Welcome. If you're here, you've discovered the Web Log of Sarasota City Manager Mike McNees. This "Blog" has been created to give interested people the chance to ask questions, make suggestions, express opinions, or in any other way give or receive input on things related to the operation of city government here in Sarasota.
It is my intention to review and update the blog on a regular, hopefully daily basis, once folks who have things to share discover that it exists and have begun to post comments. Only one rule will be enforced here - that is for mandatory civility. The goals here are open dialogue and the honest exchange of ideas. If you choose to use your name when posting that's great, if you wish to use a nickname or remain anonymous that's fine also.
The people at Google make this free platform available, and using it seems like a better idea than spending the city's money re-creating the wheel.
Once again, if you're here, thank you. What's on your mind? Regards, Mike McNees
It is my intention to review and update the blog on a regular, hopefully daily basis, once folks who have things to share discover that it exists and have begun to post comments. Only one rule will be enforced here - that is for mandatory civility. The goals here are open dialogue and the honest exchange of ideas. If you choose to use your name when posting that's great, if you wish to use a nickname or remain anonymous that's fine also.
The people at Google make this free platform available, and using it seems like a better idea than spending the city's money re-creating the wheel.
Once again, if you're here, thank you. What's on your mind? Regards, Mike McNees
posted by Michael McNees at 5:01 PM
88 Comments:
Great idea. Thanks for making the effort to get input and feedback from all levels of employees. They are what keeps that city moving and working.
I like this very much
Great idea and hope it is used constructively and it will not become "fluff." Employees have a lot to offer...otherwise why would they have been hired?
Nice idea, I look forward to using it in the future.
I am hoping that the City can make an effort to look into the idea of providing affordable housing for all general employees. The Palm Ave. project should provide housing in the range of $75,00 --$150,00. We can't continue to drive long distance to work here.I would like to live in the City that I work for. I am tired of driving over an hour a day--with gas prices and wear and tear of my vehicle. How about it?
Housing, gas and food prices are ever increasing. I need to work two jobs to pay my bills and I know many other City employees who must do the same. I never thought after working through school I would still be living paycheck to paycheck and paying for little things with credit cards. We don't get raises and our pay is much lower when compared to the pay of municipal employees in other cities. Thoughts: We can create an incentive program for employees so they will buy in the City - or create housing for civil servants that is affordable and matches with the rate of pay. Also why not work with local businesses and assist employees with housing incentives. The City can work with local lenders, banks and real estate companies to assist employees. How about discounts/reduced utilities, create a carpool list, provide a quarterly luncheon for employee appreciation.
The HOPP program needs to be restarted to help our Police officers live in the City and also help the recruitment of experienced officers to the department.
I was thinking about the gas situation. It might be cost efficient to work four 10-hour days. We have many people living in places like North Port, Venice and Bradenton. It would save them on money and gas if we only worked four days especially since the gas prices are going up to $3.00 a gallon. This is just a suggestion that I think would help our economy and City employees. Thank you for thinking about this. Signed Anonymous
Mr. McNees,
I admired your column in today's paper. I realize you're between a rock and a hard place: appearing defensive or not defending unjust criticism. I think your words were very professional and gracious today.
Thank you for starting this open forum.
Grace Carlson
A breakthrough in the communication with a Sarasota City Manager!!!!
Notice I said 'a Sarasota City Manager' as the past adminstrations were very difficult to communicate with from the standpoint of a general employee. This venue provides such a sounding board for ideas, solutions and thoughts that may not be communicated properly by staff as they proceed (or don't ) up the chain of command!
I applaud you for your establishment of such a venue!!
Please consider the use of flex time (i.e. 10 hr. days), on a voluntary basis, for City employees in the departments where city services would not be compromised. Not only will it save energy resources, but it will provide a wonderful no cost benefit to employees who wish more time with their families.
Thanks for the blog. This will allow some of us to vent our frustrations with problems that we react to instead of acting first.
Keep up the good work--you are doing just fine. This town doesn't appreciate city gvmnt or county for that matter.
A great idea, Mike. Sarasota is the envy of cities near and far...going to heaven in a handbasket as far as I can tell. But change is unsettling to many and keeping pace with best practices, dealing quickly with infrastructure "surprises" and keeping everyone in the loop is challenging, to say the least. Wishing you all the best.
I think that any perquisites have to be extended to all employees to ensure egalitarianism. A 10 hour, 4-day work week would reduce the cost of travel to and from work, decrease traffic and lower utility costs however, I don't know how we serve our customers if one workday day a week nobody is in the office.
There are already general employees who work 4/10's at the Police Department. They also work "odd" hours, come in at 6:30 a.m. and leave at 5:00. There are also general employees at the Police Department who are allowed to work details to supplement their income to the tune of thousands of dollars a year. Egalitarianism hasn't existed in the City for decades!! I think flexing our hours would be a great cost savings to City employees. I don't think that anybody is advocating leaving any City office empty during the work week!! Surely everyone could figure out a schedule where all City offices would be manned/womanned 8 - 5 Monday through Friday.
A new suggestion - A 9 hour work day and a four hour day on the fifth day, which would leave more offices covered at least 1/2 a day. However, it seems that many people are looking to eliminate an extra driving day during this particular time. Personally, I would find it more convenient (having a school age child) to work an extra hour during the week and have a 1/2 day off on the fifth day if such a choice was offered.
John B. Browning, a well respected citizen whose ancestors were among the first settlers of the City of Sarasota, said in a letter to the editor of the Sarasota Herald-Tribune: "It is apparent to many that Mr. McNees is not a charismatic or communicative leader. A good leader must first be a good communicator." Mr. Browning's assessment is that you are a "good administrative techinician, but not a good administrative leader." How do you propose developing the skills to become a good administrative leader, in other words how do you plan to develop better communication or "people skills?" A concerned citizen
A 4-10 work week sounds attractive, affording a 3 day weekend every week but if one’s income is virtually fixed, one can’t afford to do much for having three days off, unless the point of the exercise is to have the 5th day so one can work a 2nd job to pay the bills.
I find it unconscionable that the working citizens of this City cannot afford to live in the community and instead must be bused here to serve the wealthy in the community. But I also don’t see any of this changing, or incomes increasing proportionally to the cost of living, with or without a Blog. To increase incomes at the City means increasing taxes and commissioners do not win votes by promising to raise taxes.
Egalitarianism II points out that there are general employees at SPD who make thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars a year for pushing traffic light buttons and crossing people to the other side of the street (it ain't rocket science). How about the $100 a year physical they are entitled to, or the paid lunch hour they receive? Their ten hour days are truly ten hour days. I've worked under three City Managers and (so far anyway) none of them have cared that all general employees are not treated equally. Every general employee should be given the opportunity to work these details. Next time you go to a City sponsored event, look at what they do, and ask yourself how fair this is.
