Whether language in Crestwood’s civil-service code matches a municipal-code ordinance approved last year to outline the investigative powers of the Civil Service Board has prompted a further review of whether that board can move forward with two investigations.

City Administrator Jim Eckrich and City Attorney Rob Golterman will review whether the Civil Service Board can pursue two investigations into personnel matters.

The review comes after Eckrich had barred the Civil Service Board from investigating 10 Police Department pay raises implemented May 15 before the Board of Aldermen approved them July 8. Eckrich also rejected an Aug. 28 vote from the Civil Service Board to investigate the use of city resources to promote July town-hall meetings that were led by a campaign committee in favor of the now-failed tax increase Proposition 1.

Approved minutes of the Board of Aldermen’s April 10, 2007, meeting state that aldermen voted 7-1 to approve Bill 06-72, which became Ordinance No. 4047.

The language in that ordinance enacts Section 18-7(2) of the municipal code, which states that the Civil Service Board can “make any investigation that the Civil Service Board may deem desirable concerning appropriate changes or additions to the Civil Service Rules for classified employees or procedures or general policies that unfairly or adversely affect classified employees and report to the Board of Aldermen at least once a year in writing on its findings, conclusions and recommendations.”

At that April 10, 2007, meeting, Ward 2 Alderman Chris Pickel, who now serves as board president, voted “no” to Bill 06-72, citing concerns that the board’s investigative powers were too “open-ended.”

However, while Section 18-7(2) of the municipal code details that the Civil Service Board can investigate only “changes or additions to the Civil Service Rules” or “procedures or general policies that unfairly or adversely affect classified employees,” a copy of the final Civil Service Rules and Regulations included in the board packet for the April 10, 2007, meeting states that the Civil Service Board’s investigative powers are more broad.

The Civil Service Board shall have the power and be required to “make any investigation which it may deem desirable concerning the administration of personnel in the municipal service …,” according to Chapter 1, Section 8 (B) of that document.

Approved minutes from that meeting state aldermen unanimously approved the final Civil Service Rules and Regulations.

At last week’s board meeting, Ward 3 Alderman Jerry Miguel pointed out to Eckrich that the language concerning the Civil Service Board’s investigative powers in the final Civil Service Rules and Regulations does not match the investigative powers described in the municipal code.

“I saw where Bill 06-79, which became Ordinance 4054, which was approved on April 10, 2007, clearly gives the Civil Service Board the authority to, and I quote, ‘make any investigation which it may deem desirable concerning the administration of personnel,'” Miguel said.

Eckrich told Miguel that while Bill 06-79 may have contained that language, the copy of the civil-service manual that he received in April 2007 in his previous post as director of public services did not.

“What I referred to in my document was the civil-service manual, which was provided to all employees dated April 10, 2007, which I received a copy of as an employee,” Eckrich said. “The language in that document matches the language in the code, which does not match the language you (Miguel) referred to. But everything you say may very well be true. I just have not had the opportunity to review that.”

Eckrich said Friday that he and Golterman would review those discrepancies and report back to aldermen. Eckrich said he also would review a statement from Civil Service Board Chairwoman Martha Du-child in which she contends that the board can initiate personnel investigations.

“I told the board that I would review the assertions from the Civil Service Board chair and at least one of the aldermen that the language in the civil-service regulations does not match the language which was passed by the board,” he said. “Once I’m done reviewing that, I will report that to the board … We’re still in the process of doing that. That will have to be reviewed by the city attorney as well. It’s sort of a complicated matter. And at that point, we’ll see how the board wants to proceed.”

In addition, Ward 3 Alderman Gregg Roby requested that Eckrich and Golterman also meet with Civil Service Board member Gretchen Huston to review the Civil Service Board’s investigative powers.

“Based on the fact that this issue is obviously open to interpretation and we’re not attorneys up here, I think it’s important that Mr. Eckrich has the opportunity to review …,” Roby said. “And that information can be discussed with the city attorney. And if they so desire to meet with Mrs. Huston, who is also I believe an attorney who serves on the Civil Service Board, then perhaps the best way to work this out is for those parties to sit down and discuss the terminology and come to an agreement as to the interpretation.”

While Duchild said she also would like to be a part of that suggested meeting, Roby believes that discussing possible violations of civil-service rules from the pay raises and the city’s promotion of the town-hall meetings with Miguel and Ward 4 Alderman Steve Nieder shows “bias.”

“I’m going to suggest that Mrs. Huston be involved and only Mrs. Huston due to a previous memo that Alderman Nieder gave us two meetings ago,” Roby said. “The last page of which is an e-mail from a member of the civil-service commission to Alderman Miguel coaching him by laying out and underlining items in this document that show bias, in my opinion. And there have also been comments made on a local blog that I think may skew that individual’s perspective. And that’s why I suggest that the city attorney, Mrs. Huston and the city administrator get together.”

Duchild disagreed with Roby’s assertions, saying she believes the Civil Service Board could objectively investigate the pay raises and the use of city resources regarding the town-hall meetings.

“The mayor appointed three independent women to this board with integrity,” she said. “And he knew he was doing that when he appointed us. Those three women are still here. We’re not biased by anybody on this board. And our investigation was made as a group. It was a group decision.

“There was no bias. And I do not accept the implication that any member of this board is biased in any way, shape or form. And I still contend that if we work with the city that we can proceed and do this as expeditiously as possible.”