
policies,
but
they've
testified
on
family
leave
and
2016
that
counselor
wu
was
part
of
doing.
They
testified
on
the
sexual
harassment
policy
in
2018
they're
named
as
the
place,
and
you
just
said
that
their
name
is
the
place
or
the
entity
to
go
to
after
it's
elevated.
B
H
B
Well,
no,
you
you,
you
have
always
been,
and
that's
not
a
question.
I
think
the
question
for
me
is
is
prompted
by
when
they
have
been
involved
and
not
been
involved
in
crafting
some
of
our
policies
and
dealing
with
certain
investigations
and
all
of
these
different
things.
There
seems
to
be
an
amorphous,
the
place
where
they
are,
and
I
am
frustrated
by
that,
because
I
believe,
if
workers
don't
have
clear
lines
of
how
this
goes
forward
and
how
I'm
protected.
B
If
I
have
the
strength
to
come
up
against
an
elected
official
to
say
that
they've
done
me
wrong.
I
think
clarity,
consistency
and
knowing
where
hr
is
or
isn't
going
to
be,
is
vital
to
that.
And
so
I'm
hearing
that
they're
not
part
of
this,
I'm
seeing
that
they
have
been
part
of
crafting
policy
they're
listed
as
a
place
to
go.
B
We
think
we
can
elevate
to
them
and
again
the
frustration
that
they're
not
here
today
for
me
to
ask
specific
questions
about
what
they've
done
in
the
past.
If
they've
done
investigations,
what
kinds
of
investigations
who
they
have
involved,
if
they've
involved
city
councillors,
if
they've
involved
staff
they're
not
here
to
answer
that
question,
and
so,
as
I
said,
if
I
leave
here
with
more
questions
and
answers
I'll,
just
put
this
all
in
a
17f,
I
don't
expect
you
you,
lady,
to
have
to
answer
those
questions
for
them.
B
I
I
think
you're
trying
your
best
to
try
and
cover
for
them
a
little
bit,
but
the
fact
is
we
we
do
need
to.
We
need.
We
need
clarification
from
them,
otherwise
our
workers
are
not
protected.
I
feel
understood.
Thank
you.
Those
are
my
questions
right
now,
council
o'malley
and
then
I
do
have
marked
up
sections
where
it
doesn't
have
to
happen
today.
But,
as
you
mentioned,
there's
parts
of
the
rules
and
central
staff,
the
harassment
policy
that
I've
marked,
where
I
think
we
need
to
do
some
updates.
A
Yeah
no
agreed.
No.
I
appreciate
that
we'll
get
back
to
that
counselor
edwards,
getting
the
line
that
my
connection
is
unstable,
I'm
actually
in
the
office
next
to
you,
council
edward.
So
I
might
just
come
in
and
join
you
if
that's
if
that's
okay,
if
this
continues
to
freeze
off,
but
I
I
well
I'll
get
through
this
and
then
maybe
I'll
join
you.
But
you
know,
I
think
I
think
it's
an
interesting
point
that
you
raise
and
and
jallady
I
think
it's
it's.
H
H
Yes,
in
2018,
when
the
council
was
drafting
the
policies
for
the
sexual
harassment
discrimination,
it
was
determined
that
the
point
of
contact
should
be
somebody
in
central
staff,
because
the
council
president's
office
changes
every
so
often
and
people
might
not
feel
comfortable
going
straight
to
the
elected
official
to
raise
a
concern
about.
You
know
a
serious
issue
like
this.
It
was
determined
that
it
should
be
done
by
the
central
staff
director
that
we
should
have
that
responsibility.
Whoever
is
in
this
role.
A
A
A
Okay,
so
that
so
for
those,
so
that
would
be
lorraine's
catinos.
Currently
our
business
manager,
you
were
the
business
manager
before
being
central
staff
director,
so
that
person
would
serve.
I
mean
I
guess
that
that's
interesting,
because
for
those
that's
that's
what
they're
watching
you
know.
This
is
a
little
bit
about
how
this
sausage
is
made.
A
Is
that
whoever
is
council
president,
you
know
which
changes
every
two
years
or
in
this
case
twice
in
two
years,
they
sort
of
the
central
staff
director
would
report
to
the
council
president
having
that
sort
of
fluid
position,
and
also
the
inherent
political
nature
of
our
jobs,
wouldn't
necessarily
engender
a
high
degree
of
confidence
that
a
council
or
could
serve
as
sort
of
the
the
hr
liaison
for
for
the
body.
So
having
someone
in
central
staff
like
the
business
manager,
does
make
sense.
But
again,
these
are
the
questions
that
we
need.
A
A
We
should
be
discussing
no
need
for
feedback
you're,
welcome
to
comment
if
you
wish,
but
I
guess
I'm
kind
of
thinking
out
loud
at
this
point,
because
I
do
want
to
make
sure
that
folks
feel
supported
and
I
feel
like
almost
as
a
body
the
council
is,
is
kind
of
left
behind
in
some
of
these
discussions
and
deliberations.
So
that's
all
I
have
I'm
gonna
actually
probably
join
you
counselor
edwards,
I'm
gonna,
throw
to
counselor
arroyo
next
and
then
counselor
braden
after.
C
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
think
you,
ladies
really
the
only
one
here,
four
questions,
so
I'm
gonna
ask
you
some
of
these
questions,
but
if
you
don't
have
the
answers
to
some
of
these
questions,
that's
fine
and
obviously
I
think
you
know.
I
appreciate.
I
think
this
is
one
of
the
reasons
why
mr
chair
was
trying
to
be
careful
with
when
you
said,
2018
hr
cases
are
protected
by
law,
so
it's
not
like
they
can
just
come
in
here
and
start
saying.
C
We
did
these
investigations
on
these
people
these
many
times,
like
that's
all
protected
by
literally
state
law
on
worker
rights
and
hr
personnel
files.
So
I'm
not
trying
to
ask
you
directly
about
personal
investigations.
That's
why
I'm
asking
you
this
I'm
more
interested
in
how
we
manage
the
fact
that
somebody
has
to
assess
the
work
and
since
I've
been
here
that
has
not
happened
and
we've
had
some
situations
that
I
think
truly
call
for
an
assessment
of
that
work.
In
terms
of
how
that
happens,
I
know
historically
that
has
happened
in
the
rules
committee.
C
H
H
C
H
H
The
other
thing
is
that
since
you
started,
we
got
hit
with
copen19
and
it
was
something
that
it
was
in
the
works,
but
that
totally
changed
our
course
of
you
know
action
in
2020,
so
we
were
kind
of
on
survival
mode
and
just
making
sure
that
everything
was
running.
So
we
didn't
do
any
performance
reviews,
but
we
did
have
our
one-on-one
sessions
with
the
council
president
and
any
issues
that
will
come
up.
C
C
And
so
I
guess,
as
I
understand
it,
what
it
sounds
like
is,
we
don't
have,
and
I
think
we
probably
should
have
some
regularly
scheduled
time
frame
or
process
for
allowing
counselors
to
both
note
excellent
performances
and
performances
where
they
think
there
should
be
more
review
or
more
discussion,
and
it
sounds
like
we
don't
have
that.
