HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Civil Service Board - 11/08/2012 9
t
MINUTES
556" CIVIL SERVICE BOARD HEARING
1201 LEOPARD ST.,CITY HALL
HUMAN RESOURCES CONFERENCE ROOM
November 8,2012
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: CITY STAFF PRESENT:
Susanne Bonilla, Chairperson Yasmine B. Chapman, Director of H.R.
Hector Saenz, Member Marcie Downing, City Attorney
Catherine Lutz, Member Mark DeKoch, City Attorney
Sherri Eldridge, H.R. Analyst
Chairperson Bonilla called the 556'" Civil Service Board hearing to order at 9:03 a.m.
ITEM #1 Review and approve the minutes of the 555'" Civil Service Board Hearing held
July 17, 2012.
ITEM #2 Review and consider the appeal filed by Michael Cantu, City Deputy Marshal
with the Municipal Court, for his suspension.
Chairperson Bonilla read agenda item #1. Board Member Saenz made a motion to approve the minutes
and the motion was seconded. All members agreed and the minutes were approved.
Chairperson Bonilla read agenda item #2.
All witnesses present took the oath administered by Chairperson Bonilla.
Marcie Downing, Assistant City Attorney presented the City's opening statement.
Mr. Gabriel Salias representing Michael Cantu made his opening statement.
Assistant City Attorney Marcie Downing called Corina Saenz, Sr. Human Resources Analyst as the City's first
witness.
The City presented and entered into evidence:
#1: City of Corpus Christi, City Policy HR 3.0.
#2: Michael Cantu's signed City Policy HR 3.0 Acknowledgement.
#3: City of Corpus Christi Job Description for Deputy City Marshal.
#4: Texas Penal Code- Section 30.06. Trespass By Holder Of License To Carry Concealed Handgun
#5: Photographs of Courtrooms A, B, C, and signage.
#6: Letter from Michael Cantu to Lead Deputy Marshal Patrick Gonzales dated May 3, 2012.
#7: Letter of Reprimand to Michael Cantu from Jay Reining dated February 28, 2012.
#8: Contemplated Disciplinary Action Letter to Michael Cantu from Jay Reining dated June 4, 2012.
#9: Civil Service Board Letter dated June 11, 2012 regarding Michael Cantu's ten day suspension.
#10: Fact Finding Investigation completed by Sr. Human Resources Analyst Corina Saenz on May 29, 2012.
Assistant City Attorney Marcie Downing asked Witness Corina Saenz to review City evidence items#1, #2 and
#3.
Chairperson Bonilla asked Mr. Salias if he had any objections to City evidence Items #1, #2 and #3 being
entered into evidence. Mr. Salias stated there were no objections.
Assistant City Attorney Marcie Downing asked Witness Saenz to read the duties and responsibilities section of
City evidence Item # 3, the Deputy City Marshal Job Description and followed with questions regarding those
job duties and responsibilities.
Assistant City Attorney Marcie Downing concluded her questioning of Witness Saenz and passed the witness.
Mr. Salias cross-examined Witness Saenz.
Mr. Salias questioned Witness Saenz in regard to departmental discretion and how an employee knows if they
were habitually late.
Witness Saenz responded to Mr. Salias' questions.
Mr. Salias concluded his cross-examination of Witness Saenz and the witness was excused.
Chairperson Bonilla asked the Board if they had any questions before proceeding to the next witness. No
questions were presented.
Assistant City Attorney Marcie Downing called Patrick Gonzales, Deputy City Marshal as the City's next
witness and presents City evidence Items#4, #5 and #6.
Chairperson Bonilla asked Mr. Salias if he had any objection to City evidence Items #4, #5, and #6 to be
entered into evidence. No objections were made.
Assistant City Attorney Marcie Downing asked Witness Gonzales if he was familiar with Mr. Michael Cantu,
and how long lie had supervised Mr. Cantu.
Witness Gonzales was asked to read the attendance section of the City of Corpus Christi's HR Policy 3.0, and
then questioned why it was critical for Mr. Cantu to report to work when scheduled.
Witness Gonzales was asked to read the Texas Penal Code-Section 30.06 Trespass by Holder of License to
Carry Concealed Handgun, Item #4 that was entered into evidence.
Witness Gonzales is asked to review photographs of Courtrooms A, B, and C along with posted signage outside
of the courtrooms and Municipal Court building and is questioned about proper procedures, protection of
citizens, court personnel and judicial officials.
