Euclid Civil Service Commission members on Aug. 5 discussed requests to waive a civil‑service rule that bars officers from taking promotional exams until they have served 12 months in their current rank, but the commission declined to grant a waiver and took no formal vote to override the rule.

The matter concerned two Euclid Police Department officers: Sergeant Nate Reid, who is 72 hours short of the 12‑month requirement before the scheduled lieutenant written exam, and Officer Samuel Jackson, who does not meet the three‑year service requirement for the sergeant promotional list. Law Director Cooney told the commission that Rule 13.6(b) requires 12 months in rank before eligibility and that Rule 14.1 permits a waiver only by a two‑thirds vote with reasons entered into the meeting minutes.

The commission’s decision matters because a waiver would let candidates who have served less than 12 months in their current rank take promotional exams ahead of peers who meet the rule, potentially creating appeals or grievances, commissioners said.

Law Director Cooney, the city’s law director, explained the legal framework to the commission: “Rule 14.1 states, with respect to waiver in specific cases, wherein in the judgment of the commission, that it is in the interest of the public service, any rule of the commission duly adopted may be waived by a two‑thirds vote of the commission. Reasons therefore to be entered into the minutes of the meeting where such waiver was voted.” He also cited Ohio Revised Code section 124.44 as precedent for the 12‑month requirement.

Sergeant Nate Reid addressed the commission in person. “I am Nate Reid. I’m a sergeant with the Euclid Police Department. I have been employed there for approximately the last 10 years… I have been in my current rank since September 13 when I was promoted to sergeant, and I am 72 hours, 3 days short of the promotional exam,” he said. Reid told the commission the lieutenant promotional test has two parts: a written exam scheduled for Sept. 10 (40 percent of the grade) and an oral assessment in October (60 percent), and he said he would be eligible under the Ohio Revised Code by the time a promotion would take effect but not under the commission’s civil‑service rule.

Commissioners voiced concern about setting a precedent and about potential grievances from candidates who meet the 12‑month rule. “One of the concerns is setting a precedent when you do that,” Law Director Cooney said when asked about past practice. Commissioner Robinson said the commission must protect the city from future legal challenges and noted the risk of grievances if an exception were allowed and an ineligible candidate placed ahead of others who met the rule: “If we vote for this now, I can see union grievances coming in the future.”

Commission members and staff reviewed the size and history of the relevant promotional lists. The lieutenant eligible list was certified Dec. 19, 2023, and was extended by one year; nine individuals applied for the lieutenant exam and eight meet Rule 13.6(b). The sergeant promotional test drew 32 applicants; 31 meet Rule 13.6(a). The current sergeant list was certified Oct. 17, 2023; 17 individuals were eligible on that list and six promotions were made from it.

Commissioners and the law director agreed that a formal waiver would require a two‑thirds vote and reasons recorded in minutes; because the commission did not move to waive the rule the eligible requirements will stand and ineligible applicants will not take the examinations. “I don’t think we’re gonna deviate from the civil service rules,” one commissioner said.

The commission also discussed procedural constraints around scheduling promotional testing: commissioners and staff said testing vendors’ availability and the need to coordinate multiple candidates make shifting dates difficult. The commission expects the promotional testing and any subsequent protests handled through the testing vendor’s protest process; one vendor named in the meeting, Clancy, will review protests and return recommendations to the commission for disposition.

No formal motion to waive Rule 13.6(b) was adopted; commissioners confirmed only those who meet the rule will be eligible to take the scheduled exams. The commission did not set a follow‑up date for reconsideration.