Sabotage has a long tradition.  

One of several explanations of its origin is that French Luddites jammed their wooden shoes – known as “sabots” – in the gears of powered looms during the Industrial Revolution in protest over the replacement of workers by machinery.

A much more recent, and more benign, form of sabotage occurred when departing Clinton Administration staffers reportedly removed the “W” keys from all the White House computer keyboards as either a prank or in symbolic protest to incoming president George W. Bush.

Last night, Mayor Dave Schmidt vetoed what appears to be another form of sabotage: the 2-year sweetheart employment contract that our current lame duck City Council – 5 of whom (Alds. Allegretti, Bach, Carey, Ryan and Wsol) are retiring from the Council after the upcoming April election – recently gave City Mgr. Jim Hock after Schmidt vetoed a prior version and his veto was sustained by the Council.

When Schmidt and Hock couldn’t agree to a new contract following that veto, Allegretti, Bach, Wsol and Ald. Rich DiPietro took it upon themselves to negotiate with Hock – but the result they produced could re-define “negotiate” to mean “give away the store,” as the contract they came up with appears to be even worse than the one Schmidt vetoed.

It gives Hock almost $200,000/year from now until April, 2013, and includes what Schmidt called a “poison pill” in his veto message: a “super” severance package that ensures Hock will receive no less than $117,000 if he is involuntarily terminated without sufficient “cause.”  That ties the hands of the City and the new aldermen joining the Council in April; and it makes Hock virtually bullet-proof no matter how poorly he does, or doesn’t do, his job.

In our book, that’s bad enough to justify Schmidt’s veto, as well as a round of Bronx cheers for the four alderman who “negotiated” that sell-out of the public trust.  Given their track records, we didn’t expect any better from Allegretti and Bach.  But we did expect more – much more – from DiPietro and Wsol, so their endorsement of this deal is a major disappointment.

And Ald. Joe Sweeney’s vote for it after stating that it’s a good deal for Hock but a not so good deal for the City makes us wonder whether somebody ever explained to Sweeney exactly who he represents when he’s sitting in that chair around The Horseshoe.

Worse yet, the sweetheart deal they cooked up was given to Hock without any Council member even attempting to show how Hock’s performance over the past three years has been good enough to warrant anything more than at-will employment, at best.  

Which in a perverse sort of way makes sense, because from what we’ve observed over the past three years Hock’s performance has done nothing to distinguish him from any other mediocre bureaucrat.

That might explain some of the displeasure expressed by Rob Lohens and several other residents at last night’s meeting, which should make the video of the meeting more interesting than usual when it gets posted later today or tomorrow on the City’s website.  

Two weeks from now we should find out whether our departing saboteurs (along with DiPietro and Sweeney) will have realized the error of their ways, will vote to sustain Schmidt’s veto, and will then leave the question of Hock’s contract to the new Council that will have to live with it.

Hope springs eternal…but we’re not going to hold our breath.

To read or post comments, click on title.