I get the question about special details, which are typically the purview of SPD. In many cases they require uniformed presence, and have been a good way for the officers to supplement their city income. I also understand that some of the demand is filled by civilian employees, which is the root of the question, should other non-police civilians have the same opportunity? Fair question - and while I'm not quite willing to agree that it's always as simple as just pushing a "walk" signal button, I am willing to talk to the Chief about the level of demand and whether there could be wider opportunity. I don't quite get the reference to "their 10-hour days", maybe the poster can clarify.
In answer to the question of how I propose to develop my skills, I'll first say that I am continually looking for ways to sharpen my skills not only as a manager but also as a human being. A few months ago I registered for, and a few weeks ago completed a program called the Leadership Development Institute, which is provided at Eckerd College through agreement with something called the Center for Creative Leadership, which is a highly-ranked, nationally-known private sector development organization. The LDI process is very different from a lot of management or leadership training in that it starts with what are called 360 degree assesment tools - those are evaluations and observations on the way I do my job that were completed not only by my supervisors, the City Commissioners, but also by many of my direct reports, including many city Department heads. Added to these 360 degree assessments are a number of self-assessment and psychological assessment tools, and the whole batch of information is put together as a means to gain insight into what's going well, what strengths can be built on, and what actions I can take for improvement in areas where improvement opportunities are recognized. It was a great experience, and I felt like I came back with a number of new tools in my management tool box, and some good insights as to when and how to use them.
That's one example, this Blog is another, and there are more, including things we are doing organization-wide. SO thanks for the question.
Clearly, as the writer stated, Mr. Browning has an honored place in the community. In fairness, however, I think a bit of context is appropriate. One of his statements in his letter to the editor was that "Mr. McNees' administrative style seems more one of letting his departments have free rein without much oversight, winning loyalty by going along with whatever they decide." It is a matter of public record that Mr. Browning is extremely unhappy with me for what he see's as my failure to overrule the Director of Building and Zoning on a code interpretation affecting a property next to his. My opinion is that the channel to challenge this ruling, given that Mr. Litchet has a defensible rationale for his decision, is the City Commission-appointed Board of Adjustments, not through the City Manager or individual City Commissioners. I believe strongly in that, and Mr. Browning very much disagrees, believing that I should intervene on his behalf. That is the rest of the story.
9:50 AM
I would like to suggest fair/unbiased oral boards at SPD for civilian personnel. It has been my experience (and others) that oral boards can be and are stacked against you when applying for other positions within SPD. Many of these oral boards are a farce. They know who they want to hire before you even have a chance to promote yourself! I applied for a position and appeared before an Oral Board even after I was told I didn't stand a chance. I had had several people tell me that they attended a meeting outside the Department and had overheard Chief Lewis offering the open position to an ex-police officer!! Needless to say, he did get the job and it kind of let's the air out of your bag when you know going into the interview that it is a waste of your time and effort. It's the 21st Century!! Human Resources needs to get on the ball when it comes to hiring practices at SPD before someone brings suit. I would like to suggest that oral boards for hiring civilian from both inside and outside SPD consist of at least one unbiased rep. from Human Resources and one unbiased rep. from the Teamsters not just internal personnel who can and do hold many biases for many reasons (and they're not all professional reasons)!!!
Mr. McNees: Could you be more specific about what the Leadership Development Institute revealed about your strengths and weaknesses? As I understand it, a component of the program was to analyze pitfalls that can stall one's career. After four days and $6,500 (I assume the City paid the fee)for the institute, you were confronted on Friday with demands for your accountability concerning the sewage spill, and you asserted that the neighborhood president has personal issues with you. You did not acknowledge any management failures on your part. Today, the Sarasota Herald Tribune quotes your memorandum declining a raise stating "Ultimate responsibility for this failure to adequately evaluate our own internal control systems lies with management." I note that you did not say "my management." You say that Mr. Browning is critical of your management oversight of Mr. Litchet. What about your failure to exercise management oversight over the Department of Public Works whose systemic failures led to the discharge of over one million gallons of sewage into Hudson Bayou? Now you give the Director of Public Works a two percent raise (rather than a four percent raise). Should pay be linked to performance? What do you see as your personal accountability or personal management failure with regard to the sewage spills? At the August 12, special commission meeting, you said you had acted totally professionally. How has your opinion changed? Instead of declining a raise, have you considered taking a pay cut? It cost the City $50,000 for the two independent studies of the Lift Station #7 problems. It cost the city $6,500 for the Leadership Development Institute. Will you accept a pay cut of $56,000? Still concerned
This whole situtation about accountability over sewer spills, etc. is such a joke. Yes, the buck stops with the City manager. But there is no way that HE should be held responsible for how individual employees do their jobs. That's what a chain of command is for. That's what levels of management are for. To personally hold the City Manager responsible for what happens under low level management is just simply not realistic. Wake up Commissioners and look yourselves in the mirror. You all should be held responsible for not taking the residents needs into consideration. STOP the politics and DO what's right for the PEOPLE. NOT WHAT WILL GET YOU RE-ELECTED. Being responsible is to raise taxes during the good times (NOW) and increase the surplus. So that when the BAD times come (and they will) you could cut taxes, and give people a break. NOT raising taxes is NOT being financially responsible to the people. Instead of trying to lead your City Manager around by the nose and bully him (because he does not bend to your every command) you all should be following this most capable Manager. Think hard. Cities ALL around the country would do anything to have what he are going through here. sO don't sit there and think that YOU all had something to do with it. The STAFF and the leadership from their Manager had EVERYTHING TO DO WITH IT. YOU PEOPLE ARE JUST BUTTON PUSHERS. And you are pushing too hard. The STAFF are the ones that make you all look good. Stop stepping all over them.
To "concerned" - you have some of your facts straight, some not quite. First, the money paid to Eckerd College covered the attendance of two people at LDI, not one. I will continue to share what I learned with the Commissioners and Department Heads as we continue our work to build an effective team here at the city.
Secondly, I made no assertions on August 12th of "personal issues". I did say, on the record, that accusations regarding my behavior had been made that were demonstrably untrue. That is undeniable, as there is a clear record of such.
As for pay-for-performance, I am in favor of it, though it has not been used in recent years here. We are actually studying the potential for the adoption of a city-wide measurement system for our success of lack thereof, with a management "gain-sharing" system that would pay only if the entire organization succeeds. We're kind of excited about the idea, though our work on it has barely begun.
My suggestion, "concerned", is that you make an appointment and come on down and have a direct conversation, as you obviously have a number of issues. I would love to have the opportunity to speak for myself.