Is
it
accurate
to
say
we
do
not
have
any
sort
of
regular
or
normal
process
for
which
city
councilors
can
sort
of
regularly
say
it's
that
time
of
the
year
where
we
review
performance.
C
Okay
and
then
I
have
one
other
question,
I
have
my
own
personal
staff.
As
you
know,
all
the
city
council
has
their
own
personal
staff
and
they
serve
very
much
at
my
pleasure
right.
If
I
wanted
to
let
a
staffer
go
or
hire
a
staffer,
I
could
just
do
that.
That's
that's
kind
of
the
power
of
all
of
us
with
our
with
our
offices
when
it
comes
to
that.
There's
things
that
I
have
institutionalized
in
my
office
that
people
know
as
rules.
C
H
C
H
C
Okay
and
then
after
we
had,
and
so
this
is
the
thing
that
to
me,
isn't
addressing
it:
that's
notifying
of
a
problem
when
we're
trying
to
address
it.
Now
that
we've
notified
you
or
made
you
aware
of
a
problem,
what
is
the
next
step
to
actually
address
that
issue?
Is
it
a
zero
tolerance
situation
because,
as
you
know,
or
I
would
assume
you
know,
the
counselors
have
to
vote
to
hire
and
they
also
have
to
vote
to
fire.
I
believe
central
staff,
and
so
the
question
is
what
happens
after
you
become
aware?
C
Is
it
something
that
gets
dealt
with
internally?
Do
the
counselors
then
all
have
to
take
part
in
some
kind
of,
and
maybe
counselor
who
might
be
helpful
on
this
in
terms
of
her
past
practice
as
city
council
president?
But
how
would
you
address
an
issue
if
I
brought
you
an
issue
that
said
this?
Is
a
central
council,
a
central
staffer,
engaging
in
racist
behavior?
Here
you
go
here's
this
and
then
you
took
that
what
is
the
next
step
after
notification?
That's
the
process,
I'm
trying
to
figure
out.
B
Again
and
counselor
rojo,
I
apologize
counselor
rojo,
I
don't
know
if
we
sent
this
if
you
have
the
2018
policy
in
front
of
you-
and
this
is
why
we're
having
this
great
conversation,
because
I
I
don't
think
it's
clear
and
good
enough,
but
it
does
have
complaint
procedures
listed
in
it
for
the
for
violation.
So
there's
a
notification
section,
yeah
pages
aren't
numbered,
but
there's
a
notification
section.
Then
it
has
complaint
procedures
office.
B
Once
a
counselor
chief
of
staff
staff,
director
supervisor
is
notified
of
an
incident,
it
must
be
reported
to
office
of
human
resources,
at
which
point
the
city
of
boston
will
promptly
begin
an
investigative
procedure,
as
outlined
in
the
city
of
boston's
discrimination,
harassment
and
retaliation
policy,
and
then
this
is
again
where
I
don't
think.
That's
good
enough.
Council
royale,
I'm
just
saying
it
is
in
there,
though,
that
an
employee
go
ahead.
I'm
sorry.
C
C
So,
for
instance,
all
of
our
own
staff
are
hired
after
a
vote
by
the
council,
so
nobody
gets
hired
either
to
our
own
personal,
staffs
or
the
central
staff
without
a
vote
by
the
council,
and
my
understanding
is
even
though
I
can
let
go
of
my
own
staff.
Central
staff
cannot
be
fired,
except
by
vote
of
the
council,
and
so
when
we
have
a
situation
like
this,
where,
for
instance,
in
my
office
and
I
assume
in
most
people's
offices,
if
somebody
were
to
act
in
a
racist
manner,
they
would
be
fired
immediately.
C
There's
there's
a
question
here
as
to
what
that
process
like
an
hr
investigation
would
happen.
I
guess
is
what
that's
what
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
if
there
was
something
that
was
brought
forward.
That
said,
this
is
racist,
behavior
and
because
you're
the
staff
director,
I'm
just
gonna,
I'm
gonna,
use
you
staff
director
as
a
person
like
staff
director.
Here
you
go
or
city
council
president.
Here
you
go.
C
Are
they
mandated
to
take
this
next
step,
or
is
that
a
decision
that
gets
made
or
like
what
happens
at
that
point
is
basically
what
I'm
saying,
because
if
it's,
if
it's
say
like
a
video
of
somebody,
engaging
in
racist
behavior
that
comes
to
our
attention,
do
we
really
need
to
send
that
for
an
investigation?
If
we
just
have
it
and
it's
available
to
us
and
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
in
terms
of
like
the
process?
C
If
somebody
did
that
outside
of
the
work
environment,
I
don't
know
of
any,
maybe
maybe
this
is
where
it
would
have
been
helpful
to
hear
from
hr.
I
don't
know
how
hr
deals
with
a
racism
like
complaint,
like
I
don't
know
how
many
they
fielded.
I
don't
know
if
that
I'm
allowed
to
know
that
in
in
in
terms
of
like
hr
policy,
but
I
would
love
to
know
how
that
gets
addressed
and
how
we
would
address
it,
because
I
would
assume
that
the
council
would
want
a
zero
tolerance
policy
on
that.
C
And
so
I,
what
I'm
trying
to
say
is
I
don't
see
anything
here
that
specifically
says
what
would
result
if
you
engage
in
that
behavior
only
that
there
would
be
a
notification
and
sort
of
an
investigation,
and
then
we
find
out
if
that
investigation
says
this
happened,
or
this
did
not
happen,
but
I
don't
see
anything
that
says
and
then
the
next
step
is
we
do
this
this
and
this
and
this
right.
Do
you
see
what
I'm
saying
so.
A
Council
royale
it's
councillor,
o'malley,
I'm
now
sharing
the
stream
with
councillor
edwards,
because
I've
read
the
wifi.
The
last
sentence
of
that
complaint
procedures
reads
any
employee
of
the
council
who
is
found
after
an
investigation
to
have
violated
this
policy
will
be
subject
to
disciplinary
action
up
to
and
including
termination.
But
I
think.
C
C
Does
the
city
council
president
just
make
that
up
on
their
own
does
do
the
city
councilors,
who
are
all
supervisors
of
this
individual?
Have
a
say:
how
is
that
conducted?
Is
it
an
executive
session
where
it's
private
and
you
protect
the
rights
of
that
individual,
because
it's
a
private
executive
session
and
not
a
public
hearing
like
this?
What
is
the
process
for
determining?
That
is
what
I'm
saying
is
an
individual
like
now
you're
council
president.
C
So
if
that
got
to
you,
does
council
president
o'malley
get
to
individually
determine
by
himself
what
the
response
to
that
is
or
do
the
counselors
get
to
chime
in?
If
they
do,
how
do
we
not
violate
open
meeting
law?
To
do
that,
which,
I
believe
is
rules
committee
and
executive
session,
and
so
that's
the
stuff
I'm
trying
to
get
was
probably.
A
E
H
E
Say
yeah,
I
absolutely
agree
with
that.
I
will
add
that
just
the
point
that
was
brought
up
about
what
the
role
of
the
rules
committee
is
relative
to
the
full
council
relative
to
personnel
decisions
on
central
staff,
there
had
not
been
clear
standards
and
guidelines
for
that.
