A majority of the Dallas Civil Service Board voted Nov. 4 to deny Sergeant Crystal Cortinez's grievance that sought to have eligibility for the lieutenant promotional examination calculated from the completion of the entire exam, including the assessment center held in September.

The board's decision came after a contested hearing in which city counsel argued the department consistently measures the six-month eligibility window from the initial written administration of a promotional examination and that changing that practice would create operational and fairness problems. "You must draw the line somewhere," James Peacock, counsel for the City of Dallas, said during opening remarks.

Cortinez, who was promoted to sergeant on March 3, 2021, told the board she was denied the opportunity to sit for the lieutenant promotional exercise because the department interpreted the announcement to mean the six-month clock began on July 8, 2025 (the written exam date). She and her counsel argued the announcement and the civil-service definition of "examination" — which treats "test or assessment" as a single examination — meant the six months should be measured after the assessment portion was administered in mid-September. "When the exam is complete, which is not complete until the assessment is done," Cortinez testified, "the six months begins from that point."

The city's witnesses, including civil service director Jared Davis and Lieutenant Frederick Mears, described the exam process and the department's longstanding practice of scheduling and scoring the written administration first and using that date to determine eligibility. Davis told the board that treating the written administration as the operative date is necessary for planning assessment centers, managing vendor schedules and avoiding overlapping eligibility lists. "Changing the way in which we determine eligibility would make it very difficult for us to determine eligibility," he said.

Board members split over statutory interpretation and administrative practice. The chair said the board must construe Rule 4.3(b) in a way that produces an administrable and consistent outcome; he favored calculating the six months from the written administration date. After deliberation the board voted 3-1 to deny Cortinez's grievance. The decision means Cortinez remains ineligible to take the July/September promotional exercise until she satisfies the five-year service requirement for promotion.

The board did not order any retroactive relief for other officers who were not part of Cortinez's grievance. Board members noted the announcement language could be clarified in future exercises to reduce ambiguity.

The board also approved routine agenda items and resumed a short recess before hearing related grievances later in the meeting.