Oral Boards - I appreciate the post, though the reference to Chief Lewis obviously goes back many years.
My understanding is that our accreditation process reviews such things as our promotion processes. I also know that the Chief is committed to fair process, as is the H.R. Department. I will pass your concerns on to both of those for them to take a look, there is always room for improvement.
I am a neighbor in the hudson bayou area and I am really sick and tired of the constant banter from that area about accountability, get a life and move on, people are trying to move forward in this city and it appears some of you want to nit pick every word and detail to death, your just nasty people demanding things exactly the way you seem fit. I hope the city commission is not buying hook and sinker into this.
Mr. McNees I pasted part of your response back to me and below it is my clarification response to you - "while I'm not quite willing to agree that it's always as simple as just pushing a "walk" signal button, I am willing to talk to the Chief about the level of demand and whether there could be wider opportunity. I don't quite get the reference to "their 10-hour days", maybe the poster can clarify." - I wasn't talking about just pushing a walk signal button. I am talking about civilian personnel working details where all they have to do is control the light at intersections to let traffic flow when many cars are leaving an event. Van Wezel events are the perfect examples. The person working the detail pushes a button to control the traffic light. That's it!!! At other events (Ed Smith Stadium events/Art Festivals)they stand in the crosswalk and cross not only children, but ADULTS across the roadway. ANYONE can do that. It doesn't take any special training, just common sense that I would hope all of your employess possess. If Chief Abbott says that this takes special training, then how do they exclude SPD Parking Enforcement personnel? Just recently Parking Enforcement personnel received traffic control training and yet they are still DENIED this opportunity! Many of your employees work two jobs in order to live in Sarasota and support their family. These details are money makers for a very select few (just ask for a report) and they're not hard jobs! It's UNFAIR!!! As for the 10 hours days, some general employees, who are already working 4/10's, get a paid lunch hour. Other general employees who work ten hour days have to make up the time they take for their lunch. If they take a half hour lunch they work 10.5 hours, if they take an hour lunch they work 11 hours. There is at least one office at the PD with two general employees, one works 10 hours a day, the other works 10.5 to make up for her lunch hour. It's UNFAIR!! What is good for one civilian employee, should be good for the next. What is good for one general employee, should be good for the next. How do you feel about this double standard?
At a recent city commission meeting, Bill Hallisey (who interestingly kept referring to himself as a third party) said he has never had any marks on his record. As a citizen, I take offense to the fact that the HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT wasn't reprimanded IN ANY WAY during the first Hudson Bayou ordeal, and only got his hand slapped during the second. According to the local papers, apparently he himself is not so forgiving when it comes to meting out punishment.
He should be, at the very least, suspended, as he apparently did nothing to ensure that this would not happen again.
After trying speaking to city employees, who were fearful for their jobs to even speak with someone, I understand that Bill is harsh with his punishments, often suspending people for infractions which certainly don't threaten the public health and safety as did the two Hudson Bayou spills.
Bill Hallisey's handling of the first spill was seriously negligent: even though he was aware of the spill, HE TOOK NO STEPS WHICH PREVENTED A SECOND, LARGER SPILL.
Anyone else out there who believes that Bill Hallisey should be suspended due to his inept handling of the first spill, contact these three commissioners at 954-4115; they DO take time to speak with the public: Commissioner Palmer who understands the reasoning behind just punishment, Commissioner Bilyeu who understands accountability and Commissioner Shelin, who promotes fairness.
First thank you for starting this blog it is such a great idea. Would you consider requiring the people that post list their names and email addresses, possibly phone numbers? Maybe the information does not appear on the screen for everyone but you would be able to know who is writing and possibly correspond with them directly? I think it is obvious the writer on the Hudson Bayou is most likely Susan Chapman and I find it upsetting she has found another venue to attack and harass city employees. If you require this it may be more constructive comments that us as employees can actually work on.
I disagree with the last blog. You should be able to do this anonymously. Otherwise, it will be just another venue that the City promoted and then stopped when they were getting some heat! Thus, once again letting everyone know that they really don't want to know what's going on in City Departments. So, Susan Chapman has found another venue, big deal! Everyone at some point in their life gets upset over things and they get over it. Everyone has a right to an opinion, you don't have to agree.
Mr. McNees: You did not address the questions about what you specifically learned about your strengths and weaknesses at the Leadership Development Institute and whether you are willing to take a pay cut. Will you address those issues, please? Still concerned
As a former city employee I can say with certain that I had a run-in several years ago with Mr. Hallisey in which he had stated an untruth on an application that was submitted by the very employee that he recently demoted. I can say with certainly, he should have been fired at that time. I took this application to the state DEP and finally after a lot of going back and forth, Mr. Hallisey withdrew the application and the license that the recently demoted employee had received was turned back in as they decided not to go to court and I had said that I would be there. They did not want to go thru the court system in Tallahhasse. In life it really is amazing to see that sometimes things go full circle and I can say that I really enjoyed seeing Hallisey squirming at the council meeting. This on my part ruined my employment with the city. You don't take on the "big dogs" and win.
Great idea boss!
I'd like to hear more from the writer who said that Mr. Hallisey "fudged" an application. What kind of an application? Since you hinted that you were asked to go to Tallahassee to give a statement, was it a state licensing application? I'm assuming the demoted employee is Gil Fernandez? Was he, or the City doing something illegal? Did Hallisey, or someone in the City try to cover it up? Was anybody other then Hallisey, you, and Gil aware of this? Do you know if it is something that went into Hallisey's personnel file? When did this happen? I'm very interested in knowing more.
Hey, what about that guy, Hallisey's employee that died moving some furniture? I think that was about maybe 6years ago? I think he was crushed when something fell on him. If that was about unsafe work place, how come nothing happened to Hallisey then? Not even a write up! And somebody lost his life due to a preventable accident by a City Leader!
Signed,
he let us down
How do you make it someones fault that they die during moving furniture?
Mr. McNees I ask you, did Hallisey push a piano purposly out a window on the man and say catch?
Some of you sound like your part of a witch hunt.
How are you responsible for someone's death moving furniture?
When that employee is not a furniture mover and was working clear out of his classification. He was an electrician or an mechanic, not a furniture mover. That's how you are responsible!
Mr. McNees: You last responded to me (in part) as follows: "My suggestion, "concerned", is that you make an appointment and come on down and have a direct conversation, as you obviously have a number of issues. I would love to have the opportunity to speak for myself."
I suggest that you have had ample opportunities to speak for yourself in the press with comments to reporters, letters to the editor, and guest editorials, during television and radio interviews, during commission meetings, and through this blog. In fact, you have often had the last word.