As
of
you
know,
this,
the
policy
here
describes
a
sort
of
subset
of
those
types
of
decisions
and
offers
guidelines.
But
beyond
this
you
know
the
set
of
sort
of
triggers
for
that
policy,
as
well
as
prior
to
this
policy
being
in
effect.
A
So
I
would
I'll
get
to
council
brain,
but
but
I'm
sorry
this
is
less
of
a
formal
hearing
more
of
a
working
session
as
it's
holding,
but
michelle
I'm
curious.
What
would
you
think
like?
What
would
you
suggest
would
be
a
good
approach
to
sort
of
revisit
some
of
these
rules
or
get
better
clarity?
Is
it?
Is
it
literally
the
rules
committee
trying
to
rewrite
them?
Is
it
working?
D
D
I
think
the
fact
that
we
have
13
counselors,
who
are
who
are
essentially
the
the
central
staff,
have
to
report
to
makes
it
a
very
complex,
complex
and
difficult
terrain,
so
having
a
consistent
set
of
rules
that
are
recognized,
I
think
the
notion
that
we
might
have
procedures
that
would
mirror
the
what
human
resources
is.
So
we
have
a
consistent
approach
across
across
the
whole
platform,
so
to
speak.
D
That
would
would
would
help
clarify
and
and
then
it
would
make
there'll
be
less
ambiguity
about
where
people
stand
and
what
what
rules
apply
in
each
different
situation,
so
I
think
getting
into
getting
a
more
a
better
handle
on
what
what
their
procedures
would
be
would
be
helpful.
I
think
and
again
this
is.
This
is
unknown
terrain
for
me,
so
I
I
I
bow
to
your
greater
experience.
You
folks,
who
have
been
working
on
this
issue
before.
A
F
Thanks
yeah,
no,
I
I
mean
I
definitely
would
second
counselor
wu,
I
think,
pulling
pulling
the
ohr
docks
from
the
city
and
figuring
out
what
they've
got
and-
and
I
mean
recognizing
and
then
figuring
out,
if
it's
if
it
works
for
us
and
if
we
need
other
models
as
well.
I
mean
I
can
think
of
a
number
of
agencies
that
we
could
get
model
docs
from
would
make
a
lot
of
sense.
F
A
A
A
Hoped
to
do
and
have
begun
convening
the
rules
committee
on
a
whole
host
of
topics,
so
it
could
have
been
rules
like
this.
It
could
have
been
sort
of
looking
at
tweaks
to
the
council
rules.
I
don't
specifically
remember
this.
I
I
think
he
may
have
impaneled
a
smaller
group,
which
is
what
he
would
often
do
and
I
think
councilor
woo
did
as
well.
I
don't
know
if
any
other
council
president
did,
but
when
there
was
an
opening
for
a
central
staff
position.
A
But
again,
you
know
eight
years
ago
is
a
lifetime
and
these
things
should
probably
up
be
updated
every
two
years.
So
that's
certainly
one
thing
that
I'd
like
to
come
from
this
to
your
point,
to
the
the
sponsor's
point
to
president
emeritus
point
like
just
having
a
sort
of
fresh
set
of
eyes
and
some
better
inline
language
with
what
the
city
is,
but
I'm
fairly
certain.
That's
how
we
got
to
the
2013
document.
Murphy,
probably
convened
a
rules
committee
sub
sub
working
group
to
put
these
before
the
body.
F
Got
it
okay?
Well,
that's
yeah,
that's
helpful,
and
if
and
maybe
we
can
figure
out
just
what
what
process
they
use.
I
mean
I
I
think
regardless
it's
pretty
obvious.
What
we
want
is
it's
just
to
pull
all
the
docs
together
and
think
about
best
practices.
Templar
wu.
Do
you
remember
from
your
presidency,
I
mean:
were
there
particular
sort
of
major
steps
forward
that
you
felt
like
we
took
on
this
or
any
any
beachheads?
We
didn't
quite
reach
that
we
should
be
focused
on
now.
E
And
so
then
it
often
becomes
a
second
year.
You
know
sort
of
the
second
half
of
the
term
conversation
and
and
by
that
point
it's
sort
of
you
know
the
it
comes
down
to
the
will
of
one
person
and
whether
they're
going
to
put
that
into
the
budget
or
not.
It
should
be
much
more
documented
and
and
just
have
clear
frameworks
for
how
that
happens,
and
you
know,
because
also
because
there
is
no
collective
bargaining
unit
and
agreement
that
this
is
important.
We
we
have
standards
across
the
board.
F
Yeah,
it
seems
to
me,
like
we
would
almost
want
to
push
that
into
being
a
a
fall
thing
that
council
presidents
did
so
you
were
basically
setting
up,
so
your
successor
would
have
sort
of
the
memo
already
written
in
terms
of
the
budget
ass
because
that
definitely,
I
think,
like
I
know
this
year.
Obviously
we
were
glad
as
a
council
to
advocate
for
and
successfully
get
an
increase
for
central
staff,
but
that
was
that
was
all
a
a
belated
post-budget
introduction
process
for
exactly
the
reason
that
you
described
so
yeah.
E
Yeah
and
and
with
you
know,
I
think
the
the
bigger
sort
of
one
step
back
equivalent
of
that
is
salary,
adjustments
to
the
different
classifications
and
who
belongs
to
which
one
and
in
terms
of
what
the
roles
are
and
having
the
performance
evaluations
already
in
place
and
done
by
then
is,
I
think,
makes
then
the
compensation
adjustment
conversation
a
lot
more
grounded
in
data
and
a
lot
smoother.
But
then
it's
just
you
have
to
build
in
that
that
chunk
of
time
as
well,
yeah.
G
Flynn
you
thank
you,
councilor
o'malley,
council
edwards,
I
I
don't
really
have
any
questions
other
than
the
fact
that
I
just
wanted
to
echo.
What
council,
wu
and
council
block
said
is
having
some
type
of
consistent
way
of
making
sure
that
central
staff
receive
a
pay
increase
or
or
a
cola,
and
you
know
I'm
I'm
glad
that
we
were
able
to
do
it
this
time,
but
something
something
scheduled
where
every
year
or
every
18
months,
or
so
that
that
these
employees
will
know
that
they're
they're
going
to
get
a
raise.
G
If
that
in
in
experience,
if
that
happens,
so
I
think
it's
important
and
I'm
glad
this
body
is
doing
it,
I'm
I'm
so
glad
this
body
is
doing
it,
but
just
consistently
making
sure
that
people
receive
a
cost
of
living
adjustment
and
or
a
pay
raise
in
a
consistent
manner
is
is
what
I
want
to
kind
of
provide.
My
my
colleagues
with
in
terms
of
steps
going
forward
so
hope
hope
that
is
helpful,
councilor
o'malley
and
councillor
edwards.
B
B
B
So
I
think
what
we're
what
we're
seeing
honestly
is
that
there
is,
there
is
a
confusion.
There
is
not
clarity
and,
and
having
clarity
is,
is
a
matter
of
due
process
and
predictability
and
it
shouldn't
change
depending
on
who's,
a
city
council
president.
