Civil Service Board OKs hearing on challenge to Miami police lieutenant promotional exam

The Miami Civil Service Board voted to grant a hearing on a challenge to the City of Miami’s 2024 police lieutenant promotional examination, attorneys and board members said at a board meeting. Attorneys for two sergeants asked the board to investigate whether the city altered the announced exam process after candidates had applied and spent months preparing.

The petitioners’ attorney, Jerry Gutman Valdez, representing Sgt. Raul Delgado and Sgt. Maximiliano Valdez, told the board the candidate preparation materials and the announcement originally described a three-part exam but were revised in April 2025 to remove a situational judgement component and to limit advancement to the next phase to “the top 35 ranked candidates.” Gutman Valdez said the change was unfair to candidates who had been studying for months and described the post‑announcement change as “egregious, egregious violation.”

“The top 35 ranked candidates based on phase 1 ... will be invited to participate in the written in basket,” Gutman Valdez said, reading from the updated materials. “You cannot say only this many people can go from part 1 to part 2. It’s about a passing grade. That is egregious.”

Lanetta Geary, speaking for the city, put an objection on the record. “The city does have an objection to the request for the hearing,” Geary said, adding that, in the city’s view, the allegations “do not rise to the level of a violation of any of these civil service rules.” Geary also asked the board to allow “at least 2 or 3 weeks” for both sides to prepare if the board scheduled a hearing.

After discussion and questions from board members about how the exam components and scoring would have been affected by the removal of the situational judgement test, Board Member Cabrera moved to grant the request for a hearing; Board Member Soleiman seconded. The motion passed with all voting “aye.” Board members later confirmed for the record that the employees requesting the hearing are Raul Delgado and Maximiliano Valdez.

Board members and the petitioners pressed two central factual points: that the announcement and candidate preparation guide (published in late 2024 and updated in April 2025) described three components making up 80% of the exam (technical knowledge, situational judgement, and a written in-basket) and that the vendor updated the guide less than a month before testing to remove the situational judgement portion and to state that only the top 35 from phase one would advance. Petitioners told the board the technical knowledge test was scheduled for March 28 and the written in-basket was listed for Aug. 26 in the documents they received.

The board did not rule on the merits of the civil service rules claim at the meeting; it granted the procedural request to schedule a hearing so the parties can present evidence on whether the city’s actions complied with the civil service rules governing promotional examinations.

The board directed staff to place the matter on the hearings docket and the city indicated it would seek additional preparation time if the hearing is scheduled.

The petition identifies alleged violations of Civil Service Rules 6.2, 6.3, 6.5 and 6.6 governing promotional examinations and the method of rating, and Rule 16.1 and 16.2 procedures for investigations and employee complaints; the board granted a hearing on that request.