The word choice of "issues" implies that I have some sort of personal pique with you. I do not.
How would a one-on-one meeting with you resolve my profound concerns that you lack the essential executive problem solving skills to address the city's challenges? Still a concerned citizen
I find it a sad day when employees work is confined strickly to their job descriptions and we have to call "the furniture moving employee" to move the desk and "the stray cat feeder employee" to feed the stray cat outside city hall and "the toilet paper picker upper" when we drop some on the floor and the list goes on. Unless someone is forced against their will, I am sorry you must be a lawyer!
Mr. McNees: I thank you for starting this blog and I remain amazed that people can claim you are a poor communicator, and I know that is a small percentage of people.
The people that are happy tend not to speak up because they go on with their days happy. I have attended numerous luncheons and you have been the speaker, you not only get people laughing but you do a very good job explaining complicated subjects. In fact the last one was the Downtown Partnership morning meeting about the parking. I learned that there is a parking study.
I wanted to thank you for the committment you put into your job.
I look forward to the day you are gone. You have no respect for Sarasota or its citizens.
PS Mrs. Servian will be to follow
Mike, my City manager,
I respect you very much. To have to put up with what you put up with is more than I would. If two of five comissioner's asked for my surprise resignation I would have taken the golden ticket out. You have done an amazing job here and you can write your ticket to any city looking for a manager with the guts and smarts that you have. These commission clowns have some nerve. You have been a student and experienced municipal expert for years. They have been an elected fool less. What makes them think they know more or can do a better job than an experienced city manager. And now. OH BOY , more talk about a "strong mayor" Our current Mayor, who is obviously running for higher office, says a strong mayor 'may weaken the manager's role to some degree". Ha, Ha. Is she kidding? Again I say. What makes her or any other commissioner, or prospective commissioner MORE experienced or more knowledgeable then YOU. A student of the game. I've lived here 30-plus years, and know alot of people and have tried to stay under the radar. But if this strong mayor thing comes up again, believe me WE will attack it.
Mike, I hope you hang in there. Keep up the great work.....more people than you know appreciate it.
My letter to the editor concerning your people skills was based on the editorial in the H-T concerning your method of dealing with the Planning Department on the Burns Square issue. You are right, however, that I believe your mishandling of the zoning question, and your "solution" that I pay $1000 plus expenses to take it to the Board of Adjustment for a proper resolution, was like saying "this is the method we have devised to stop citizens like you from making complaints when our employees make a mistake and we don't want to admit it - pay up or shut up". John Browning
Clearly there are people that will abuse this wonderful tool you provided for being able to look into issues that concern the employees and others in the city. I really find it hard to not think all the "obnoxious" and attacking messages you are receiving does not eminate from a few sole diehards. It is easy when hate fills your day to sit and write one thing after another. Regardless of what you read, you are an qualified leader and the city has seen great benefits by you being here, nobody can deny that. We support you and all your staff for having to put up with this small city BS. Thank you.
About job discriptions They are there for a reason, that's why Hallisey does not have to move furniture!
Anyway if one things that moving furniture is not a skilled job, try it sometime, things can fall on you and kill you!
And talk about witch hunts: if one sees any humor of "Hallisey dropping a piano on someone" that person is a sick "O" someone died here and left behind a family that misses them everyday, this is also not a place for sick jokes!
11;21 message!
There are in place very strict qualfications to receive a C wastewater license. One of them being that the applicant must spend one year in the plant as a trainee. Learning all phases of the operation "hands on." You also have to document your required schooling.
This also includes working nights, weekends and holidays. You have to pass a state test with a passing score.
This is required under State Statues. There is a trade magazine that when it comes out has the names of those that have received their c license. You can imagine the result of others seeing that Gil Fernadez had received a c license. He was the maintance foreman, never spent one day as a trainee. The whole matter was kept under wrap til it came out in the trade magazine.
I contacted DEP with my concerns that the city or those in the city who had signed his application had broken the law. I received a call from DEP and based on what I had told them, they agreed with me. They also asked me if I was in this for the long run as it would quite a while for it to be investigated and concluded. I was also told by them that I would be in a very bad position as I was on the city payroll. I really believe that they were trying to be certain that if they took this on that I would not back out.
If someone wanted to check this out, I am sure its all on the public records.
There was a school being taught at the Sarasota Vo Tech, where most of the trainess took their required classes.
I was told that in order for this to be kept in the dark that Gil had been sent to a school somewheres south of here, I think Ft. Myers and was told that he had the use of a city vechicle to go back and forth to the school.
I was told that Hallisey had signed some papers and also that the lead operator had also signed them. I questioned the lead operator as to why as he knew better? He really felt the Hallisey had not given him any choice in the matter!
After a very long time many phone calls and letters, the city trying to say Gil done this and that and me responding that they were not true ... I was contacted if I would be willing to go to Tallhassee and go on record as to my statements. The city was asked to do the same. A few days later I received a letter and a phone call telling me that the city had stated that they would not go on record in Tallahasse, that they had decided that they would not persue the matter any further and that Gil would return his c license. Many of my co-workers kept me at arms length during this long drawn out affair, as they were afraid of their jobs "always remember something that I have learned in life, that when the chips are down, it's a very lonely place."
But I was cheered when I went into work by some of them when Gil lost his c license.
Believe me when I say that after this I had a running battle with Hallisey and know many other things about his incompetance.
I never once kept any of this secret and yes it is common knowledge, but those that were there and still are are not very brave when it comes to their jobs!
All one has to do is ask Gil or Hallisey, I am sure they will tell you what happened, but they may slant it some.
If nothing else should not Gil have to refund the money that the city spent on his schooling and license?
From Pat2:
Dan, sorry you feel that dismay, anger, appreciation, fear, happiness and such are abuse. Interestingly, I also see you did not sign your last name to your opinion. We are all entitled to our ideas, and many people are coming forth in these blogs to express concerns and ideas.
How about if we all pick a name or number, and stick with that when we sign our blogs? That way you'll see how very many people have become involved. Sure there are some who only want to complain about their own gripe, but ideally there would be no gripes. Even you are griping! And that's OK! There are apparently many problems in city offices.
It is great to know that McNees reads all concerns. If he acts on even some of them, then this site is a success. That guy who died doing something he was told to do under Hallisey (even if not directly) will affect his family forever. I don't know the details, but I bet something could have prevented it. and sure, Hallisey should have been written up or reprimanded, or even suspended or demoted. But it looks now like he has done lots of stuff and gotten away with it.
Mike, will you verify any of this and reprimand Bill accordingly, since his actions reflect on your city like Bill would reprimand an employee? We hope so.