It
shouldn't
change
based
off
of
who
is
whether
it's
a
counselor,
that
is,
the
perpetrator
or
a
counselor,
that's
a
victim.
B
We
need
consistent
policies
and
before
I
get
into
some
of
the
areas
where
I
think
that
there,
our
policies
are
falling
short,
I
do
want
to
make
very
clear
the
goal
of
this.
What
I
want
to
see
come
out
of
this,
whatever
future
conversations,
I
want
to
make
sure
that
there
is
no
question
that,
when
there
is
a
concern
about
a
central
staffer
again
the
central
staffers
that
have
13
supervisors,
that
that
concern
is
vetted.
That
person
is
given
due
process,
and
I
think
the
rules
committee
is
the
appropriate
way
to
do
that.
B
To
make
sure
all
supervisors
are
informed
of
the
concern.
All
supervisors
can
weigh
whether
that
is
a
valid
concern.
What
makes
me
upset
may
not
make
counselor
bach
upset
or
counselor
braden.
What
I
define
as
something
that
is
racist
or
sexist
or
whatever
may
not
be
fit
within
the
definitions
of
other
people,
and
it
is
worth
the
vetting
of
us
to
have
that
conversation
with
one
another.
B
I
don't
think
there
should
be
ever
a
direct
way
to
bring
or
or
hold
one
person
accountable
by
by
virtue
of
me
finding
or
thinking
that
they
have
done
something
inappropriate.
I
want
to
be
clear
about
that.
I
do
think
that
there
should
be
a
method,
a
step
down
the
evaluation
process,
all
of
that
to
be
built
into
our
infrastructure,
to
make
sure
that
our
standards
are
clear
and
how
we're
evaluating
them.
B
On
the
flip
side,
I
actually
think
if
a
central
staffer
has
the
strength
to
come
out
against
or
filed
a
complaint
against
a
city
councilor.
I
want
that
to
be
as
efficiently
moved
and
moved
to
a
power
center
as
far
away
from
this
body
as
possible.
I-
and
that
means
including
the
city
council
president.
I
do
not
believe
that
person
should
be
handling
any
issues
that,
especially
if
their
colleagues
are
accused
of
creating
a
hostile
harassment,
work,
environment,
any
way,
shape
or
form.
I
want
it
gone
out
of
this
body
and
I
won't.
B
B
They
have
no
other
place
to
go.
We
are
not
so
when
we're
coming
after
or
going
after
and
pointing
out
something.
I
think
we
should
make
it
clear
and
that
person
should
have
a
back
and
forth
if
they
are
coming
after
one
of
us
they
need
to
be
protected
from
day
one.
The
retaliation
is
real.
The
retaliation
is
hard
and
it's
hard
enough
to
come
forward.
I've
represented
enough
workers,
workers
who
are
alone
workers
who
work
in
people's
homes.
The
power
dynamics
are
enough
to
silence,
not
just
them,
but
other
workers
that
work
around
them.
B
I
don't
want
that
culture
here
and
also
hr
needs
to
be
here
and
again
I
and
they
have.
I,
I
hate
to
be
so
flippant
of
their
work,
but
this
is
real
cute.
They
are
involved
in
investigations,
sort
of
sometimes
maybe
not,
and
I
want
to
know
what
they
are,
and
I
think
we
should
know
what
they
are,
and
they
should
be
clear
about
that.
B
B
That
hr
seems
to
be
involved
in
or
not
involved
in
or
canceling,
and
I
don't
appreciate
it,
but
in
that
back
and
forth,
and
that
football
that
we
put
people
through
these
are
people's
lives,
their
mental
health,
their
emotional
health
that
we
are
putting
them
through.
Even
if
you're
the
accused
or
you
were
the
accuser
and
without
having
clear,
structured
back
and
forth
and
understanding
how
people
get
due
process
and
actually
get
redressed.
B
We're
a
lesser
body
we're
an
embarrassed
body,
we're
a
hypocritical
body
unless
we
provide
those
things
now,
just
to
point
out
some
of
the
things
that
we
need
to
be
looking
at
in
our
harassment
policy,
it
states
under
complaints
and
procedures,
one
of
the
it
says
up
to
like
disciplinary
action
up
to
and
including
termination.
Well,
we
are
involved
in
this
and
we
can
be
held
accountable
by
this.
None
of
us
can
technically
be
fired.
B
I
think
the
language
should
be
assured
that
there's
up
to
including
termination
censure
and
then
adding
in
the
section
from
our
city
council
rules
that
discusses
two-thirds
majority,
removing
any
one
of
us
for
actions
on
becoming
of
a
counselor.
But
I
want
that
as
part
of
the
step
ups
that
are
also
potentially
levied
against
people
who
are
doing
harassing
or
racist
actions.
B
Just
let
me
read
what
it
says
right
now:
whenever
a
female
employee
shall
become
pregnant,
she
shall
furnish
the
staff
director
with
a
certificate
from
her
petition
from
her
position,
stating
that
her
date
of
delivery
so
prove
you're
pregnant,
and
then
she
may
continue
to
work
so
long
as
her
physician
certifies.
She's
able
to
do
so
not
only
prove
that
you're
pregnant,
so
you
can
get
maternity
leave,
but
then
make
sure
your
doctor
gives
you
permission
to
keep
working.
D
B
Horribly
out
of
date,
horribly
out
of
date,
and-
and
it
obviously
doesn't
include
paternity
leave
it
the
word.
The
term
we
use
now
is
parental
leave,
and
it's
it's
it's
out
of
date.
So
those
kinds
of
things
that
we
would
let
that
happen
or
let
that
continue
is,
is
one
of
the
other
reasons.
Why
we're?
Having
I'm
having
a
call
for
this
hearing?
B
I
also
do
think
that
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we
have
not
just
updated
the
policies.
I'm
looking
for
my
last
or
a
couple
other
sections
I
have
concerns
about
what
does
an
investigation
involve
and
who
pays
for
it?
I
wanted
that
to
be
clear
and
the
ability
for
either
city
council
to
call
for
the
investigation
or
of
hr
calls
for
the
investigation,
how
much
notification
should
they
be
providing
the
city
council,
especially
if
a
counselor
or
staffer
or
any
person,
is
part
of
that
investigation.
B
B
This
could
change
based
on
the
city
council
president,
but
the
definition
of
that
committee,
I
think,
also
needs
to
be
very
clear
that
that
committee
is
also
the
committee
for
human
resource
or
human
workers
issues
of
central
staff,
because
it's
not
clear
based
on
our
committee
structure,
where
everything
goes
or
as
clear
as
it
could
be.
So
these
are.
These
are
just
some
clarifying
points.
These
are
some
outdated
points
and
I'm
very
what
my
goals
are.
B
I
want
to
know
that
the
workers
have
a
b
line
to
help
and
that,
if
we
are
concerned
about
one
of
the
central
staffers
that
we
have
a
process
put
in,
that
is
protective
of
them
and
allows
for
them
to
go
back
and
forth
and
for
all
the
supervisors
to
be
involved.
So
those
are
those
are
my
thoughts.
