Should City Manager Jim Hock be fired?
That’s the question the Park Ridge City Council is currently pondering, which is a more substantial issue that some of the ones that recently have consumed too much of the Council’s deliberations – like how many pets can be kept in any one residence.
A couple of weeks ago, Ald. Dan Knight (5th Ward) opined that Hock’s performance didn’t seem worthy of the $200,000+ in annual compensation he’s been paid since arriving here in 2008. For those who haven’t been paying attention, Hock’s compensation package includes a $350,000 interest free loan, a $5,000/year pay-down on that loan principal, the use of a City-owned car (along with gas and insurance), and pension benefits that we suspect exceed those of most of the Park Ridge residents paying the bill for Hock’s services.
And it’s all guaranteed through May 2013, by a $117,000 severance package unless he’s terminated for “cause,” thanks to a new contract given him by the former City Council members as they were heading for the exits, after Hock had gone almost a year and a half without a contract since his original one-year deal expired.
From just the information that has become public, it looks to us like Hock has botched a number of significant responsibilities in just the last year or so that, cumulatively, have cost the City (a/k/a, the taxpayers) some significant money:
— During the 2010-11 budget process, he disregarded the Council’s decision to eliminate the position of Deputy City Manager and reinstate the Hock-terminated Economic Development Director position – instead, retaining the former and sacking the latter. He compounded that bit of what sounds like insubordination by then bestowing unauthorized severance payments on the Economic Development Director and the Director of Community Development, which cost the taxpayers an extra $45,000.
— He unilaterally decided to have City absorb unbudgeted increases in employee benefits expense without informing or consulting with Council, costing another $141,000. In a similar vein, he improperly attempted to pay the police chief $19,000 in “deferred compensation” in order to evade the City’s cap on police chief salary – a cost that was avoided only because Mayor Dave Schmidt vetoed it; and, after initially approving that deferred comp payment, the Council finally woke up and sustained the veto.
— He irresponsibly handed the firefighters union negotiations to Chief Mike Zywanski (who doesn’t live or pay property taxes here), who promptly agreed – without even telling the mayor or the Council – to negotiation “Ground Rules” that required the negotiations to be kept secret from the public. When Mayor Dave Schmidt finally discovered those “Ground Rules” and called Hock on them at the May 2, 2011, Council meeting, Hock failed to “man up” and, instead, continued to obfuscate for the next two weeks – presumably until he could persuade Chief Z to “wear the jacket” for that gaffe without Hock’s having to assume any responsibility.
— He left the Finance and Budget Director position, the second most important City Staff position, vacant for almost a full year after receiving the application of the candidate he ended up hiring.
— Most recently, the discovery that collection of at least $600,000 in City tickets and fines has been neglected since Hock took over as City Mgr., something for which Ald. Rich DiPietro (2nd) said there was “no excuse.”
Yet DiPietro and five other aldermen have decided Hock deserves an evaluation process with some performance objectives and a period of time to achieve them – even though, according to an article in this week’s Park Ridge Herald-Advocate (“Park Ridge aldermen favor evaluation, improvement over firing,” Nov. 17), DiPietro claims to be only “fairly satisfied” with Hock’s performance, Ald. Jim Smith is “negatively impressed,” Ald. Sal Raspanti (4th) doesn’t “know if [he’s] satisfied…but there’s a lot of room for improvement,” and Ald. Marty Maloney is merely “satisfied.”
Hardly a ringing endorsement.
Notably, none of those aldermen who want to give Hock more time to shape up have identified, much less elaborated upon, exactly what it is that Hock is actually doing well. The best thing that a Council member has said about his performance comes from Ald. Tom Bernick (6th), who considers him “a valuable source” of information.
We’re not sure about “valuable,” although we certainly would concede expensive.
We’d expect that even blind squirrel theory would account for at least one or two “very good”s or “excellent”s on something or other over the course of three years. So, in the interest of magnanimity, we’ll offer one: Hock’s hiring of Finance Director Allison Stutts, who so far has been an all-star in the position – including being the one who was responsible for bringing to light the neglected ticket collection mess.
But that seems to be it. And therein lies the problem.