P.S. I don't think Susan Chapman has been doing as many blogs, if any, that she gets blamed for. Bill is more than capable of bringing on his own woes.
Pat2
Mr. McNees: Thank you for responding to my questions about your strenghts and weaknesses and your point is well taken. I did not know that the cost of the school was for two city employees to attend and it sounds like a class worthwhile. This blog is a good idea so we can exchange questions and get your response. I appreciate you taking the time to do so. Less concerned
From Pat2:
Mike: people appreciate the blog. Lets off a lot of steam and maybe even some good ideas come out of it. Whether we like your job or not, we have to appreciate its not an easy one.
Pat2
to queequeg: sorry you're hung up on the Chapman thing. Let it go...
To Still A Concerned Citizen:
Since you try to appear such an expert and think you know our jobs better than we do, why hide behind anonymous because appartently you feel we are in desperate need of your wonderful knowledge, expertise and experience in the field of city government and how things exactly should be run to ensure we never have to take risks, experiment or every fail at our attempts. Wow, you must be an amazing person, always seeing things with such clarity, who are you?
Signed, An Employee more concerned than you.
Another Hallisey story!
A city employee who resigned his employment with the city for the following reason.
This city employee resigned his postion because he could no longer put up wiht his supervisor smoking pot on the job and playing up to those in there click.
He put this in his resingnation and demanded an exit interview with Hallisey where he told him face to face of the problem.
He left the city and the city conducted an "????investigation???? and Hallisey, the assistant city manager and Mark Singer deemed that the resigned city employee did not know what he was talking about and they closed it.
The resigned went on about his life and put it behind him because if this is the way a city conducts an investigation, he was glad he was out of there.
But you know what? almost one year later the supervisor that the resigned employee was talking about and the investigation was about was arrested and led out of the wastewater plant in handcuffs. They were arreseted on drug related charges! How in the world can anyone say Hallisey is compentent. He was told at the exit interview that he was in way over his head! He just isn't smart enough for the job!
From Pat2:
Wow... Any idea how long ago did the employee quit, or how long ago was the superviser arrsted?
Pat2
I remember the employee at the wastewater plant. It was a woman and it happened about 15 years ago??? I knew someone who worked there at the time. He said that both she (I can't remember her name) and several employees at the City smoked pot on several occassions while on duty. Hallisey, Schneider, and Mark Singer knew and didn't do anything about it!!! She did get arrested, I do remember that and it was on City property, just didn't know that they all knew about it. Somebody said the press was monitoring this blog. Maybe they'll find this interesting??
Mr.McNees
I am having a problem with the investigation that the city conducted, re: the city employee who resigned.
Why was the investigation necessary? Culd not Hallisey had the supervisor sent to a lab to have his urin checked for residue?
Would not that have resolved the charges brought on by the employee concerning his supervisor?
Why the expense for a long drawn out investigation?
Where you the city manager at the time?
Was the supervisor fired after his arrest?
This blog appears to be deteriorating into a venue for personal attacks on City employees, by one another. If only one rule will be enforced here (in the blog) that is for mandatory civility, I do believe it’s being broken or at least, stretched. Some of the statements being made are libelous. It’s turned into what I feared it might, an AOL chat room.
Agreed. I think we can put a cap on this thread. As I said earlier, I will deal with employee issues through appropriate channels, and this is not one!
Also - No cheap shots here, the comments regarding Mrs. Chapman are out of line. I've been really slow to delete anything (except spam) and haven't so far, but more of that goes in the trash. (If I do delete anything, I will post why.)
I mean REALLY . . . what did you think was going to happen? You have allowed your IT Department to deploy an uncensored, unmanaged, open-question forum.
Competent City Employees (current and former) are angry. They are underpaid, underappreciated, and frustrated with inept incumbents. The citizens are mad. The issues of the privileged are being addressed. The issues of the rest of the population are being buried in double speak. They are voicing their opinions.
I think the negative turn out to this forum would be much greater if this was advertised well.
From Pat2
I don't think anybody meant to get particularly rude, but its just such a relief to be able to vent that some people just got carried away.
some of these items really do need looking in-to, and if things have already been brought to city leaders and bosses and nothing was done, then people tend to harbor bad feelings toward their bosses or the city leaders who were told but still allowed stuff to happen.
It seems close-minded to stop this blog just because you don't hear what you want to hear.
Mike, what is the right way to bring things to you and get something done?
Thanks for listening to everyone,
Pat2
Dear what is the right way? When it comes to personally attacking an employees integrity because you really know they have done something that is provable and wrong you cannot hide behind a anonymous post. These are serious acusations and they get taken seriously and anonymous is hard to take seriously no matter how you look at it. Nobody is going to run around and chase anonymous postings claiming wrong doing. If you know strongly that someone did something wrong you come forward and deal with it and if you are too scared to do so, you are part of the problem, that is called an accessory to the crime.
Regarding Hallisey and the C license issue and the pot smoking supervisor - About 15 to17 years ago a guy from the wastewater plant came to several union meetings (AFSCME was the general employee's union at the time) and said that he had went to Hallisey, Schneider, and City Attorney Mark Singer. The C license issue the employee took care of himself when he notified the state office in Tallahassee. The pot smoking was a different story, they blew him off. Completely and totally ignored him! Well he was proven right when the supervisor (I think her name was Paulette) was arrested for drugs on City property. If anyone is interested in how the City handles investigations all you need to do is publicly request the records from the City Attorney. I specifically remember the guy saying that Mark Singer had taped the meeting he had with the City employee and that the employee had asked and paid for a copy of the tape. So somewhere out there there's a former City employee who has a tape with all the details on it and it's public record. Oh my!!
Mr. McNess, is anybody at the top interested in making Sarasota a great city?? This is an Open Letter that was sent to City Commissioner Ken Shelin from Save Our Sarasota http://saveoursarasota.blogspot.com
This letter is written on behalf of a great many city residents who
voted for you in the most recent election because you were going to
put "process" back into city government. We believe your motion and
leadership in rezoning historic Burns Court to Downtown Core was an
abrogation of those campaign promises.
An entire community understood there was to be a study of Burns
Court zoning and more public input and discussion, after which that
area would be readdressed. No one dreamed that on a second reading
the zoning would be changed, least of all your supporters, who know
you champion "process."
As you would be first to remind us, process is not what is strictly
legal/allowed. It is procedures that ensure deliberative,
considered, fact-based public decision-making. What happened
Wednesday circumvented that process with what looks to a stunned
community like a backroom political solution to a complex issue.