Witness Gonzales was asked to review an email he received from Michael Cantu dated May 3, 2012, City
evidence Item #6 and did he recall receiving this email.
Witness Gonzales was asked if the correct procedures were followed by Mr. Cantu given Mr. Cantu's emailed
explanation of the incident that took place on May 1, 2012.
Witness Gonzales responded to Ms. Downing's requests and questions.
Assistant City Attorney Marcie Downing concluded her questioning of Witness Gonzales and passed the
witness.
Mr. Salias cross-examined Witness Gonzales.
iliiiw Mr. Solias asked Witness Gonzales how does he communicates with Mr. Cantu.
Witness Gonzales is asked if he saw a video of the incident that took place on May 1, 2012.
Witness Gonzales is asked about the preservation of video in the Municipal Court Building, more specifically
the video that Mr. Cantu believed would have shown the incidents that took place on May 1, 2012.
Witness Gonzales is asked about personnel assigned to the Municipal Court building, and his role in ensuring
proper security procedures are followed.
Witness Gonzales is asked about the location of signage and where it is located in the Municipal Court Building
in regard to where the incident took place.
Witness Gonzales is asked to explain what City Deputy Marshals are allowed and not allowed to do when it
comes to the arrest and detention of citizens.
Witness Gonzales responds to Mr. Salias' questions.
Chairperson Bonilla announced a short recess at 10:36 a.m. before resuming testimony of Witness Gonzales.
Chairperson Bonilla called hearing back into session at 10:48 a.m.
Chairperson Bonilla asked opposing counsel if they have any additional questions for Witness Gonzales.
Mr. Salias stated they had no further questions for Witness Gonzales. Witness Gonzales was excused.
Assistant City Attorney Marcie Downing called the City's next witness, Mr. Jay Reining, Interim Director of
Municipal Court.
Assistant City Attorney Marcie Downing presented City evidence Items 0, #8, and #9 to be entered into
evidence.
Chairperson Bonilla asked Mr. Solias if he had any objections to Items #7, #8, and #9 be entered into evidence.
No objections were made.
Assistant City Attorney Marcie Downing questioned Witness Reining about his issuance of the Letter of
Reprimand to Michael Cantu dated February 28, 2012,City evidence Item #7.
Witness Reining was asked why Mr. Cantu was issued the Contemplated Disciplinary Action Letter dated June
4, 2012 and why he felt the Contemplated Disciplinary Action Letter was appropriate.
Witness Reining responds to Assistant City Attorney Marcie Downing's questions.
Assistant City Attorney Marcie Downing concluded her questioning of Witness Reining and passed the witness.
Mr. Salias cross-examined Witness Reining.
Witness Reining was asked if Michael Cantu was suspended for failure to act and if anyone else was
reprimanded or disciplined for this incident. Witness Reining responded that Mr. Cantu was suspended for not
notify anyone that a citizen had possibly entered the building with a weapon, nor did he follow the proper
protocol to investigate the matter as it was occurring. Mr. Cantu notified the supervisor after the fact and by
Mr. Cantu's own admission in his personal statement failed to follow protocol if he suspected the elderly
woman was being truthful that she had a weapon in the building.
Witness Reining was asked if anyone validated if the elderly lady, the subject of the incident, was a juror that
day. Was an elderly woman really a security threat, and why were others present not disciplined for their failure
to secure the area from this security threat. Witness Reining responded that woman was not identified because
Mr.Cantu failed to follow protocol. They were unable to identify the elderly woman because Mr. Cantu did not
attempt to get the woman's identification information.
Witness Reining was asked if a video was reviewed that would identify the elderly woman and the incident that
occurred. Witness Reining answered "No, he that it would be highly unlikely a video of the incident would
have been captured as there are no video cameras found on the second floor."
Witness Reining was asked was he aware that weapons get passed security such as brass knuckles and other
items and were personnel disciplined for those breaches of security. Witness Reining responded, "He had no
idea"
Assistant City Attorney Marcie Downing objected to the line of questioning by Mr. Salias.
Mr. Salias continued his questioning of Witness Reining.
Witness Reining was asked if he was aware how many arrests, City Marshals make in regard to illegal weapons
brought into the Municipal Court building. Witness Reining responded, "City Deputy Marshals are not to arrest
anyone for such a violation,CCPD is to be notified to complete the arrests."
