2007 Budgeted Staffing
I have been preaching for over a year about the lack of control exercised by the City Council over the senior staff, municipal operations, financial activities and ethics. Today I’ll provide more detail concerning staffing.
Many of you will remember the so called lay offs in 2004. The number of employees had climbed from just over 200 in 2001 to 253 in 2004. The story goes that the former Finance Director discovered a major shortfall in revenues which caused the need to cut the payroll. Forty-four employees were terminated or convinced to take early retirement. This action reduced the total staffing to 209 full-time employees.
In the subsequent 2005 budget, the Council authorized 215 full-time employees. In the 2006 budget they again authorized 215 employees. So, what did the staff do this year? They increased the number of full-time employees to 242. I understand the staff “consulted” with the Council on a couple of the additional employees but did not on the balance of 27 positions. Think about it. The staff just increased itself without our elected representatives’ involvement. Remind me, we have elected representatives to do what?
Guess what the staff wants for staffing next year? You bet; 252 full-time positions. Now what was that count in 2004? Maybe 253? Our Council is so oblivious to what goes on in the City that they believed in the staff presentations that showed only a modest increase of ten positions. The staff compared requests to actual; not approved and it went right over the Council’s head. I have already picked up some flak by telling some members of the Council that they are increasing the number of employees by 37 over their previous authorization; not ten.
When the supposed mistake that caused the layoffs in 2004 was found before the last Council elections, but kept secret until March of this year, the Mayor expressed her feelings in the March 2nd issue of the Sentinel. “Despite the unfortunate nature of the city’s layoffs in 2004, the increased funds in the city bank account isn’t entirely a bad thing. It gives us more flexibility. The bottom line is that we have $10 million in savings now instead of the $8 million that we had before. This infusion of cash will help council get to its priorities faster.”
As the proposed budget shows, the City staff had its own priority. The staff increased itself by 27 employees this year and the estimated year-end balance went from $11.1 million in 2005 to $8.8 million for this year; and is projected to be only $5.1 million at the end of 2007. As you move around in the city, check out all the improvements done by the City this year with the extra 27 employees. Remind me, we elect a City Council to do what?
Now for a teaser about a future posting. The Council is proud of its great commitment to communicate with the residents. We have the web site, Connection, Channel 8 programming, the televising of meetings, occasional flyers, PR articles and numerous ads. How much are you willing to pay for all this?
Many of you will remember the so called lay offs in 2004. The number of employees had climbed from just over 200 in 2001 to 253 in 2004. The story goes that the former Finance Director discovered a major shortfall in revenues which caused the need to cut the payroll. Forty-four employees were terminated or convinced to take early retirement. This action reduced the total staffing to 209 full-time employees.
In the subsequent 2005 budget, the Council authorized 215 full-time employees. In the 2006 budget they again authorized 215 employees. So, what did the staff do this year? They increased the number of full-time employees to 242. I understand the staff “consulted” with the Council on a couple of the additional employees but did not on the balance of 27 positions. Think about it. The staff just increased itself without our elected representatives’ involvement. Remind me, we have elected representatives to do what?
Guess what the staff wants for staffing next year? You bet; 252 full-time positions. Now what was that count in 2004? Maybe 253? Our Council is so oblivious to what goes on in the City that they believed in the staff presentations that showed only a modest increase of ten positions. The staff compared requests to actual; not approved and it went right over the Council’s head. I have already picked up some flak by telling some members of the Council that they are increasing the number of employees by 37 over their previous authorization; not ten.
When the supposed mistake that caused the layoffs in 2004 was found before the last Council elections, but kept secret until March of this year, the Mayor expressed her feelings in the March 2nd issue of the Sentinel. “Despite the unfortunate nature of the city’s layoffs in 2004, the increased funds in the city bank account isn’t entirely a bad thing. It gives us more flexibility. The bottom line is that we have $10 million in savings now instead of the $8 million that we had before. This infusion of cash will help council get to its priorities faster.”
As the proposed budget shows, the City staff had its own priority. The staff increased itself by 27 employees this year and the estimated year-end balance went from $11.1 million in 2005 to $8.8 million for this year; and is projected to be only $5.1 million at the end of 2007. As you move around in the city, check out all the improvements done by the City this year with the extra 27 employees. Remind me, we elect a City Council to do what?