Is this kind of performance from the City’s top operating officer really all the taxpayers deserve for $200,000+ a year? Or, put another way, is this all that any of the aldermen who represent those taxpayers expect from someone in that position and at that price? Or, put yet another way, is this all any of those aldermen would accept from one of their own employees making that kind of dough?
But apparently that kind of reasoning doesn’t automatically come with a seat around The Horseshoe, so we will eagerly await what we expect to be a lot of warm-and-fuzzy goals and objectives that nobody will be able to objectively measure. Look for “goals” like “Improve communication with elected officials” and “Enhance staff morale,” along with related objectives like “No less than five e-mails per week on topics related to the upcoming week’s meeting” and “Encourage independent action by subordinates.”
Which, in turn, will likely provoke comments from aldermen like: “Jim’s e-mails are a must-read – I couldn’t put them down!” and “I’ve never seen so many smiles at 505 Butler Place.” And that will be more than enough for those among our elected officials who seemingly expect nothing and, therefore, can never be disappointed.
Meanwhile, no substantial improvement will occur other than what the mayor or the aldermen themselves specifically direct, even as Hock begins his search for a similar position in some other community and the remaining term of his sinecure here in Pleasantville winds down.
And for City government, the beat goes on.
Update (11/18/11): Yesterday the H-A reported (“Report reveals another half-million dollars in upaid debts to city of Park Ridge,” Nov. 17) that City Finance Director Allison Stutts had discovered that there are over $550,000 in additional uncollected debts owed the City, including $301,940 in unpaid ambulance bills and another $208,779 owed for fines for things like false alarms, cutting overgrown grass, damage caused to City property, sidewalk-replacement cost sharing, and unpaid rent for City-owned property. And $36,000 is owed for red-light camera fines that have accumulated just since July of last year.
Worse yet, it appears that there’s another $124,078 in unpaid utility bills (water and sewer) that haven’t even gone to collection because – get this! – the City apparently hasn’t sent unpaid utility bills to collection since 2005. For what it’s worth, that would have started on the watch of the previous inept city manager, Tim Schuenke.
But don’t worry about all this uncollected revenue, folks: all this incompetence will be eliminated just as soon as the City Council designs and implements its Hock Performance Improvement program, the theme song of which is rumored to be: “Nearer My God To Thee.
To read or post comments, click on title.
20 comments so far
I laughed, I cried…this is one of your best essays yet; should be required reading for every elected official who forgets what he/she’s there for: To protect the interests of the public that a) elected him/her and b) pays the “manager” who isn’t. Have any of these elected officials been in other positions? Did they hold their prior managers fully accountable for results or were they fobbed off with lame excuses after expensive mistakes? One wonders.
Tell everyone you know to CALL THEIR ALDERMAN and demand that Hock get fired, FOR CAUSE. Enough is enough.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Should we take that as a “no” vote on the Council’s proposed 3-6-9 month evaluation process?
After this latest annoucement, what kind of curve does this city council have to be grading on for Hock to get anything better than an “F”?
EDITOR’S NOTE: That’s a question that should be posed to Alds. Sweeney, DiPietro, Smith, Raspanti, Bernick and Maloney, although it sounds like they’re giving Hock at least a “C”; and Bernick’s grading him even higher because he provides Bernick with information.
There must be some humor in that somewhere, but we’re having a hard time finding it.
This can hardly get any worse… or can it??
EDITOR’S NOTE: Sure it can: the 2012-13 budget process is about to start.
I agree – fire Hock!! But it is same ole’, same ole’. The elected officials scurry for the shadows and the blame game begins!!!!
On the one hand the Mayor presents himself as a budget “superman” and yet somehow he did not notice or ask the right questions to uncover what appears to be about a 1.5 million variance in claimed revenue compared to what was actually in the bank.
Here is what is ironic. The Mayor (and you) have made it pretty clear that he wanted Hock gone for a long time and here he had all the ammunition he needed right under his nose but he never even noticed it. The fact that these issues have come to light has nothing to do with a single elected official. In fact, left to our elected officials these issues would go on and on and on!!
Here is what is pathetic. It will happen again. They will fire Hock and replace him but unless they put some review process in place the new manager will be able to make the same mistakes and it will pass right by. Sorry Mayor. Sorry Aldermen but making sure that our most costly city employee is doing their job is a part of your responsibility.