Witness Reining was asked was Mr. Cantu identified as the person who did not check the woman. Witness
Reining responded, "It was never a question that Mr. Cantu let the woman in, that wasn't his job. Mr. Cantu
was suspended for not doing his job when the woman advised she had a weapon in the building violating state
law, and Mr. Cantu's failure to identifying the woman, check if she in fact did have a weapon, or tell anyone to
have the incident investigated."
Mr. Salias passed the witness.
Chairperson Bonilla asked the City to call their next witness.
Assistant City Attorney Marcie Downing stated that the City rested.
Assistant City Attorney Marcie Downing asked the Board for a short break.
Chairperson Bonilla announced a ten-minute break at 11:32a.m. before resuming the hearing.
Chairperson Bonilla announced at 11:50 a.m. they were back on the record.
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch presented City evidence Item # 10 to be entered into evidence.
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch recalled Witness Corina Saenz to testify to her fact-finding investigation
documents, City evidence Item #10.
Mr. Salias objects to evidence Item #10 to be entered stating they had not received the documents prior for their
review.
Chairperson Bonilla asked Mr. Salias if they would like to take a break to review the investigation documents.
Mr. Salias stated they will review the documents.
The review of documents by opposing counsel was conducted while still on the record.
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch requested a break.
Chairperson Bonilla approved a short break.
Chairperson Bonilla stated they were going off record at 12:04 p.m.
Chairperson Bonilla stated they were back on record at 12:07 p.m.
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch reminded Witness Saenz she was still under oath and resumed his
questioning of Witness Saenz.
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Saenz why she conducted an investigation on Michael
Cantu. Ms. Saenz responded, "She was investigating two allegations regarding Mr. Cantu. The first allegations
was unfounded and therefore not investigated any further; however the second allegation regarding Mr. Cantu
overhearing a female citizen stating she was a concealed handgun license holder and had forgotten to leave her
handgun in the vehicle. Mr. Cantu did not detain the citizen, allowed the citizen to leave the building and did
file a report of the incident."
Witness Saenz was asked about her interview with and statements provided by Mr. Cantu as well as her
findings during her investigation. Ms. Saenz responded that the statements made by Mr. Cantu confirmed the
second allegation.
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Saenz based on Mr. Cantu's own statements, Mr. Cantu
admittedly failed to do his job by not detaining the citizen therefore his own statements would justify the
suspension Mr. Cantu received. Witness Saenz responded "Yes."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch concluded his questioning of Witness Saenz and passed the witness.
Mr. Salias cross-examined Witness Saenz.
Mr. Salias asked Witness Saenz what evidence she had to prove this citizen had a gun in her possession.
Witness Saenz responded Mr. Cantu believed the citizen had a handgun in her possession by his statement
provided during her investigation.
Mr. Salias asked Witness Saenz if she knew what probable cause was and did she know an officer-needed
probable cause to detain someone, and that she did not know the procedures of law enforcement or laws of this
state. Witness Saenz stated, "She knew some."
Mr. Salias asked Witness Saenz if she ever reviewed a video tape. Witness Saenz responded she knew nothing
of a video tape, I have information about a video."
Mr. Salias asked Witness Saenz if she thought her investigation was thorough. Witness Saenz responded, "Yes,
she thought her investigation was thorough."
Mr. Salias concluded his cross-examination.
Chairperson Bonilla asked the City to present next witness.
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch stated the City rested.
Chairperson Bonilla asked opposing counsel if they wished to call a witness.
Mr. Salias called Michael Cantu to testify.
Mr. Salias rein inded Mr. Cantu he was still under oath.
Mr. Salias questioned Witness Michael Cantu about his current employment, and his law enforcement career.
Witness Cantu responded he was currently a City Deputy Marshal and had approximately twenty years.
Mr. Salias asked Witness Cantu if discretion is used in law enforcement and to explain discretion. Witness
Cantu response with an example "If I pull a citizen over for a moving violation, I have the discretion to issue
either a ticket or a warning for the offense."
Mr. Salias asked Witness Cantu what do you needed to arrest or detain somebody. Witness Cantu responded,"It
needs to meet the elements of a crime."
Mr. Salias asked Witness Cantu what is probable cause. Witness Cantu responded "Is more than reasonable
doubt that a crime has been committed."
Mr. Salias asked Witness Cantu on May 1S` what were his duties that day. Witness Cantu responded that he was
assigned to Court Room C on the second floor of Municipal Court, Judge Rivera.
