Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Personnel Contracts topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee delays sole-source contract with Faust Psychological Services after abstention, will revisit tonight

2550398 · March 10, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

An ordinance to authorize a noncompetitive contract with Faust Psychological Services for pre-employment psychological exams for police officers was discussed but postponed after an abstention raised quorum and conflict concerns; human resources said the vendor has conducted police psychologicals since 2021.

An ordinance authorizing the director of human resources or her designee to enter into a contract without publicly advertising for bids with Faust Psychological Services for administration of psychological examinations for safety personnel was discussed but not approved by the Akron Budget and Finance Committee; members agreed to take the item up again during the evening council meeting.

Christine Reininger of the human resources department told the committee the city has used Dr. Faust since about 2021 to conduct pre-employment psychological examinations for police officers and that he has “30 plus years of experience” concentrating on law enforcement and first responders.

Reininger said the city expects to interview police officers for lateral transfers in the near future and preferred to have the contract in place before those interviews. Committee members questioned whether the psychologist’s services could extend beyond police officers to other city employees or 911 operators; Reininger said the current use has been strictly for police officers but that it could be extended in other circumstances.

A motion was made to suspend the rules so the ordinance could be passed immediately. A committee member then announced they would abstain because the member’s employer was one of the two entities mentioned as potential providers; the abstention prompted committee members to question whether a valid suspension could be achieved given attendance that day. Committee members agreed to hold temporary time on the item and attempt suspension of the rules again if a quorum of this committee attends the evening meeting. The committee noted that the law department would be consulted to confirm the correct procedure.

No final vote on the Faust contract was recorded during the committee’s afternoon session.