We understand that, in part, you were reflecting the concerns of the
City attorney as to possible exposure to lawsuits. However,
following the process for review that we believed you had put in
place would not have jeopardized your legal position. Indeed, two
commissioners with much longer tenure on the commission than yours
were not worried enough about potential lawsuits to follow your
lead, and voted against your proposed changes. They had the courage
to follow process. Further, we want to tell you emphatically that
many of us would support our taxpayer dollars being used to fight
lawsuits that protect our right to make this a great city.
We are told no matter what anyone does, Sarasota is becoming
a "city." We know that. But the issue is whether it becomes a "good
city," a "great city," or merely "a city." That decision rests with
the commissioners. To date, we see only a "city" rising. We want
something better.
We have heard too often of the venerable John Nolen's vision for
Burns Court in his 1924 city master plan. However, in that same
document he cautioned, "A good plan is one that does not attempt to
bind the city too far into the future." If Nolen were here for wise
counsel, we believe he would ask you to consult with your current
planners. Mr. Duany recommended Downtown Edge for Burns Court with
buffers for abutting neighborhoods. The city planning department has
consistently supported that recommendation. How could all of that
study and process be overturned on a second reading?
If you truly have a sense of the pulse of this community, you will
know that voters are close to the point where, as in the movie
Network, they threw open their windows and screamed "I'm sick and
tired of this and I'm not going to take it any more!"
So, Ken, what we are asking you is, in the interest of process, and
respect for those who elected you, to bring this issue back to the
table and ask for rescission. We ask this with trust and hope that
the Ken Shelin we spoke with on the campaign trail is the Ken Shelin
who serves us at the commission table today, tomorrow, and into the
future.
Save Our Sarasota
Is it just me or did I not hear that the Burns Court area is planning on hiring a planner to help them create an area that is wonderful and helps keep the character of the area. I go to IOPTICS, UVA RARA and went to the farms market while it was there and know the owners of Burns Court one story buildings are not changing anything to their properties except improve them. I have not heard of any other area willing to take this drastic step in planning to preserve and grow "smart". Laurel Park had the city do a study of ONLY the people that lived or owned property there and they got what the majority wanted but this was never done for any other area. It is difficult for Laurel Park to keep complaining Burns Square is not following the cities employees interpretations of the Duany plan when they would not participate at all and opted out. Everyone already agrees that very little was done in this area of town when it came to this plan. Partially because Laurel Park opted out of the plan. They themselves are not following the urbanism plan of Duany they say is so wrong of Burns Square not following, which is not the factual way it went. Many of us wanted Laurel Park included and take the new designation Gillespie and the other neighborhoods are getting but they wanted it their way and got it. Okay, you move on but they want to have the hammer over other's rights and that is not right. The 100' perimiter that is part of the gift given to Laurel Park is a slap to the developers property rights. We have fought and fought to have Laurel Park in the Master plan. They choose their own destiny, I do not remember ask "outsiders" their opinion because many would have said include them. QUESTION: So, why can the city place control over others rights for Laurel park on properties that are not theirs, expecially because they are not even part of the plan in the first place?
To 10:24
The Laurel Park area was left out of the Duany's Master Plan at the City's choosing. Having recently completed an overlay district for that area, the City did not feel it was in need of being included. In fact Duany, after reviewing the overlay of that area did not believe anything more was necessary. It is true that the majority of property owners have fought with others in the area to maintain the status quo and prohibit the type of commercial intrusion that would clog the small streets around it. I live there, and I can tell you that any commercial uses will require areas to accomodate the parking. Most property in the Laurel Park area is not big enough for both the use and associated parking. As a result our streets become clogged with off street parking on narrow streets when some residents don't even have a driveway themselves-
Several have pushed for inclusion, but they have been outnumbered by the majority. The issue of Burns Court was addressed in Duany's Master Plan- DTE (5 stories maximum) to help establish a buffer between the downtown scale and the adjacent neighborhoods. These issues were discussed by many- including Ms. Kowal, and at the time there were no objections. When the Master Plan was adopted by the City- the residents/business owners did not come forward and object then either- so where ya been? Changing the zoning to DTC in the manner that our community recently observed was a insult to many of the residents that have lived and worked downtown in this area and participated in the Master Plan Charettes. Input came from a large cross section of the Community- to take that work and toss it out the door because a few threaten lawsuits is not leadership- it is reactionary. I hope that the Commission rethinks their decision.
Dear 1:29: Since you addressed me personally, I feel it's appropriate to respond. I own property in both Laurel Park and Burns Square. This year I worked actively with my fellow property owners who desperately wanted to protect their current zoning rights in both Laurel Park and Burns Square. Two different neighborhoods but both wanting to maintain historical property rights. I am neither on one side or the other but both.
The Master Plan which was the result of Charrettes with the city did not designate Burns Square DTE so I am not sure what you are referencing when you say I participated and did not object.
Mr. McNees,
I watched the workshop meeting today and was impressed by the professional replies of you and your department heads as they responded to a series of questions from Commissioner Shelin regarding the sewer spill controversy. I was impressed by the detail that should once and for all put to rest the witch hunt and some Commissioners need to participate in a “blame game”. The Key Moment for me was when you corrected Commissioner Shelin and told him that the consultant did NOT state that poor maintenance was the cause of the spill. Of course, Shelin let that moment pass. I did enjoy watching the Commissioner Bloviate regarding legal issues. I am not a Lawyer, but I am sure that if the same mistake is made twice, it is NOT a felony. Shelin is trying to show the city that he is the know everything commissioner. All that he accomplished today was to waste a significant amount of the city’s resources to prove once again that he will say anything to pander a few votes.
Hallisey again played the squirm game.
After answering written answers to prepared questions, he again left squirm room for himself.
You can really see how incomptent he is when he he gets off the prepared answers.
He said that although he has full confidence in his help. They can't always be trusted to tell him the truth.
Now if he gets in trouble again he can squirm out by saying "it's not my fault, they didn't tell me what really happened!" What a poor excuse for mangement that man is!
I said in an earlier post that to call someone out by name, anonymously, is poor form at best and cowardice at worst, and not what we're trying to accomplish here. 7:25, you've helped me make the point.
OK You All, I am off of here. You just killed the messenger and left the message go, It's seems more cowardly to not question those in power, but you can't take on City Hall and win. Goodbye and best wishes and remember you are going to have to live with this abuse of power for a long time! Thank You for letting me vent my frustation in a way that gave me the chance to do it with out letting the power of the city to come down on me. Goodbye!!!!!
That's an interesting point of view, that "if I speak up the power of the city will come down on my head". I find it interesting because in the 21 years I've worked in local government, I've never really seen it happen. Talked about, sure, but actually happen? No. First, I've never known a City or County Manager who would tolerate such a thing, and even if they did our commissioners and the press are so accessible it wouldn't stand for long. Of course I can't say it has never happened, but I can say with pretty good authority it's not going to happen here, now.