Mr. Salias asked Witness Cantu if during that time if he came across some woman or over hear about a
concealed handgun license. Witness Cantu responded he overheard it, while escorting a defendant from the
courtroom at the direction of the Judge. Witness Cantu said he overheard an old woman say something about a
gun, which caught his attention. The woman was already walking out of the building.
Mr. Salias asked Witness Cantu how long after his encounter with the woman did he finish he duties with the
defendant he was escorting. Witness Cantu responded, "It was about 10 or 15 minutes, then I reported back to
Court Room C because the Judge was still hearing cases."
Mr. Salias asked Witness Cantu if he ever saw a gun, did the woman ever display a weapon or make threat.
Witness Cantu responded "No."
Mr. Salias asked Witness Cantu if he thought there was a breech in security based on what he heard. Witness
Cantu responded "No."
Mr. Salias asked Witness Cantu if he believed he has probable cause to detain the woman. Witness Cantu
responded "No."
Mr. Salias asked Witness Cantu did he believe it would have been an illegal arrest or detaining based on year of
law enforcement experience. Witness Cantu responded "Yes."
Mr. Salias asked Witness Cantu on the days off you requested and were disciplined for how did that affect your
livelihood. Witness Cantu responded, "It put a lot of constraints on me."
Mr. Salias asked Witness Cantu on the second reprimand where you were suspended for ten days how did that
affect you and what were your losses. Witness Cantu responded he was unable to work both his regular job and
outside employment.
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch objected to the questioning based on the relevancy to the issues of this
case.
Mr. Salias responded the relevancy was they were going to ask for back pay.
Chairperson Bonilla stated she would allow the questioning to continue.
Witness Cantu responded based on his regular job about seventeen hundred dollars and his outside job
approximately five hundred dollars.
Mr. Salias stated had it not been for Mr. Cantu complaining about the suspension being too harsh that they
would not be here today. Witness Cantu responded "Correct."
Mr. Salias passed the witness.
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch cross-examined Witness Cantu.
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu to turn to his job description, exhibit #3 and read
the second responsibility on that page. Witness Cantu responded"Provide Court Room Security"
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu did he agree this was his job and responsibly.
Witness Cantu responded,"It is."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu you heard a woman say she has a handgun in the
building and you did not know it was wrong to have a handgun in the building. Witness Cantu responded, "It's
against the law."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch stated, "So you knew it was against the law." Witness Cantu responded
"Of course."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu, "You hear a woman say she has a handgun in the
building, is that correct?" Witness Cantu responded, "That's the assumption,yes."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch stated, "Not your assumption, your statement says you heard a lady say
she is a concealed handgun license holder and she had forgotten to leave her gun in her vehicle, right?" "What
does that tell you?"
Witness Cantu responded, "That was my assumption because that is what I overheard." "She said she might
have a gun." "What did you hear her say?" Witness Cantu responded, I didn't hear her clearly there were a lot
of people around."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu "Where in your statement did you say you may
have not heard that" "Where did you qualify that in your statement?" "Found that yet?" Witness Cantu
responded, "no, I have not found that yet."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch stated, "In fact you said you overheard it, right?" "What did you think
when the woman said she forgot to leave her handgun in the car, what did you think that meant?" Witness
Cantu responded, "That she may have forgotten to put her gun in the car."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu, "Do you think she had the handgun on her?"
Witness Cantu responded "No."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu"Who was the person that could have determined if
she had a handgun?" Witness Cantu responded, "Three people actually, the security guard and the two officers
of the court room.""My obligation again was the defendant I had in my custody I could not leave, they teach in
the academy you never leave someone in your custody."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch stated "Okay you said you can't leave that person, but you just told us
that where you over heard this there were several police officers standing there, you could have told one of
those police officers in passing what you over heard and therefore done your job without ever leaving the
person in your custody." "Your supervisor and Jay Reining both say that the proper procedure would have been
to notify the police, had you told a police officer what you overheard than you would have done your job."
"Had you done that, we wouldn't be here today, but because you did ignored it, that is why we are here isn't
that right? Witness Cantu responded, "I didn't have the elements of a crime."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch stated,"You heard someone say that they didn't leave the gun in the car,
she is telling you for a reason right?" "You don't think a reasonable officer whose job is to provide court room
security would hear that and do nothing?" Witness Cantu responded, "Number one we weren't in the court
room, number two I didn't have to tell the other officers because they heard it also."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu, "How did you know the other officers heard it,
were you assuming?" Witness Cantu responded,"Well the video.."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked, "Where did this happen, it happened outside court room A
according to your statement right?" Witness Cantu asked if he could demonstrate on the dry erase board the
location in which he was describing?"