Now for a teaser about a future posting. The Council is proud of its great commitment to communicate with the residents. We have the web site, Connection, Channel 8 programming, the televising of meetings, occasional flyers, PR articles and numerous ads. How much are you willing to pay for all this?
posted by Gene Wieneke at
9:21 PM
15 Comments:
Anyone that was close to the 2004 layoff as I was knows it was a layoff in name only. In reality it was a purge disguised as a layoff. The purge was motivated to try and save the City Manager’s job and conserves the City’s cash, which would be needed for the economic development plans slated for the recreation center and the 120th and Grant project. Those laid off were mostly long term, hard working, and dedicated employees that had expressed some dissatisfaction or frustration with the direction of the City. A few of the people were marginally performing long term employees that should have been let go years ago, but they were the exception not the rule. The City Manager maintained an “open door” policy. Little did anyone know that any discontent or frustration expressed to him would result in being included on the pending layoff list. The manager must have thought he could save his job by dismissing those people that were most qualified to raise knowledgeable objections to his performance. I am sure in hind sight he wishes he had done the purge much earlier in his tenure since the seeds of discontent by then were too deeply rooted in the community to save his job. The cost to the City was a tremendous outflow of valuable intellectual capital and knowledge which continues to be missed by our community. This cost has manifested itself in the lack of maintenance to our streets and the waste treatment plant.
Notably missing from the layoff list was the newly hired and unqualified Economic Development director. Instead of laying this person off and conserving their salary a consultant was hired to show the person how to do the job of economic development. Again, this was poor judgment on the part of the manager. The Economic Development Directory left the City a few months after the purge.
By
Unknown, at 11:25 AM
Were you one of the employees actually layed off in the big 2004 layoff or were you let go before or after it?
By
Anonymous, at 11:52 AM
I am aware of at least five of those people laid off who never set foot in the office of the then city manager, nor their supervisor. All of those had been with the city for less than 10 years, some less than 5.
You take the "truth" of some of the employees and broadly apply it to all. Again. You should be in politics.
And, in keeping with Wieneke's assessment and your own admission in a previous blog, just because an employee is hard-working, doesn't make them good at their job.
By
Anonymous, at 5:07 PM
Anonymous at 5:07:
I realize that not ALL of the employees laid off were long term employees. This is why I used the word MOSTLY instead of ALL. If that makes me a purveyor of untruth then I guess I stand convicted. I also realize that not ALL of the employees laid off were critics of the Manager and council. Some of the employees, like the meter readers, were innocent victims of their jobs being obsolete. Some of the employees were victims of their supervisor’s fear that their knowledge and skills would challenge the supervisor’s position. Some of the layoffs, like the MSWs in Natural Resources, were handled with the utmost fairness and professionalism.
The real test of if it was a layoff or purge would be to look at how the eliminated positions have been refilled since the layoff. Were the incumbent employees offered their old jobs back when the positions were reestablished? Why did the supervisors put up such a fuss when this practice was suggested? I don’t have the answer to that question since I am no longer working at the City.
By
Unknown, at 8:38 AM
I think the real point here is that a person can't generalize, even "most" is too general. If you are a supervisor and faced with having to perform layoffs in your department, you are going to look at what positions you can afford to do without. What are you going to do if you have a position that you can cut if you had to, but the employee in that postion excels at their job and is hard working and dedicated. Then in another position you have a low performer and you have to eliminate one of the positions. Aren't you going to eliminate the low performer and ask the high performer to take on some additional duties? So does that make it a purge rather than a layoff as you state, no, it was a reduction in staff because the reveues weren't there. Any manager trying to make their department sucessful that is faced with the need to eliminate employees is going to try to keep the best employees. Now again, this isn't to say that every person layed off was a non performer, there were some good people layed off based on their position. And there have been layed off employees hired back to the city.
It's too easy to play Monday morning quarterback and speculate on why certain employees were let go and whether it was the right employees or not and it's water under the bridge now because the City Manager and every department head that was in charge and made the actual decisions on the layoffs is gone now except for one.
By
Anonymous, at 2:40 PM
To Anonymous: Mostly is not an over generalization if in fact it is true that most of those laid off were long term, hardworking and dedicated employees. There have been too many things that have come out (about that situation and others) that have made it very difficult for the average citizen to give the city management staff the benefit of the doubt.
"Monday morning quarterbacking" is all that we have to make sure that in the future things are done with integrity and honesty. In my mind it is possible that all people and position that the city eliminated were chosen correctly. Unfortunately, even if this is true that is not the message that has been sent to the citizens. Employees of the city have the obligation to act in a forthright and honest manner. This will not always please the citizens, but honesty and integrity are an absolute defense.
You are also trying to take the "truth" of some employees and apply broadly to all.
With all of that said I would also like to say that while I appreciate all the information I receive from this blog I do not appreciate the personal attacks contained within it. Mr. Wieneke, his supporters and his adversaries should all consider posting facts and letting the people come up with their own opinions based on these facts.
By
Anonymous, at 3:37 PM
"should all consider posting facts and letting the people come up with their own opinions based on these facts."
You have to realize this is a blog with opinions being posted that aren't verified by anyone for any accuracy. The other side of the story is rarely posted. I would be leary about considering information on this site as facts to base your opinion on. Most of the information is opinions to get a person thinking, but to call the information facts just because an unidentified person says it's true???