I read an article written about Mayor Dave recently. Congrats to your press agent…front page!!!!! In the article he references one of his political heros – Ronald Reagan (now there is a shock). God old RR….”Trust but verify”. Our elected officials need to understand that this phrase applies not only to organizations like Com Ed (whoops, what happened there???) but also to the most important position in our city government – City Manager. Otherwise they are little more than words.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Of course, the part-time $12,000/yr mayor – and/or the part-time, $1,200/yr aldermen – could have asked the full-time, $200,000+/yr city manager: “Hey, Jim, are you sure you folks have been collecting all the fines that the City has been assessing?” Just like they could have asked him: “Hey, Jim, did the fire chief you put in charge of the union negotiations propose some ground rules that cloak those negotiations in secrecy?” Or “Hey, Jim, did you give Carrie Davis a severance package without telling us?” Or thousands of other similar questions that any competent manager shouldn’t have to be asked.
Shame on them for not doing so?
As to your point that Schmidt “had all the ammunition he needed right under his nose” for firing Hock, six of the seven aldermen have already proved you wrong on that one – by refusing to fire Hock even though they now know all this; and there’s not a damn thing Schmidt can do about it because he has no authority to fire any member of City staff. So six of the seven aldermen (Ald. Knight excluded) will run their Hock evaluation/rehabilitation goat rodeo for as long as it takes Hock to find another job into which he can seamlessly step into. And then his deputy will try to keep the plates spinning while they search for another bureaucrat to bumble around like the last two have.
So long as the City keeps hiring career government bureaucrats, they’ll keep getting the performances they’ve been getting.
At the last council meeting the Finance Director noted that all these tickets and fines are accounted for on a cash basis so there really wasn’t any claimed revenue or ammunition laying under the Mayor’s nose as a poster stated. But that is beside the point. That this was allowed to occur under the management of the City Manager is the point. To the same poster…do you understand the form of government in place in Park Ridge??
Hock was a third choice candidate when he was hired and has proved why. We need a City Manager who gives a hoot about Park Ridge; watch Hock in action, he isn’t that guy.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Good catch on the “cash basis” accounting.
We thought Hock was only the second choice, after Frimark’s insurance client from Glenview.
What would it take to restructure the whole City hierarchy? How can the residents participate (is referendum the only method)? Finally, if they do look for a new City manager, what qualifications do they look for regarding this type of job responsibilities?
EDITOR’S NOTE: Too much! It’s not the structure but the people operating it that are the problem.
If we were looking for city manager candidates, we’d look for managers from the private sector who also express an understanding of the differences between public and private sector management. And we would begin our search with Park Ridge residents who already have a commitment to, and undestanding of, the community.
I’ve heard Charlie Melidosian’s name floated as a replacement for Hock. I hope this isn’t just a way for the Mayor to hire a crony.
EDITOR’S NOTE: This is the first we have heard of any such thing. Mr. Melidosian’s credentials can be found at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/melidosian.
Whether those qualify him (or anybody else) for the city manager position, however, remains a moot point so long as the Council continues to insist on wet-nursing Mr. Hock after more than three years on the job.
11:11
You ARE kidding, right? Come on now…
If you heard it who did you hear it from? Anyone that would have any credibility? Or a coffee buddy this morning while you bullshitted about what ails the City???
Who manages the Finance Director Allison Stutts?
EDITOR’S NOTE: Do you mean technically as it appears on the org chart, or actually?
Charlie Melidosian? Really? No Really?
EDITOR’S NOTE: On the other hand, if that’s the approach you want to take: $1 million of uncollected fines? Really? No really?
I find it telling that the editor of this blog, arguably another of the Mayor’s cronies, would post Melidosian’s resume in response to the question.
EDITOR’S NOTE: And why is that, pray tell?
If the council ever decides to get rid of Mr. Hock, or when his contract is up and he leaves, I hope the city reaches out to the private sector and looks at all the local people who have credentials equal to or better than Mr. Melidosian’s. And we would be better off in the school districts hired business people for superintendent instead of educators.
If you can’t see the problem with the mayor working to place a crony in the highest staff spot in the town, then you and the mayor are myopic at best, or at worst, disengenous about your motivations for such public and tenacious criticism of the current manager.
