Under the heading “Fired? Demoted? League City's administrator waits” Thayer Evans,of The Houston Chronicle and the blog Everything League City, talks about Tuesday nights agenda. The following is a portion of what he wrote.
"The agenda for Tuesday's City Council meeting will include a closed-door item to "deliberate the employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline and or possible dismissal" of the city administrator, City Councilman Jim Nelson said. The item was submitted by Mayor Toni Randall, he said.
There is also a closed-door agenda item to "deliberate the appointment or employment of a public officer or employee" as interim city administrator, Nelson said. It was also put on the agenda by Randall, he said.
After the two closed-session items, there is also an action item on Tuesday night's agenda for the city to request proposals from executive search firms that could assist with the city's potential search for a new city administrator, Nelson said. It was also put on the agenda by Randall, he said."
What are your thoughts? Should Chris Reed be the assistant city administrator? Should he be reassigned? Do you think bringing in someone who has no knowledge of the city, with Mr. Reed being the assistant city administrator, will change the way business has been and continues to be conducted in city hall? Do you think the employee’s moral will go up or down (as if it could get any lower) and do you think more positions will become vacant? And when the people voted overwhelmingly for change (70% to 30%) do you think this is what they had in mind?
29 comments:
I've never understood the controversy. The administrator is not elective, and therefore not political. Council and mayor decide what the city does, and then the administrator just gets it done. If he does his job, or doesn't, is the only way he should be evaluated, just like any other city employee.
I think Jim Nelson needs to take Thayer Evans and the Galveston Daily News off speed dial. Without TC he is only proving that he is inept, unprofessional and hysterical.
P.
I agree!John Kennedy of Nassua Bay just retired after 10 years of being the City manager! How many mayors did he have to work for and adjust to there style of ideas? Fireing people is a weakness.. Its not management at all.
I would think that the city would want some continuity in the admin position. Bringing in another manager would seem to just cause more problems in the short-run. Reed has been doing the job since 2006 and has been recently given a raise so he must have been doing at least a "fair" job. I do not know if he has done a good job or not. If anyone else could speak on the subject I would like to hear it!
A few wise thoughts....
Forget that CR was hired for the wrong reasons with the wrong background.
How has he been at learning on the job (granted he may be getting paid too much for someone on OJT - separate issue)?
What has the city done in helping him to improve or grow into the job?
If nothing, then what does that say about how our city views it's employees, and why would anyone want to come work for such a place with such a (ahem) great track record?
Thayer needs to go back to Journalism 101 and talk to more than one source and get some corroboration.
BHL,
You have a great point! I know I would not take the job if i was from the outside! I would think to myself that it is just a temp job.
So next mayor comes in and gets rid of the top employees.. Again, and again.. oh and again.. Cant we save money and just contract our employees from a temp agency???..lol
Before I get started, I will repeat what I have said before; I have not and will not advocate (publicly or privately) for or against Chris Reed's retention or dismissal. Such decisions are the business of the mayor and council that we elect.
That being said, there are a few points that I think are worth consideration in regard to some of the recent public discourse.
-The council that recently decided to give Chris Reed a raise was a different council than the one we have today. Regardless of what this new council chooses to do (and I don't know), there is no reason to assume they will be bound by the actions of previous councils. Not to say that the previous council was right or wrong or that they should or should not be reversed, just noting that different people are involved in this decision now.
-Chris Reed was not notably qualified by training or experience for this job when he was hired. As far as I know he may have grown into the job very effectively and if so his accomplishments since taking the job should be noted. However, those who have claimed that he came to the job with uniquely impressive qualifications are mistaken. If the city decides to seek an alternate manager, it will be possible to find a replacement with equal qualifications. Again, I'm not saying there aren't good reasons to retain Mr. Reed, just noting that contrary to some recent claims his prior resume is not a significant reason for doing so.
-It is not unusual for high level executive civil service positions to see turn over when new political leadership is elected. For instance, when a new President or Governor is elected, the top level staff personnel that answer to those people are usually replaced by someone who the incoming elected official would prefer to work with. Why would it be surprising to see the same thing in a municipal government? Once again, this is not a reason to automatically replace Mr. Reed, but it should hardly be surprising if that does happen and not particularly unusual.
-Mr. Reed's hiring was controversial and however rightly or wrongly, his position is tainted by memories of those misdeeds by past city government. I am not claiming that he should or should not be removed for such, just saying that it is understandable that questions remain about how and why he was hired. It would not be wrong for the new mayor and council to address those questions if they choose to do so, though perhaps we should not expect public discussion of this matter.