So if you choose to disengage, that's up to you. Just don't blame it on that last person who's just calling for a little individual responsibility for the things we say.
Did the Master Plan that was the outcome from all the charrettes suggest DTE for Burns Square or not? Does anyone have a copy to answer the question?
How did we "kill the messanger" when you did not say anything meaningful?
The planners are much better to answer the question, but in general the "Downtown Master Plan 2020" actually uses different terminology, and defines the downtown zoning districts somewhat differently, and in far less detail, than the Downtown Code which originated from the DMP 2020 and Mr. Duany's "Smart Code." So the simple answer is that no, the DMP 2020 didn't designate anything as "DTE", there was a translation step in there. But of course this is not a simple issue!
Not messanger, messenger: Gee Didn't have any idea I would be missed that much or made such an impression ... maybe I'll change my mind and get back on here again!
There are many parts of the Master Plan 2020 adopted by the city commission that have been changed. In fact many parts of the code that was just adopted are being worked on and changed by staff and lawyers in text amendments right now. Many properties throughout the study have changed from the zoning suggestions in the DTMP. Even parts of Laurel Parks zoning have changed from the DTMP 2020. This is a living document and changes are inevitable.
To answer the question to "so where ya been?" and the post at 12:17PM the Master Plan 2020 that was the document produced after the charrettes with Duaney does not have a height limit nor does it designate DTE for Burns Court.
Mr. McNees, you never answered my post. Do you think it is a double standard that all civilians and all general employees are not treated equally within the City??? Just as a refresher, this is in regards to a select few being able to work details AND the fact that a select few get paid lunch hours. Is this fair to you? Especially when you take into consideration that there are other general/civilian employees who are trained in traffic control, but are denied this perk. AND there are offices within the PD where two general employees work in the very same room. One gets a paid lunch hour and one doesn't. They basically do the same job. The one big difference is that the one with the paid lunch hour dates her immediate supervisor (a Police Sergeant), which enables her to attend meetings with him outside of the department. She also has another advantage, that being she can schedule HERSELF to work these details. Talk about having your cake and eating it too!
What is the big deal about anonymous posts???? Just an an FYI, I don't work for the City and post to this blog from home. I did put in my name (several times) and it still posted as anonymous! Anyway, look at 9/15 1004 who posted anonymously. Come on even Denise Kowal was/is posting anonymously!! Also, I have to respond to this post from Mr. McNees that I cut and pasted, "First, I've never known a City or County Manager who would tolerate such a thing, and even if they did our commissioners and the press are so accessible it wouldn't stand for long". Who are you kidding? Hallisey, Schneider, Mark Singer, and Gil Fernandez are still on the City payroll!
To 17/9/05 2:44 PM - I spoke to Chief Abbott about your question. He tells me that there are two issues with the extra duty assignments you're asking aboout. The first is training, and the second is that the assignments are part of the collective bargaining agreement we have with the PBA. I haven't had a chance to look at the contract directly but I'll track down what it says.
On your lunch hour issue - I've said a few times that I can't handle city personnel matters over a public Blog. If you are aware of inequities or violations of our rules I encourage you to call my office at 954-4102, and I will see that you get answers.
To 17/9/05 2:54 PM - I haven't stopped or discouraged anonymous posting. But I do think people are more responsible for what they say if their name is up there - that accountability thing we keep talking about. Disagreements tend to be more respectful.
As far as retaliation for speaking up, I stand by what I said the first time.
Finally, I don't get your comment about Ms. Kowal, if you're assuming anything posted regarding the Burns Square area is written by her, you're mistaken - I asked. There are others with similar views.
Below is City Commissioner Ken Shelin's response to Save Our Sarasota's recent Open Letter to him:
---------------------------
Janice,
I value your support and ideas and I apologize for not responding to you sooner. I was out of town part of this past week trying to help a client on the east coast in major regulatory trouble.
As you know, I have been involved in the downtown code development and rezoning almost from the beginning, first as a member of the City Planning Board and now as a member of the City Commission. This process has been a very public process from the beginning to the end. It has been challenged both in court and during public hearings. The process for it has been debated openly and often and the rezoning delay just this year resulted from a need to amend the city code to assure we could do the rezoning legislatively and legally instead of property by property. Elaborate matrixes were developed at every stage documenting the staff, Planning Board, Commission and public comments on the code itself as well as the areas to be rezoned as the process moved along. The Commission has been responsive to concerns about the rezoning and in the case of Rosemary District we have delayed the rezoning in order to deal with major issues there. I hope that doesn't last long because it leaves Rosemary in limbo. In Gillespie Park, individual property owners came to us and wanted to expedite the process for their individual properties and we did that.
You have been successful in business because you have been responsive to your customers' needs. And you know that while you have unique and special knowledge about your business, in the end, the customers needs must be satisfied and those needs will vary from customer to customer. It is the same with government. We have many constituencies and a balance must be struck amongst them. I have been especially sensitive to Laurel Park. I supported its current zoning which de-intensifies land use in it and will likely lead to gradually decreasing density there over time. I also instigated the buffer adjacent to it to protect it. But, I must point out that this neighborhood has led the way in rejuvenating itself while being surrounded by C-CBD zoning for about 30 years, the most intense zoning in terms of use, height and density in the city. The recent downzoning in Burns Court would not logically lead to a conclusion that Laurel Park is at risk from the zoning there.
As you point out, the city is changing and as I said throughout my campaign, Sarasota is becoming a compact and cosmopolitan city. And I think it is especially important to manage that change carefully. To that end I have supported downzoning of Burns Court and that is what we have done. The City Commission, as I've said, has an obligation to take into account the views and needs of all its constituencies and the property owners in Burns Court have made their views known through many months of public hearings. They have asked for continuing the use of C-CBD which we can't do because of the adoption of the downtown master plan and code. They've asked for Downtown Bayfront which is clearly inconsistent with the new code, Duany's transect theory, and our desire to downzone the area. But, they have vested interests in Burns Court and their own properties just as property owners in Laurel Park, Gillepsie Park and elsewhere in the city. And we have an obligation to be responsive to them. We have struck a balance, in my view, between the desires of the neighborhoods adjacent to and outside Burns Court and those of Burns Court. As for Burns Court itself, it has had C-CBD zoning for over 30 years allowing for 18 story buildings throughout it. That zoning did not result in the construction of 18 story buildings or the degradation of the essential character of the area. Downzoning of the area does not logically lead me to a conclusion that Burns Court will be placed at increased risk - downzoning should decrease the risk.