By
Anonymous, at 9:21 AM
Before I do a posting, I do the required research. I obtain information from the city through Open Records Requests and download documents off of the city's site such as the CIP, Budget and presentations to the Council. I print them and spend a lot of time going through each. I will not put any fact in a posting that I know to be false or misleading. Every resident can do the same.
By
Gene Wieneke, at 9:41 AM
Gene,
You do the research and you do provide a lot of facts in your posting. I would belive your information long before I would believe formercityemployee. But you also provide a lot of opinions with your facts. As soon as you start explaining the "why" something was done it becomes opinion when you are saying why council or a staff person made a decision they made.
That has been one of the biggest complaints I have seen raised against you, you don't just state the facts to make those who don't do the research aware of things going on in the city. You smother the facts with opinions, innuendos, and generalizations that then twist the overalll truth of the posting.
By
Anonymous, at 11:41 AM
As another (one of many) former Northglenn employee, I would say that from my knowledge, 90% of Gene's postings are the truth. The other 10% are things that happened after I left, or was not involved in.
Purge vs. layoff: a combination of both. I do know that the list the department heads were given was different than the one implemented, based on former CM "decisions". And lets not forget the role of the "Tipping Point Team" and the interim CM masquerading as a consultant in those decisions. How many of the TPT are now "service center managers"?
Why do you think that none of the department heads involved in the layoffs are there any more? Maybe it had something to do with integrity, honesty, ethics - all values missing from the former CM reign.
The former CM has left Northglenn crippled. His impact has been felt, and will continue to be felt for a long time. Surrounding communities, contractors, and consultants have trouble dealing with the city because they don't know who to contact, there is no one there with the experience, knowledge, and history to help them.
Water under the bridge? Yes. But lets not forget the mistakes that were made, the lives that were affected, and the damage that was done. Best of luck to the new CM. Hopefully he will find the people there who can be trusted, and have the integrity and ethics to do what is right for the City of Northglenn.
By
Anonymous, at 5:37 PM
I agree with some of what you are stating. I know that 4 of the department heads that have left the city left because they couldn't continue working for the previous city manager. I don't think he intended to, but he sure did hurt the city in many ways.
By
Anonymous, at 7:39 PM
I'll try to seperate fact from opinion. The difficult part will be stating what I know to be a fact without making it sound like an opinion. I'll give it a go and thanks.
By
Gene Wieneke, at 10:03 PM
I agree with the previous posting pointing out that it will take years for the City of Northglenn to recover from the damage done over the last few years by the former City Manager. Am I the only one that holds the Mayor and Council responsible for the City’s present state of affairs? Our Mayor and Council either knew what was happening to our City or should have known but refused to do anything to correct the problem until just recently. The maintenance of our infrastructure has been woefully ignored. This would include both our streets and the waste water treatment plant. Valuable intellectual knowledge from our long term employees was allowed to walk out the door in the name of saving money but as we now see those positions have mostly been refilled. Where are the savings now? Money was taken and then later returned from our water bills. We are the laughing stock of the Denver Metropolitan area due to our mistakes and mismanagement. Our Mayor and Council seem oblivious to all this due to their own “happy talk” they like to hear. I think the real question we need to be asking our selves is did the Mayor and Council do this out of ignorance or was it done deliberately to further their self interest at our expense? As always the cost of these mistakes will have to be paid by the citizens of Northglenn. I hold our Mayor and council responsible.
By
Unknown, at 7:52 AM
You have got to be out of touch, or at least not paying attention to all the other communities within the north metro to say that we are the laughing stock - PLEASE. Our city problems aren't even close to our peers'. For example, Commerce City's CM kicked out, City of Lakewood forced to rely on a vote to save itself financially last fall, the stalker council person from Brighton, and many of the political figures in Boulder who are in the spotlight all the time is extensive. That's just the tip of the iceberg. The only media publicity Northglenn has gotten in the last year has been the yourhub.com stuff submitted by Gene and Councilman Miller's personal life fiasco. Your circles must be really small if you believe that any sizable amount of people in the metro area think our council/CM/Mayor is any worse than any other place. Par for the course.
By
Anonymous, at 6:36 PM
What kind of a measurement is it when you compare yourself to negative attributes and negative happenings in surrounding communities? What kind of a measurement is it when a community puts a mayor back into office (one with many previous years experience on the council) who made hidden car deals and who took advantage of a travel budget on the backs of the citizens of NG? What good has come to the citizens of NG from those behaviors? At least some of the surrounding communities had the gumption to say "No" to some of the corruption in their government. Northglenn citizen, don't you need to shore up your backbone - and sharpen your knowledge?
By
Anonymous, at 7:24 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home