-Mr. Reed has made some significant mistakes in his job which have become widely known by the public. He has acknowledged some himself. On the other hand, it is possible that those mistakes were made when he was new and inexperienced in the job and perhaps under improper influence of ethically tainted previous city governments. Perhaps he has grown in experience and under the guidance of our new elected officials who do not have the baggage of previous administrations he would not make the same mistakes. Perhaps he is now well suited to do the job without much risk of making similar errors. It is the right of the mayor and council to ask this question as well and to make the best determination they can. I don't pretend to know the answer and have no preconceived notion of the outcome, I only understand that it is yet another reasonable question that the mayor and council might wish to discuss. We should not be surprised nor blame them if they do want to consider this issue. I would, however, expect this too to be a private conversation.
In the end, the mayor and council that we have seen elected to office over the past few years do not suffer from the same obligations to special interests as previous city governments. That being the case, I have high confidence that they will arrive at a wise answer to this matter and I will accept their decision whatever it is. I do not feel the need to offer an opinion on the conclusion, but only to request that there be a dispassionate deliberation focused on the facts.
Jeff Hagen
Jeff,
I dont know about all your blah blah blah....But just say..Hi my name is Jeff Hagen. I am PRO Mayor Randall!...
Am i the only guy on here that has a pair of coconuts to put my real name on here??? Cause really the ones that dont have their real name have no validity when it comes to speakin on here!!!
Yes, Tim, you have already made it abundantly clear that you lack the capability or interest for rational conversation. But thanks for admitting it.
Jeff
@P
"I've never understood the controversy. The administrator is not elective, and therefore not political."
Hon, I think you left the words "supposed to be" out (between not and political). That could be significant.
Timmy, darling, thanks for sharing your "coconuts" with us. My dog had that problem too. I had him fixed and now he's fine.
I am Pro Mayor Randall, and Pro League City.
We are back, a blog for the rest of us.
http://leaguecity.blogspot.com/
Marc, I thought you didn't care for Macs?
Two blogs now? - you must have run out of Blogadone again.
;-)
Jeff
Chelsea,
Your Pro Randall? No way!!! It must be your tacky tasteless junk that gives it away! I am going to even guess you are Randall??? You sure like to talk about my coco nuts and going to the scottish inn... Sorry but I am Happly married! So NO i wont go to the scottish in with you!!!
So if you believe in what you say? Why dont you use your real name?
I am going to the other blog.. where there is real names and no fakes........its a joke if you dont use your name! Bank Robbers use masks to rob banks... I guess the same to rob our city!!!
Marc,
Glad to see tommy and pat gave you permission to start your blog back. Good Luck my friend.
What a hollow way to fake importance. I think Pat is more amusing, even under his phony names.
Paul,
I had no probs with Marc's blog. I was the first commenter.
You don't fool me; Tim Holloway is an alias for Odie.
well looks like pt, tc and me will be posting on the "other" blog. wonder why they won't post here? hmmmmmmmmm
lcpd
The other blog is a great place for Tim Holloway (recall Mayor Randall); Pat Hallisey; and others to commiserate their anti-Randall rantings. I appreciate Marc's efforts to give the 27.9% a place to pine and whine. This election proved that the tail no longer wags the dog.
Change is always difficult.
To be fair, Marc's first post was well written and balanced. The discussions that go on after that, well only time will tell...
Mrs Glenn Cove,
Thank you so sweet of you! Your the one that plays the washboard when the Banjo's are playing!! I think that is Awesome! great job!! I even catch myself tappin my feet when I am drivin by with my windows down.. lol
Those are ironic words from somebody who is unable to form grammatically correct sentences Timmy.
Jeff
Chris: You said assistant administrator. Is there such a position, or do you propose yet another new layer of government?
Is this the mask of Chris Mallios as evil expansionist coming off? Should we get a rope?
CR is a big enough guy to be visible enough no matter where he sits in a room. But putting him up front there at council meetings might have made him too big a target for some people to ignore. It's possible that was Dick Gregg's undoing too.
Who's idea was it to put the administrator and lawyer on display up there alongside real elected officials? Maybe they should tell that person, "Don't do us any more 'favors'."
Mr. Moratto,
There is not such a position that I am aware of in the budget. I am not suggesting another layer of government. I am only relaying information that has been presented to me by those who could make such decisions. If I was for larger government I would not have spoken out about adding an in house city attorney position. I believe in efficient government. Unlike Mr. Baron who wants government to continue to expand. So save the rope for someone else I am sure a use for it may arise very soon. I have always been very clear on my position regarding Chris Reed. I guess the real question is will the council follow the will of the people or their own direction. That is why this will be the moment of truth.
Post a Comment