I will be unable to attend the council meeting on Aug. 2, and am consequently expressing my concerns regarding items J, K and L on the consent calendar — all relating to the appointment of Gary Hampton.
You are being asked to approve several resolutions without being provided sufficient information to vote in a responsible manner. As you know, city management chose to forgo a formal search for a new police chief. Although Mr. Hampton may be a fine candidate, it is not possible to rationally judge whether or not the salary and benefit concessions that you are being asked to approve are appropriate. Other equally qualified candidates may be available at both lower cost and lower risk to the city.
In the materials provided in the agenda packet, nearly the entire discussion of Mr. Hampton’s background is cut-and-pasted verbatim from the city’s July 6, 2011, press release extolling Mr. Hampton’s virtues. There is no factual information provided to bear on the following questions:
n What other candidates were considered, and what were their strengths and weaknesses compared to Mr. Hampton?
n What were the salary and benefit requirements of these other candidates? Was any cost-benefit analysis performed to weigh the various candidates?
n What unique attributes does Mr. Hampton possess that justify the additional cost to the city ($34,000 a year) and that makes it in the best interest of the city to forgo a formal search?
n What is the long-term fiscal impact to the city of the proposed salary and benefit package? (Only single-year costs are addressed.)
n How does the at-will employment agreement compare to previous agreements? Are the changes required solely to secure Mr. Hampton’s acceptance of the employment offer? Why are such generous severance terms needed? These terms make Mr. Hampton’s appointment a very risky proposition.
The total cost to the city of Mr. Hampton’s appointment, over the course of a 5-year tenure, will exceed $1,000,000, yet more energy appears to have been devoted to consideration of the purchase of four new police cars than to this appointment.
While several of you may have met Mr. Hampton and approve of his selection, to proceed with this appointment without any examination or consideration of alternatives would be irresponsible. It is akin to my test driving a BMW, finding that it is an excellent solution to my transportation needs, and purchasing it without further consideration. Only after examining the alternatives, being cognizant of my other responsibilities, might I realize that a Ford could be a more proper choice (and might I discover that the Ford had better performance and reliability).
I close with the observation that placing these items on the consent calendar, a repository for routine items requiring no public discussion, is disingenuous at best.
Why do you say the CM didn't look out for the best interests of the city with hiring the new chief?
You "think" and "my guess" are your facts in making that comment.
How do we know Maciel didn't abstain? Even if he didn't there are 4 others also making the decision. But by your logic they all are dirty and would allow something unethical or inappropriate to happen.
You know why you think that? Cause you are unethical so you believe the entire world is. Tommy you are a sad sad person.
Hey Ornley, how far does think, and guess get you in court?
Are you sure you're not upset because you didn't come up with the idea to hire him, first?
I am concerned the city manager did a poor job of looking out for the best interests of the city. I think he followed the lead of a councilman who has a more than comfortable relationship with Chief Hampton, and offered him more than we can afford.
Keep in mind maciel worked with Chief Hampton when both were in Tracy. When maciel retired he went to work for Hampton in Turlock under a contract. "My guess" would be theres a little quid pro quo going on here. I think maciel should have abstained from voting on the Hampton contracts because of his personal relationship with Chief Hampton.
I think if you're coming from that perspective this may sound flippant, but I'm going to say it anyway.
I say try it. If the crime rate continues to worsen they are going to be pumping on all cylinders.
Nobody including ol TommyB will say anything negative about the decision to hire him. So that leaves the financials...
And forget Measure E. They made over $500k selling firecrackers.
On the other hand, if you prefer, we could assume going down the path you are proposing - hire a half-rate employee (for less).
You don't think that kind of hiring deal would do wonders for chasing business out of Tracy?
My point is the City shouldn't make these kind of hiring deals. Yes, we are stuck with the house since the City didn't enforce the original deal with Mr. Hobbs, which was to pay us off within a year of termination.
When the City makes over-the-top hiring deals because that person is THE only one, it will turn out to cost the taxpayers. It's like Mr. Hampton's severance, are we solvent enough to pay him $185 plus? Since we aren't, we shouldn't have put that in his hiring package.
By paying into Mr. Hampton's 401K (to the tune of $14,000 a year), we have paved the way for all City employees to negotiate for the same deal: which I believe is only fair, but we also cannot afford.
Why does he get to start out as a 10-year employee? That's a slap in the face to all of those that have put in their true 10 years.
No one in the City seems to look at the "what ifs" when making these exorbitant deals.
Wow, a well written article by Paul Miles turned into a bash tommybahama. What happened to everyone has the right to voice their opinion? When someone turns to bashing the person instead of presenting a sound argument, it shows their ignorance.
Macpup hasn't tommybahama been doing a lot of bashing of his own?
Did anyone take notice that Tracy approved a loan modification for Daniel Hobbs (another must have at any cost). He was supposed to pay us off if an when he left or was terminated. We know have a 30-year loan for $540,000 on a $280,000 home
Macpup how much money did you expect to get from the sale of an underwater home? Would you prefer to short sell the home, at a loss?