I
also
wouldn't.
B
A
C
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
just
a
couple
of
thoughts
on
on
that
one,
the
obviously
our
maternity
leave
like
that's
embarrassing.
So
obviously
our
attorney
league
policies
have
to
get
changed.
I'm
trying
to
get
some
clarity
just
in
terms
of
like,
if
we're
trying
to
talk
about
where
we
send
investigations
right
like
ultimately,
I
think
counselor
well,
mr
chair
mentioned
sort
of
the
concern
with
having
it
throw
through
an
hr
that
reports
to
a
mayor
because
of
the
political
sort
of
nature
that
can
be
behind
that
for
any
individual
counselor
and
quote
a
mayor.
C
If
we
create
an
hr
position
or
an
hr
director
for
the
city
council,
when
you
say
you
want
as
far
away
from
the
body
as
possible
or
whatever,
that
means
I'm
just
trying
to
figure
out
what
that
that
means
from
a
mechanism
of
who
engages
at
that
point,
are
we
talking
about
the
city
council?
Hr,
can't
touch
it
because
they're
hired
by
the
city
council
president,
and
that
whatever
they're
investigating
could
be
made
by
this?
It
could
be
something
that
involves
say
a
city
council
president.
C
So
then,
are
we
saying
that
they're
not
allowed
to
do
it
because
technically
they're
supervised
in
sort
of
our
informal
process
by
the
city
council,
president
or
they're
hired
by
all
13
of
us,
or
is
it
a
situation
where,
like
I'm
just
trying
to
figure
out
how
we
would
even
isolate
that
if
it's
not
the
mayor's
hr
team
in
terms
of
the
administration
or
our
hr
team?
How
you
would
do
that?
C
I
think
the
second
part
of
that
is
when
people
make
complaints,
they
often
make
them
in
a
way
where
they're
trying
to
maintain
some
privacy
maintain
some
of
that
element
of
privacy
for
themselves.
If
we're
just
saying
every
time
somebody
requests
an
investigation
or
an
investigation
is
conducted,
we
make
that
public,
even
if
we
don't
name
names
or,
however,
we
want
to
do
it.
There
is
an
element
of
that
privacy.
There
is
an
issue
with
privacy
that
we're
creating
not
just
for
the
accused,
but
for
the
accuser.
C
So
that's
that's
something
that
I
would
want
to
figure
out
how
we
would
even
go
about,
say,
figuring
out.
You
know
quote-unquote
hr
investigations
or
private
tax
dollars.
This
year
are,
but
I
don't
think
that
we
make
every
investigation
that
hr
for
the
city
of
boston,
for
example,
does
on
a
daily
basis
public.
Nor
do
we
do
that
for
bps
or
any
of
our
other
facilities
that
are
departments
that
are
doing
these
investigations.
We
don't
just
publicly
say
this
week
or
this
month.
C
We
spent
this
much
on
investigations,
and
so
I'm
not
sure
exactly
if
there's
even
precedent
for
that
in
terms
of
good
policy
or
if
that's
even
helpful,
for
accusers
or
accusees
or,
however,
you
want
to
put
that
so
that
that
jumped
out
to
me
as
well
as
something
that's
an
interesting
thing
that
I
think
we
could
look
into
and
then,
as
far
as
the
rules
committee,
I
thought
that
the
rules
committee
structure
was
pretty
clear
to
me.
At
least
I
mean.
C
I
know
that
you
and
counselor
flaherty
have
some
questions
about
this,
but
you've
been
under
multiple
presidencies
at
this
point,
and
I
know
that
under
ross,
for
instance,
counselor
ross
when
he
was
a
former
counselor
ross
when
he
was
president,
there
were
executive
sessions
and
rules
committee
to
make
determinations
on,
say,
firing
or
hiring,
or
things
like
that
or
to
talk
about
performance.
I'm
not
she's
no
longer
here,
but
I
was
not
on
the
council.
C
I
think
you
were
counselor
o'malley
when
there
was
a
process
of
replacing
our
staff
director
or
our
ex
our
central
staff
director,
and
that
was
a
process
where
there
was
a
termination,
and
there
was
a
process
to
that
that
I'm
not
aware
of
that
predates
me.
I
don't
actually
know
what
that
process
was,
but
they've
been
processes
in
the
past,
where
we've
dealt
with
sort
of
hiring
firing
performance
they're,
just
not
regular,
which
I
think
is
what
we
want
to
try
and
do
right
like.
C
I
think
we've
done
this
in
different
ways
and
I
think
we
can
have
conversations
about
whether
or
not
the
ways
that
say,
council
president
ross
did
it
or
council
president
who
did
it
or
council
president
murphy
did
it
are
the
right
ways
to
do
it
or
the
better
ways
to
do
it.
We
can
come
up
with
like
a
good
framework
that
we
should
follow,
but
I
think
we
have
done
frameworks
for
how
we
do
this.
I
just
don't
think
they're
regular
and
they
certainly
shouldn't
change
every
two
years
with
council
presidents.
C
I
think
that's
something
I
firmly
agree
with.
We
should
have
set
in
place
protocols
that
whoever
the
city
council
president
is
our
central
staff
has
reliance
and
confidence
that
their
rules
aren't
going
to
just
change,
because
councillor
o'malley
is
no
longer
the
city
council.
President
pro-tempore.
Now
it's
somebody
else.
So
now
we
have
new
management
rules
and
then,
if
somebody
else
and
now
we
have
new
management
rules,
I
think
that
absolutely
makes
sense.
That
should
absolutely
happen,
and
we
should
talk
about
how
to
do
that.
C
I
think
when
we
get
into
the
nitty-gritty
of
like
trying
to
nail
it
down
so
specifically
about
this
investigation
that
investigation,
how
are
you
gonna
do
this?
How
are
you
gonna
do
that?
I
think
that
we
could
get
lost
in
the
trees
there,
and
I'm
glad
that
we
have.
You
know
councillor
bach,
willing
to
jump
in
here
and
be
like
a
big
part
of
putting
together
how
we
structurally
go
about
this,
but
I
do
worry
about
how
we
protect
the
privacy
of
central
staff.
C
C
If
you
work
under
the
city
council
in
any
capacity,
you
should
have
these
rules
apply
to
you,
but
in
terms
of
how
we
do
that,
I
think
there's
a
a
level
to
that
where
we
do
a
lot
of
this
in
an
open,
open
conversation,
but
when
we
get
into
how
we
do
so,
these
disciplinary
processes-
I'm
not
aware
of-
and
maybe
council
o'malley
you
are
you've
been
here
longer.
I
don't
think
we've
ever
discussed,
anybody's
sort
of
assessment
or
job
call,
even
when
we're
firing
them
like.
C
Even
when
there's
been
a
vote
on
the
floor
to
fire
somebody,
I
don't
think
that
there's
actually-
and
you
can
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
a
presentation
of
sort
of
why
right
like
they
just
do.
We
just
do
a
vote
to
terminate
or
vote
to
hire.
There's
no.
Generally
speaking,
when
you've
done
votes
to
terminate.