EDITOR’S NOTE: We have heard or seen nothing about “the mayor working to place a crony in the highest staff spot in the town,” so you seem to be engaged in specious “straw man” or “red herring” arguments.
As for our “motivations for such public and tenacious criticism of the current manager,” we believe the facts speak for themselves about the current City Manager’s performance. We initially supported him and continued giving him the benefit of the doubt, even after it became clear that he was “over his skis” when it came to City finances (as we noted in our 02.22.10 post). But going on two years later with even more gaffes on his resume, we think he has shown an inability to do the work the way it should be done by somebody as highly paid as he is.
‘Dog…Hock was the third choice. The second choice was the asst city manager in Troy, Michigan who, according to Frimark, backed out because of the hostile climate caused by the “Evil Blogs”, most notably the Park Ridge Underground. Ah, those were the days.
EDITOR’S NOTE: We forgot about the wimp from Troy.
You are right that $1,000,000 in uncollected fines demands answers….
EDITOR’S NOTE: This comment has been edited to remove gratuitously vituperative comments about someone who is not a public figure and unrelated to the substance of this post.
8:15:
“I hope the city reaches out to the private sector and looks at all the local people who have credentials equal to or better than Mr. Melidosian’s”.
I know that this is technically a holiday week but don’t you think it is a bit early for cocktails???
Exactly how many people who currently have successful careeers in the private sector do you think would even consider the position of city manager??? It is even more funny when you sonsider that a part of the goal will be to dramatically reduce the comp package for the new person. “Gee, I think I leave my current position to go to a postion where:
– I will probably make less than I am currently making yet everyone will still think I am overpaid (do you want to give a 50+ million dollar budet to a middle level manager??)
– I can experience the “love” that people have for public sector workers.
Beyond that you say “local people” which makes it even more difficult. Anyone who lives here and pays attention can see our elected officials are either unwilling to make very difficult decisions (council) or have proven to be unwilling to work with others and all to willing to throw the city manager under the bus (Mayor).
The city better budget for extra traffic control to deal with the long lines of qualified locals who will want that job!!!!
EDITOR’S NOTE: We think there are capable people in this community who would be willing to do the City Manager’s job for what Mr. Hock is being paid, maybe less. And we believe a good private sector “middle level manager” could handle a 50+ million dollar municipal budget because the most challenging task in the private sector – revenue generation – is pretty much guaranteed on the public side, compliments of property taxes and “captive” fees for things like water and sewer.
Wow. I didn’t realize how many boats oars YOU Pubdog are rowing for the SS CRONYISM. Edit away.
EDITOR’S NOTE: When a commentator unwilling or incapable of discussing issues raised in the post chooses instead to gratuitously attack an individual who has done nothing to make himself/herself a public figure, we will.
PD:
I guess I would disagree with your comment releted to revenue generation. I realize that comparing public to privat sector is not always a perfect fit but typically the operational and finance positions (COO/CFO) are seperate from revenue generation (SVP/EVP Sales). At many companies in the private sector all three of these positions are compensated well above what a city manager makes. COO/CFO are “on the hook” for the numbers and have to make adjustments in their areas to meet those numbers but a huge part of revenue generations is in sales.
On a side note, I completely agree and applaud your edit of the prior post. It appeared on the screen before your edit and I read it. While I do not know the man, I do know he is not deserving of such comments appearing on a blog. If the assumptions people seem to be making here turn out to be true I would tell that poster to go to the man and make those comments face to face.
I see. So in your world it’s ok to post an individual’s name by someone in another comment, to be floated around for a very public position. Then it’s even more ok for YOU to link that individuals LinkedIn resume to your editor’s note for people to review. But it’s not ok for someone to question the weakness of that resume for the very position for which you previously allowed his name to bantered about?
It would appear you have “Learned to play ball”.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Just because the position may be “very public” doesn’t mean that the individual whose name was mentioned is a public figure, especially since there is no evidence that he was floating his own name in order to solicit public support for the position – which isn’t currently even available.
There was no specific questioning about “the weakness of that resume” – just several ad hominem comments.
If you don’t like the way we “play ball,” go start your own blog – given the shallowness of your comments, we doubt you’ll be missed by anybody other than your few fellow Frimark insurgents.
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>