Witness Cantu made a demonstration by using a drawn map to go over his whereabouts during the incident and
where cameras are placed. Witness Cantu demonstrates the incident happened in the lobby where cameras are
located.
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch stated " In your statement you say she walked up to the guard in court
room A, and now you're saying you weren't even close to court room A, is that what you're telling us today?"
Witness Cantu responded, "Yes,that's an assumption because I went by what the security guard told me."
Mr. Salias objected asking what the question was.
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch stated,"You said in your statement that she walked up to the guard from
court room A, you didn't say the security guard." Witness Cantu responded, "That must have been a
misquotation by myself, okay can I explain?"
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu "Who wrote this?" Witness Cantu responded, "I
did, I typed it."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu "Did you proof it before you turned it in?" Witness
Cantu replied, "No, I did not."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu "Why not?" Witness Cantu responded that Deputy
Gonzales asked him to write the statement and that he was under a state of duress"
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu "Did you tell your supervisor the day of this event
that the woman never got into the building?" Witness Cantu responded, "The woman was in the building."
Chairperson Bonilla asked Witness Cantu to answer yes or no to the question.
Witness Cantu responded "Then the answer would be yes."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu "Then you did tell him she never entered the
building?" "Let me ask my question again to clarify, on the day of the incident did you tell your supervisor
Patrick Gonzales that the woman never entered the building." Witness Cantu replied "No."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch stated, "Is he is lying about that?" Witness Cantu replied, "I don't know
if he's lying about that."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu "What did you tell him that day?" Witness Cantu
responded, "That he may have told him that something may have gone on, but that he didn't know if it went on
or not"
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu "Why did you even tell him if you didn't think she
had a handgun?" Witness Cantu replied, "Well it might have happened, but I don't know if it happened."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu "Do you have the right to ask someone who says
they forgot to leave their handgun in the car if they have a handgun?" Witness Cantu replied, "Yes."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu "Why didn't you ask her?" Witness Cantu
responded,"Because I didn't see a gun." "She was already out of the secured area."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu "Why don't they allow handguns in court houses?"
Witness Cantu responded, "Because it's a state law."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu "Because someone could get killed right?"
Witness Cantu replied "Yes."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch concluded his cross-examination of Witness Cantu.
Mr. Salias asked Witness Cantu "You had someone in custody, who posed the greater threat?" Witness Cantu
responded"The person in custody"
Mr. Salias stated, "Because the person in custody is being held against their will is that correct?" "What threat
did this seventy year old lady pose?" Witness Cantu replied "None."
Mr. Salias asked Witness Cantu"Was she threatening anybody?" Witness Cantu relied "No.""Was she exiting
the building?" Witness Cantu replied, "Yes." "What breach of security was she performing?" Witness Cantu
replied, "None."
Mr. Salias passed the witness.
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch again cross-examined Witness Cantu.
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch asked Witness Cantu "Could you have asked her if she had a handgun?"
Witness Cantu responded, "No, I was pre-occupied with the person I had in custody."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch stated,"You could tell her she could leave the building, but you couldn't
ask her if she had a handgun?" "In your own statement you state you spoke to her, you approached her, but you
couldn't ask her if she had a handgun?" "Why did you tell her to leave the building?" Witness Cantu responded,
"She was already leaving."
Assistant City Attorney Mark DeKoch stated he had no further questions.
Mr. Salias, representing Michael Cantu made his closing statement.
Mr. Mark DeKoch, Assistant City Attorney made the City's rebuttal statement.
Chairperson Bonilla announced they were going into closed session at 1:45 p.m.
Chairperson Bonilla announced at 2:16 p.m. they were resuming the 5501' Civil Service Board Hearing,
considering the appeal filed by Michael Cantu, City Deputy Marshal with the Municipal Court.
Vice Chairperson Saenz made a motion to nullify the Letter of Reprimand for the sick days with back pay for
the days missed and to reduce the suspension from ten days to seven days with back pay for three days.
Chairperson Bonilla asked for a second on the decision, Board Member Lutz seconded.
All members agreed and the decisions were approved.
Chairperson Bonilla adjourned the hearing at 1:56 p.m.
AW
Susanne Bonilla, Chairperson Hector Saenz, Member
Civil Service Board Civil Service Board
41
Cathe'rinekuTz, ember ��Yaine B. Chapman, Secret ry
Civil Service Boar Service Board