Has
there
been
like
a
like
a
public
hearing
about
the
reasons
for
that
or
do
they
protect
that
workers
sort
of
privacy
and
just
terminate
like
what's
the
process
there
so.
A
A
couple
things
I'll
I'll
try
to
answer
all
the
questions
I'll
end
with
that
one,
but
I'm
gonna
sort
of
try
to
answer
them.
The
way
you
you
sort
of
phrase
comments
in
terms
of
having
an
hr
professional
on
council
staff.
I
brought
that
up
more
of
the
realization
that
the
from
my
understanding
of
the
makers
conversations
with
hr.
They
basically
essentially
said
I'm
paraphrasing
here
you're
on
your
own.
We
don't
get
involved
with
that.
I
thought,
meaning
that
we
need
to
have
some
sort
of
an
hr
official.
A
I
agree
with
you,
it'd
be
better
to
have
you
know
we
need
an
independent,
independent,
fair
body.
I
think
everyone
agrees
to
that
to
sort
of
adjudicate
hr
decisions.
Secondly,
you
brought
up
the
ross
point.
I
did
sadly
only
serve
with
mike
ross
for
one
month,
because
I
came
in
late
midterm
for
my
predecessor,
but
I
think
he
and
revert
most
council
presidents
for
whom
I've
served
under,
I
think,
have
sort
of
used.
A
The
rules
committee
well
and
it's
one
thing
in
terms
of
it
being
a
repository
for
counselors
to
both
deal
with
internal
external
issues
as
well
as
the
inner
workings
of
the
body
and
and
we're
doing
that
right
now
we're
having
this,
I
don't
believe,
there's
been
a
rules
committee
hearing,
perhaps
I'm
wrong,
but
I
don't
believe
there's
been
one
in
well
over
a
year
so
that
that's
essentially
what
this
is.
So
I
think
we're
all
we're
all
you
know
rolling
in
the
right
direction.
A
That
way
you
would
also
mentioned-
I
guess
the
last
part,
and
if
I
forgot
something
you
can
remind
me,
but
the
last
part
in
terms
of
us
terminating
an
employee.
I
don't
know
that.
We've
ever
done
that
with
the
vote,
there
are
certain
positions
on
central
staff
staff,
director
being
one
of
them
city,
clerk
assistant
city
clerk,
as
you
know,
being
other
ones
if
they
need
affirmative
council
votes
every
central
staffer
and
every
council
staffer
of
course,
is
voted
on.
When
we
go
through
personnel
orders.
A
I
don't
believe
we've
ever
in
my
time.
We've
never
taken
action
of
an
affirmative
vote.
When
someone
has
left
some
individuals
have
that
have
left,
there's
been
litigation,
sometimes
as
a
result,
but
I
I
think
I
think
the
point
of
your
question
is
that,
of
course
there
are.
There.
Are
you
know
protections
in
place
as
it
relates
to
personnel
decisions.
C
Yeah-
and
I
think
those
are
state
laws,
but
so
that's
news
for
me.
I
thought
that
the
way
that
terminates
so
so
so,
if
I'm
to
understand
this
correctly
technically
as
city
council
president
pro
tempore,
you
could
unilaterally
make
a
decision
to
release
a
central
staffer.
Is
that
essentially
how
it's
worked
in
the
past?
A
That
I
don't,
I
feel
like
there
have
only
been
a
couple
and
I
think
that
it
was
I'm
even
hesitant
to
get
into
the
specifics,
because
I
think
that
there
you
know
it
would
be
inappropriate
it's
personnel
and
protected
information.
But
I
don't
believe
I
don't
think
it's
quite
as
cut
and
dry
that
the
council,
pres
or
president
pro
10
can
just
dismiss
someone.
I
think
there
obviously
needs
to
be
just
cause
and
perhaps
that
yeah
yeah,
but
but
I
don't
know
that
I
don't
know
I
I
may
have
gone
through
the
rules
committee.
C
C
But
if
we're
saying
that
the
council,
the
president,
could
determine
well,
this
is
a
fireable
offense
for
me,
or
it's
not
a
fireable
offense
for
me,
regardless
of
how
say
a
majority
of
counselors
feel
or
or
whatever,
then
that's
an
interesting
dilemma
where,
if
we're
not
voting
on
something
a
counselor,
it
sounds
like
a
council
president
could
basically
make
a
determination.
This
rises
to
the
level
of
termination
for
me,
or
it
doesn't
sort
of
on
their
own
and
if
say,
counselor,
edwards
or
myself
disagreed.
A
C
D
C
So
I'm
less
asking
just
to
make
it
more
clear,
so
we
don't
have
to
get
into
any
personnel
weirdness,
I'm
not
asking
specifically
about
prior
cases.
I'm
saying
it
sounds
like
as
of
right
now,
if,
if
somebody
wanted,
if
there
was
a
determination
for
central
staff
to
be
made,
it
sounds
like
the
person
who
makes
that
determination.
C
Pretty
much
is
solely
the
person
who
has
the
city
council
president
entitled
is
what
it
sounds
like
if
you've
never
voted
on
a
termination
and
that's
not
the
procedure,
then
it
sounds
like
the
way
somebody
would
get
terminated
is
if
the
city
council
president,
determines
that
something
they've
done.
Obviously,
there
has
to
be
just
cause,
but
something
that
they've
done
reaches
the
level
of
just
cause
for
them,
whoever
that
may
be
not
if
it
reaches
just
cause
for
the
council,
as
a
majority
body.
B
Right,
I
I
don't.
I
actually
don't
think
that
that's
what
it
says.
I
think
and
that's
what
the
frustration
is.
It
seems
like
it's.
You
know
the
complaint
procedures
again,
it
would
have
the
counselor
or
the
supervisor.
Whatever
it's
reported
to
hr,
at
which
point
the
city
of
boston
prompts
an
investigation,
and
this
is
where
the
language
is
not
clear,
but
it
says
an
employee
of
the
city
council
who
is
found,
it
doesn't
say
who
does
the
finding
it
just
who
is
found
and
I'm
assuming?
Because
it's
been
done
by
an
investigative
procedure
prompted.
C
B
What
I'm
assuming
but
but
I
agree
with
you-
I
don't
like
that
not
being
clear
who's,
making
the
finding
and
then
it's
then
who
is
making
the
punishing
who's
doing
the
disciplinary
action.
Is
it
based
off
of
a
vote
that
says
there
there's
a
warning
this
time,
there's
going
to
be
a
firing
this
time
there's
going
to
be,
you
know
that
is
not
clear
at
all
in
these
policies.
C
It
doesn't
tell
me
if
unilaterally
a
city
council
president
can
say
I
want
to
protect
or
I
want
to
help-
or
this
is
the
person
I
care
about
so
even
though
this
reaches
just
cause,
I'm
not
like
it
doesn't
there's
no
clarity
as
to
what
the
process
is
on,
how
that
happens,
and
the
one
thing
I
forgot
to
bring
up
on
the
on
the
parts
that
kind
of
came
out
of
your
pieces.
I
I
get
uncomfortable
when
we
talk
about
rule.