As for the voting result and the way in which the vote took place, there had been multiple occasions when the City Attorney had publicly advised us on how the process would work and that changes could be made to the staff recommendation. In fact, the City Attorney had advised us that if we felt changes were desired they would more easily be made before the vote than after. We had had multiple public discussions about Burns Court including public presentations during public hearings that took a different view than the staff recommendation. As you know, we don't have to accept the staff recommendation. And the public often encourages both the Planning Board and the Commission not to do just that when they disagree with it.
My hope is that we can understand and accept differences of opinion. There is seldom a right way or a wrong way in matters such as these. It isn't helpful to demonize people or their motives in these discussions. I know and accept that differences in perspective create differences in beliefs, but I also strongly believe, as I know you do, that we all have a right to be heard and to expect our government to be responsive to us regardless of who we are.
I hope we can continue to work together discussing our differences along the way as they might occur.
Ken Shelin
Thank you for your answer on your 17/9/05 4:02 pm post. The Chief's answer is incorrect. SPD Parking Enforcement personnel HAVE received training in traffic control. What other training do you need to assist people across crosswalks and to be able to push traffic control buttons?? Once again, this isn't rocket science!! It takes common sense, which many of us DO possess! Please answer the question of is this a double standard! IT IS UNFAIR and it creates a great monetary divide amongst your general employees!! Some of us do need to work two jobs AND our off duty jobs are harder and pay ALOT LESS money! Also, if there is a discrepancy in how CIVILAIN/GENERAL employees are treated because of either PBA, or Teamster representation, I'd like for you to explain how and why this is happening. Contracts with unions can be amended. In fact I would think the City administration/Human Resources/Teamsters would be happy to accept an amendment that would make us all equal when it came to a big issue, such as the money we earn! That should be easy to agree upon. The office I am talking about at SPD where there are two girls basically doing the same job (minus the other two issues of dating and being able to assign themselves jobs) is the Off Duty/Special Events Office at SPD. One is a Teamster, one is in the PBA. They are both general employees, paying into the same pension, but are not treated equally. Do you think this is fair?
How can we find out about other jobs we could do for the city on a part time basis?
Regarding 18/9/05 5:51 pm, getting the Teamsters on board with this is a great idea! There are only 4 general employees who work these details. They must be overworked because I see one of them at every event I go to. I've went to three separate events on one weekend and saw this one person working every event. These off duty jobs pay $20.00 an hour. I'd be willing to bet that no City employee earns $20.00 an hour at their second job. The City certainly employs people who can be trained to work these events. The Police Department would certainly have people who could conduct this training, or employees could attend the training that all the recruits are given on this very subject. Is any one from the Teamsters working on this? If not, when is the next Teamster meeting? It sounds like the City is willing to work with us to level the playing field for all general employees. The Chief has already said that the wording for this (for general employees) is already in the PBA contract. Let's all get behind this.
This is not a City issue or a PD issue. This is a PBA issue. I believe that the PBA and the city agreed, in contract, that no one except for the few (mentioned previously) will ever be used to take the place of a sworn officer on an extra duty assignment. That's why we cannot use our PD volunteers in these situtations. So, if you have a problem with this, I would suggest that you take it to the PBA president because they are the ones that have requred this exemption.
In regards to the concerned employee/citizen that states that general employees are allowed to work extra duty details to the tune of thousands and thousands of dollars a year. I must respond, but first I have to pick myself up off the floor! Sorry, I am now composed, somewhat. . . We have three employees who are not sworn that are able to work off-duty details. Those are CSA's who were hired to work the road and could take certain details, not all. Ones that involve traffic. Curtesy mandated that when the CSA program folded they could stay in certain positions and continue to work a few of the details that they were designated for. Ones that wanted private sector jobs gave up their ability to work off-duty details. As for "pushing the button" and not "rocket science". As with many observations, you choose the one detail where the person does not have to stand in the middle of a I-section for hours. One easier one, compared to the thousands of hours that the CSA's and officers have spent directing traffic in 90+ heat for hours. When these CSA's are no longer at the department, then only sworn personnel will work details. Until then, they were caught in the past and present. As for being able to make extra money as an officer. Yes, it is true that I can make extra money. Not thousands and thousands!! I don't like details but I am grateful to be able to work them. If you want to work 3 to 20 hours extra per week, apply at City Hall to be a police officer and then get ready to work all holidays, including Christmas's and Thanksgivings, midnights, hurricane duty (well with the exception of a few females last year!)and every other position that interferes with our families and personal lives. If you don't want that then you don't GET to work details. .
OH MY GOD!! I am so tired of hearing whining people complain about police officers working off duty details for extra money. Parking Enforcement where were you last Christmas, general employees where were you last Christmas or even last Sunday. I was working, the same thing for midnights, when was the last time someone from parking enforcement or a general employee worked midnights. You want to work during the day, have week-ends off, and then you want some benefits of sworn personnel. You know what. . .Become a cop and then you can have the "gravy" details that you are so jealous of. Free time for meals when I can get pulled out of that meal or wait for two or three hours to even eat. Kiss my you know what!!! I have never heard of such jealousy. Want the whole package, fill out an application, go to training, stand out in the rain, the heat, and you know what you can walk adults across the street. Trust me it ain't as much fun as you would think, but I have earned the right to those details. Plus, they don't want parking enforcement officers, they don't want general employees, you know what they want COPS!! Yes, a few CSA's work a very few of the details but not many. So please get off your duff and take the bad with the good and stop your WHINING for heaven's sake. Thank you for this opportunity to realize how terriffic we have it. I have taken the good with the bad, excuse me but there isn't a city or county agency out there that sends their parking enforcement or general employees to work security details. The whole point is to be able to do something when something goes wrong. Cop applications can be found at City Hall. . .Have fun with that, the bio-chemical suits, the firing range, the calls for service, having people puke in your back seat, working all night. But you can't handle that, you just want a few of our perks. You make me sick!!
Helllllooooo nobody has been talking about the police officers working details. The question is does the City Manager think that it is fair that general employees (CSA's) work details when the rest of the City general employees are denied this perk. The CSA's are general employees who pay into the general employee pension fund. They are not police officers. Who cares if the City made a deal with them over a decade ago. I want to know if the City Manager feels this is fair. The CSA's are general employees who have been promised a paid lunch hour and the right to make thousands of dollars a year. Then to make it worse, the CSA's perform the same job functions as the rest of the general employees, some of them DO LESS than the rest of the general employees. How can anyone look at this with an unbiased eye and say that this is fair. Most of us work second jobs and we make half of what the CSA's do and work ALOT HARDER. Some are single mothers that have to work a second job to survive. Name ONE CSA who works these jobs because they HAVE TO to support their family, just ONE.
Post a Comment
<< Home