Fort Scott commissioners review draft employee handbook; flag DEI language, hiring rules and weapons policy

At a Fort Scott City Commission work session, city staff and commissioners reviewed a draft employee handbook and identified several areas that need clarification before the handbook is finalized.

Commissioners and staff concentrated on how employees will acknowledge receipt and understanding of the handbook, whether a competency test should be required, how department hiring and candidate evaluation are documented, the proper title and duties for an employee-relations role, and wording on diversity, firearms and workplace safety. No formal votes were taken during the work session; commissioners asked staff to revise specific language and return the handbook for further review.

The draft includes an electronic distribution method and a sign-off confirming that employees have been given access to the handbook. Brad, the city manager, said employees will sign off that they were given the link; the proposed revision adds a competency test and a study guide so staff can confirm employees have reviewed highlighted policies. Brad also confirmed physical copies will remain available for employees without internet access.

Commissioners pressed for stronger documentation around performance reviews. The draft lists appraisal timing as "January, quarterly, semiannually, or an established local date each year." Commissioners asked that reviews be documented consistently and that supervisors use candidate-evaluation forms. Tracy Dancer and Brad described the current practice: department supervisors run interviews and complete candidate-evaluation forms; the supervisor then discusses finalists with the city manager before an offer is made. Commissioners asked the handbook to say explicitly who completes the evaluation forms and to clarify terminology (for example whether the "hiring manager" and "department supervisor" are the same role in practice).

Several commissioners sought clarity about background checks and pre-employment screening. Staff described current practice as: police and fire positions receive background checks and drug screens; other departments use drug screens but do not routinely run full background investigations. Commissioners asked for handbook language that makes these prerequisites clear and suggests replacing "background check" with a more general phrase such as "completion of prerequisite checks" where appropriate.

A recurring subject was the handbook's references to "human relations / special projects coordinator" versus a uniform title such as "human resources manager." Commissioners and staff said the draft contains many inconsistent references to that role and asked for uniform wording and clearer limits on duties. One commissioner argued the combined duties (employee relations plus special projects) risk creating a single overburdened position and asked staff to define which duties are expected versus optional.

Commissioners discussed the handbook's section on employment of relatives. The current draft says no exception will be made without the written permission of the city manager. At least one commissioner asked whether the commission — not just the city manager — should approve exceptions. Brad and others noted state statute gives the city manager hiring and firing authority; commissioners said they will consider how the handbook records the commission's oversight role while recognizing the city manager's statutory authority.

Weapons and company vehicles drew extended comment. The draft states that concealed handguns should not be stored in city vehicles except for fire personnel. Commissioners raised risk and liability concerns about allowing employees with concealed-carry permits to keep firearms in city vehicles. Bob, who had arrived during the session, was asked to review the language. Commissioners asked staff to bring proposed, legally vetted language back to the commission; several raised that some city buildings already prohibit firearms on site.

Safety, training and documentation also drew questions. Commissioners asked that supervisors certify employee competence for high-risk tasks (for example trench work or operating heavy equipment) and that the handbook include a short, enforceable sentence describing that requirement. Staff said vehicle logs and pre-use checks have recently been started for equipment and city vehicles.

A commissioner recommended removing explicit references to "diversity, equity and inclusion" (DEI) from certain handbook passages and replacing them with wording such as "inclusion topics" or a more general employee-council reference, because of concerns that some federal grants exclude entities with DEI programs. Brad and Rachel said harassment and discrimination prohibitions remain in other sections of the draft regardless of DEI wording.

Other items discussed included retaliation definitions (commissioners asked the handbook to list examples such as denial of promotion, cuts to hours or benefits, or other adverse employment actions), clarification that sick leave covers mental as well as physical illness, and a brief discussion about knives used as tools in the field (staff indicated tools that are part of job duties are acceptable, with limits tied to job function).

Commissioners asked staff to: (1) standardize role titles and references to the human-resources function; (2) clarify the recruitment and selection workflow and who completes candidate evaluation forms; (3) add short, enforceable language about supervisor certification for safety-critical tasks; (4) revise the weapons-in-vehicles language and have Bob review legal risk; and (5) expand the retaliation description to include adverse employment actions and whistleblower protections. Staff said they will circulate tracked edits and return the handbook for another review. No formal action was taken at the work session.