C
I
think
it's
40
a
or
40
b,
because
the
courts
have
found
that
we
don't
actually
have
the
ability
to
remove
duly
elected
people
from
office
that
that's
actually
illegal
and
so
technically
what
that
rule
says
we
can
do
the
courts
have
said
we
cannot
do.
I
don't
even
know
why
that
rule
is
still
on
our
books,
to
be
perfectly
honest
with
you.
C
So
when
we
talk
about
tying
disciplinary
records
into
rule
40,
that
doesn't
make
a
lot
of
sense
to
me,
because
the
courts
have
already
come
back
and
said
we
don't
have
the
ability
to
remove
duly
elected
officials,
even
after
in
that
particular
case,
even
after
a
conviction
of
a
federal
crime.
And
so
you
know
I
don't
know
how
we
would
try
to
tie
that
into.
C
You
know
disciplinary
decisions
in
terms
of
language,
but
I'm
very
wary
when
we
try
to
tie
things
to
rule
40
because
rule
40
is
not
a
legitimate
rule
to
me
when
the
courts
say
you
don't
have
the
power
to
do
this
and
I've
read
that
legal
opinion.
It's
not
it's
not
a
rule
that
we
can
actually
use
and
so
to
continue
to
pretend
that
we
could
or
that
it's
an
accurate
thing
that
two-thirds
of
the
body
could
remove
a
member.
That's
not
that's,
not
healthy.
I
don't
think
I
think.
C
Actually,
that's
a
rule
that,
if
like
we're,
we
haven't
had
a
rules
committee
hearing,
but
if
we
had
a
rules,
committee,
hearing
or
meeting
I
would
say
that's
a
rule
that
we
should
be
off
the
books
because
the
law
says
it
should
be.
But
in
terms
of
you
know
the
rest
of
that,
that's
the
one
thing
I
had
a
concern
with
that
flag.
B
B
C
C
B
B
So
I
think
what
I'm
trying
to
say
is
I
I
don't
think
our
rules,
what
I
brought
this
up
for
and
what
I
said
the
languages
of
the
complete
is.
There
is
no
clear
understanding
of
how
to
discipline
or
how
to
censure
or
that
that
is
in
part
of
the
step-up
process.
In
dealing
with
a
counselor
who
stepped
out
of
line.
B
C
Don't
have
that
either,
but
I
think
even
on
that
right,
like
this
is
the
issue
I
had
with
say
the
rule
that
you
could
just
remove
the
city
council
president,
but
didn't
have
any
language
determining
what
dictates
so.
For
instance,
accountability
requires
like
clear
rules
right
like
don't
break
a
law.
Don't
do
this
right,
so
that's
how
you
and
then
you
hold
them
accountable
to
that.
C
If
we
created
the
idea
that
you
could
censor
a
council
or
a
counselor,
I
would,
I
would
expect
clearly
expressly
written
language
that
would
dictate
under
what
circumstances
that
could
occur,
not
that,
like
seven
people,
can
censor
somebody
for
any
reason,
but
that
there
are
specific
reasons
in
which
we
we
allow
for
the
censuring
of
a
person
right.
That's
like
the
accountability
standpoint.
B
C
C
It's
not
enough
to
just
say
we
can
publicly
censure
you.
I
think
we
have
to
explain
what
the
process
for
a
public
censure
has
to
be
or
what
the
actual
process
for
what
qualifies
for
public
censure
has
to
be,
and
it
can't
be
subjective
like
it
can't
be.
You
know
I
I
feel
this
way,
but
counselor
o'malley
doesn't
feel
this
way.
It
should
be
clear,
cut
language.
Do
you
understand
what
you're
saying.
B
So
so
what
it
shouldn't
be
also,
is
a
city
council
president,
going
to
hr
to
investigate
a
counselor
or
essential
staffer
and
then
ultimately
selecting
the
damn
investigator
to
do
some
investigation
and
then
sending
us
the
bill
that
sure's
help
isn't
what
it
should
be
either,
and
that
is
also
something
I
never
want
to
see
happen
again,
and
I
wish
hr
was
here
to
answer
those
questions.
But
but
let
me
be
clear
because
of
the
lack
of
clarity,
because
a
lack
of
understanding
of
what
is
going
on
in
this
body.
B
We
have
subjected
some
of
our
members
to
outright
abuse
and
I
am
embarrassed
by
it.
I
don't
ever
want
it
to
happen
again
and
while
I
appreciate
the
back
and
forth-
and
I
do
think,
we
absolutely
need
to
make
sure
that
our
rules
are
clear
clarified
and
that
the
step
up,
if
you
and
I
are
lawyers
who
are
about
that
procedure-
we're
about
to
process
we're
about
to
notice.
B
B
Say
I
would
agree
with
you
on
that?
No,
I
know
you're,
not
you
asked
me
specifically
about
what
did
I
mean
that
I
wanted
out
of
this
body?
I
mean
if
someone
has
the
strength
to
say
that
lydia
edwards
has
sexually
harassed
me.
I
don't
think
my
president,
that
I
voted
for
right,
who
might
be
inclined
to
protect
me
or
central
staffer,
who
I
control
should
be
part
of
that
conversation.
B
C
C
You
asked
for
a
review
of
me,
so
I'm
going
to
ask
her
a
complaint
on
you
that
kind
of
thing
that
we're
protecting
both
people,
in
terms
of
who
that
may
or
may
not
be,
and
I
agree
that,
if
that
so,
for
instance,
and
I'm
sorry
if
I
insert
you
this
way-
counselor
o'malley,
because
you're
you're
as
president
potent,
but
if
somebody
made
an
a
complaint
against
councillor
pro
temp
o'malley,
I
don't
think
he
should
make
the
determination
on
how
it's
it's
treated.
That's
that's!
That's
amazing!
C
C
In
fact,
as
councilor
o'malley
has
referenced,
I
believe
that
there
are
two
lawsuits
working
their
way
through
the
system
right
now
about
those
exits
that
happen
under
prior
presidencies
currently,
and
so
when
we
talk
about
like
complaints
and
how
they
get
made
they're,
not
there
has
to
be
a
protection
on
both
sides
about
how
we
deal
with.
Is
this
a
retaliatory
complaint?
Is
this
a
valid
complaint,
and
I
do
not
just
to
be
clear.
C
I
believe
that
should
be
a
decision
made
by
hr
and
whatever
investigation
happens
there,
but
I
think
we
have
to
be
sensitive
to
the
fact
that
after
hr
sees
one
of
these
after
an
investigation
is
conducted,
it
may
be
found
that
that
investigation
found
no
basis
or
no
merit
to
whatever
that
is,
and
if
that
occurs,
as
public
officials
as
people
who
work
in
public
office
or
government
office,
not
just
us,
but
central
staff.
Having
the
you
know,
sort
of
public
scrutiny
of
a
public
trial
or
something
before
you
get
a
finding
like.
C
We
have
to
be
very
careful
about
how
we
create
rules
about,
say
how
an
investigation
is
conducted,
who
investigates
it.
That's
fine,
but
when
we
get
into
like
you
have
to
report
when
you're
doing
them
and
how
you're
doing
them
in
a
public
way,
you're
creating
a
dangerous
to
me
protects
lack
of
protection
for
not
just
the
accuser
but
the
accusee,
and
I
want
to
be
careful
about
when
we
create
these
sort
of
standards
about
when
we
can
publicly
censure
and
when
we
can't
those
kinds
of
things
that
we
do,
that
with
very
firm.