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110416/A_NEWS/104160327/-1/a_comm04
A second city investigation into Espinoza also is mentioned in his lawsuit - this one saying that he failed to report to Thiessen the death of a jail inmate arrested by Tracy police.
I don't feel one bit sorry for TommyBahama. However, with crime increasing. Why not hire two police chiefs? One for the north side and one for the south?
The bottom-line isn't whether Mr. Hampton is a good choice or how they found him, it's Tracy cannot afford him. His salary and benefits are affordable because vacant positions are not being filled.
The employee negotiations should be interesting after what was given to this one man. I'm still curious how many fire and police positions are among the "vacant" positions. Since Measure E was supposed to prevent that - oh I guess they weren't laid off, but retired, so that's legal.
Did anyone take notice that Tracy approved a loan modification for Daniel Hobbs (another must have at any cost). He was supposed to pay us off if an when he left or was terminated. We know have a 30-year loan for $540,000 on a $280,000 home.
Is it any wonder that some of us citizens do not trust the City Staff to make good choices? The City Council is supposed to be our watch dog, but all I see is Yes Men.
I hope the people of Tracy will give Hampton a chance, he is tough and can stand up to pressures well. Good luck, Hampton.
CN
Look to the city manager, Leon Churchill for the answers to why Janet Theisan resigned.
tommybahama wrote "Keep in mind that just because you say something over and over doesn't mean it's true, even though that's what you would like to believe.
Tommybhama,
I'd respond by saying. If the shoe fits ... wear it.
Like th you-tube cartoon th Renton Washington PD Chief is all worked up about. Th cartoon spoofs inappropriate behavior internally in a PD. But it don't mean that those spoofs are accurate any more than th "Duncan Doughnut" urban myth is about cops either.
Just cause ya thank somethin might be true don't make it true until ya can produce th facts that prove it's true.
Innuendo an supposition ain't a reason ta attack someone as doin somethang wrong. Nope, ya need ta prove it first an that's yer shortcomin in all of yer diatribe.
Ya write, "I don't understand why you are all so worried about my comments; unless you know my comments are true (which they are) and you know it; and you're attempting to discredit me (which you are) because I'm right (which I am)."
Paranoia mixed with a superiority complex that feeds on negativity fostered by comments made ta incite discontent.
Good way ta endear readers an persuade em ya actually have somethang valuable ta consider.
Keep it up, yer doin a fine job at discreditin yerself if fer no other reason that ya can't get th hint people are tirin of yer continual unsubstantiated rants an attacks on everyone that has a different point of view.
I worry about what ya say not fer myself but fer those who don't follow th issues themselves an might be deluded inta thankin what ya have ta say has merit an then take inappropriate action on yer manufactured "facts" with yer half truths an innuendos.
Being placed on administrative leave an terminated can be as simple as th officer said somethang inappropriate ta a superior or a failure ta follow th directions given ta him or her. Somethang anyone that's workin anywhare can be terminated fer.
By all means feel free to post any links you believe will substantiate your position. I think there are only a few people who are worried about what I say. Those being yourself, kerryrog, Ornley, and tomislarry.
I don't understand why you are all so worried about my comments; unless you know my comments are true (which they are) and you know it; and you're attempting to discredit me (which you are) because I'm right (which I am).
Otherwise, why allow yourself to get so worked up over the comments of one blogger?
Yes I have accused thiessen and churchill, and sheneman, of lying; specifically related to the issue of Mr. Helm and their comments to him. I believe that has been discussed and resolved with the outcome being that "thiessen did lie" and churchill "attempted to cover it up", which is no different than lying.
If you remember, I was concistent with my comments that these things had happened and when Mr. Helm presented the evidence to the council you continued to deny it's existence. In short, you were lying to yourselves.
The point being that two of the three officers have been terminated by thiessen, and I'm not certain about the status of the third, but will continue to keep my eyes and ears open.
The only conclusion I come to about your continued ramblings about me is that you're part of the small group assigned to try and discredit anyone who gets the story out about what's really going on at city hall.
Keep in mind that just because you say something over and over doesn't mean it's true, even though that's what you would like to believe.
TommyBahama did say she lied. And since he can't remember - I can post that link if anyone can't remember where he wrote it. Or someone else can post it.
In the meantime, for those interested I think if you google up "TommyBahama tracypress Janet lied" you will likely find it.
If not. Let me know and I will be glad to google it up.
Tommybahama, Let me know if you also want the link for the "administrative leave".
If everyone is telling the truth then they don't have anything to fear, do they?
So far, all I've asked for is open discussion on the matter, fiscal conservancy regarding spending of our tax dollars and honesty from our public officials. In my opinion, anyone opposed to those basic concepts really needs to check their standards and expectations.
Cont.
So, since yer playin this little game ya have now lost a game player cus I got more important thangs ta do than mess around with ya.
Good luck in yer efforts an I wish ya well but it now appears many commentators here feel th same way an don't trust ya any more.
Sad cus ya probably do have some good ideas. Oh well, that's th way it goes sometimes.