C
Not
arguable
not
subjective
language,
where
somebody
can
say.
I
think
this
is
politically
motivated.
I
think
this
is
this,
where
it's
just
very
clear
what
this
is,
and
I
think
my
one
thing
that
I
want
to
be
like.
If
I
finish
on
anything,
is
I
want
to
make
sure
we
keep,
and
I
said
it
sounds
like
you:
do
too
politics
out
of
hr
complaints
right
like
we
don't,
and
I
and
I
got
that
from
counselor
o'malley.
C
When
you
talk
about
you
know
the
hr
situation,
we
don't
want
individual
politics
or
how
somebody
politically
feels
about
somebody
else
to
mandate
or
determine
how
a
process
for
for
a
complaint
is
processed
or
how
a
complaint
gets
dealt
with
or
handled
eventually
right.
We
want
that
to
be
as
free
of
political
bias
or
political
sort
of
machinations
as
possible,
and
so
for
me,
I
think
these
policies
definitely
have
to
get
redone.
B
No
one,
I
don't
think
I
certainly
am
not
disagreeing
with
that.
I
will
say,
though,
that
there
is
there
is
there
is
certain
sunlight
is
the
best
disinfectant
and
things
that
happen
in
the
dark
and
are
happening
in
the
dark
makes
for
an
incredibly
uncomfortable,
unequal
and
horrible
work
environment.
I
agree.
B
C
I'm
not
interested
so
much
the
other
guy.
You
think
we
should
is
a
different
conversation,
but
legally
we
certainly
do
just
like
my
staff.
If
I'm
doing
an
investigation
on
my
staff
that
that
is
done
in
the
dark,
you,
don't
you
don't
have
public
investigations
into
individuals
unless,
for
some
reason
I
mean,
I
think,
there's
a
handful
of
public
investigations.
B
We're
headed
in
a
different
direction
when,
when
I
one
again,
I
there's
there's
two
things
that
I
wanted
to
again
make
very
clear
accusations
against
us.
As
elected
officials,
I
see
different
than
accusations
from
public
officials
against
these
particular
workers
and
why
the
difference
is
and
you're.
You
may
be
correct
that
there's
never
any
other
public
back
and
forth
about
other
hr
cases
about
other
hr
workers
in
the
city
of
boston.
Those
workers
have
other
protections,
though
they
have
unions.
A
C
You,
though,
is
I
fundamentally
disagree
that
say:
counselor
o'malley's
privacy
rights
in
terms
of
an
hr
complaint
would
be
different
than
a
central
staffer's
privacy
rights.
I
think
they
both
have
privacy
rights.
I
think
that
neither
one
of
their
privacy
rights
should
be
violated,
so
when
you're
saying
that
counselor
o'malley
or
counselor,
edwards
or
counselor,
bach
or
counsel
arroyo,
have
lesser
privacy
rights
on
an
hr
matter
than
a
central
staffer.
I
think
that
does
two
things.
It
ignores
the
idea
that
that's
not
for
me,
that's
not
true,
but
two
and
by
state
law.
C
That's
not
true,
but
two
that
there's
a
level
of
privacy
that
we
would
want
to
maintain
for
the
accuser,
even
if
an
accuser
came
forward
and
said
unless
they
came
forward
publicly
or
something
like
that.
But
if
an
accuser
is
basically
going
through
the
personnel
policy
or
the
personnel
protocols
and
they're
making
a
private
complaint,
if
there's
some
way,
which
in
that
then
becomes
a
public
complaint
because
of
who
they're
accusing
you're
doing
a
disservice
to
that
person
is
what
I'm
saying
it's
it's
a
two-way
street.
C
A
A
I
appreciate
this.
The
purpose
of
this
hearing
is
order
for
a
hearing
to
review
central
staff
policies,
procedures,
performance
and
regulations.
I
think
we've
touched
upon
a
number
of
issues
that
are
important
and
warrant
further
discussion,
but
I
just
want
to
bring
us
back
to
what's
before
us
today.
A
It's
been
not
quite
two
hours
about
an
hour
and
45
minutes.
I
want
to
be
respectful
of
everyone's
time.
I
will
not
be
adjourning
this
hearing.
I
will
be
recessing
it
for
the
purpose
that
we
will
continue
the
conversation.
I
think
there
are
some
key
takeaways
that
we've
all
highlighted
that
deserve
further
conversation
review.
One
is
a
better
understanding
sort
of
of
our
council
rules
as
it
relates
to
the
rules
committee.
A
Specifically,
the
more
important
thing
is
updating
the
policies
that
were
last
done
in
2013,
and
I
think
that
I'll
be
looking
to
work
with
several
members
to
try
to
perhaps
put
a
smaller
working
group
together.
That
will
then
convene
at
the
reconvened
rural
committee
hearing
on
this,
but
I
think
this
is
an
opportunity
that
is
unique.
I
am
the
council
president
pro
tem,
I
am
not
seeking
re-election.
A
I
will
be
serving
out
through
november
or
for
perhaps
beyond
that,
depending
on
what
happens
in
the
mayor's
race.
I,
through
the
work
of
many
members
of
this
body,
was
able
to
negotiate
an
increase
in
our
central
staff
budget,
so
this
will
allow
for
much
needed
and
deserved
cost
of
living
increases,
which
will
then,
I
think,
dovetail
nicely
with
a
better
review
process
and
better
opportunities
for
rewarding
some
exceptional
work.
I
would
say
across
the
board
for
our
central
staff
during
this
pandemic,
so
the
work
continues.
A
B
Yeah,
so
I
look
forward
to
a
working
session.
I
think
I
talked
about
several
themes
on
the
documents
as
they
exist
that
we
need
to
address.
I'm
still,
I
still
think
it
would
be
great
to
have
possibly
an
outside
consultant
and
consider
allocating
some
of
our
funds
to
bringing
someone
in
there
neutrally.
B
It's
very
clear
that
it
goes
to
the
rules
committee
and
that
there
is
a
public
process
for
that
accountability
and
that,
if
they
are
holding
one
of
us
accountable,
that
they
are
able
to
do
so
in
a
way
that
protects
them
and
also
make
sure
that
it
is
not
deliberated
by
this
body,
because
I
don't
believe
that
we
should
be.
You
know
the
president
or
anyone
else
and
that
they
are
that
we
provide
a
process
for
that
place
to
land
and
be
deliberated.
However,
it
may
finish.
A
Great
so
again,
one
of
our
extra
or
excellent-
I
should
say
extra
excellent
central
staffers
reminded
me
that
I
shouldn't
recess
this
hearing.
I
actually
should
adjourn
it,
and
then
we
can
schedule
another
hearing
or
working
session
afterwards.
So
we
are
now
closing
dockets.
Excuse
me
for
one
second
docket:
zero:
five,
zero.
Four
order
for
a
hearing
to
review
central
staff
policies,
procedures,
performances
and
regulations
is
hereby
adjourned.