There’s a special meeting of the Park Ridge City Council tonight at City Hall/505 Butler Place. Only one topic appears on the agenda: the appointment of an Acting City Manager to replace the soon-departing ACM Juliana Maller (leaving for the Hanover Park Village Manager job, at a $20,000+ pay boost) who has been filling in for recently-sacked City Manager Jim Hock.
Thanks to the December 2010 fiscal boneheadedness of current Alds. Joe Sweeney (1st) and Rich DiPietro (2nd) – along with former alds. Jim Allegretti, Tom Carey and Frank Wsol – the City (a/k/a, we taxpayers) is still paying Hock a severance of approximately $130,000 not to work for us. By having Maller fill in for Hock while keeping her Deputy City Mgr. position vacant, however, the City has been able to somewhat ameliorate the adverse effects of that foolish severance benefit.
But with Maller’s decision to leave, the City now has to scramble to bring in a new ACM. And under the City Code, it’s up to Mayor Dave Schmidt to appoint one, with the approval of the City Council.
We hear Schmidt is leaning toward someone with substantial private and public sector experience. That sounds like the “right stuff” to us, as we have long been critical of traditional bureaucratic “leadership” that seems so immersed in the mediocre “good enough for government work” mindset that tends to strangle in its crib anything other than the same old same old.
Consequently, innovation of the kind embodied in private sector strategies and methodologies is unlikely to spontaneously generate among the folks currently in charge of the day-to-day administration of City services, all of whom appear to be good people who seem to have become too comfortable and complacent with the way things have always been done. Only the current Finance Director has demonstrated innovation in her approach to the City’s financial management – and her non-conformist methods have won her few friends at City Hall outside of the mayor and most of the aldermen.
As the City continues to confront the challenges provided by a grossly-underperforming Uptown TIF, tens of millions of dollars of TIF-related debt, neglected infrastructure, spiraling employee compensation and benefits, increasing water costs, flooding, and the prospect of a major RE tax increase in November, more “business-as-usual” just doesn’t cut it. While Schmidt’s fiscally-responsible leadership has finally started to gain some meaningful traction – as evidenced by numerous vetoes that have helped turn operating deficits into surpluses, and the City’s succesful refusal to succumb to the revenue-sharing demands of Whole Foods – the City remains desperately in need of much more than the lackluster City Manager performance it has endured under the last two City Managers: Hock and Tim Schuenke.
Although the new ACM appointment is intended to be merely an interim one, we see no reason why Schmidt and the Council shouldn’t treat it as an “audition” for the permanent position. We also see no reason, however, that they shouldn’t begin the interview process for other applicants for the permanent position – with the express understanding by both the Council and those applicants (including the interim ACM) that the interim ACM’s “audition” is not the same as a commitment for the permanent position.
And with the April 2013 election presenting the possibility of a new mayor and three new aldermen, we think it would be wise of this Council to seriously consider offering the new ACM a term that runs through April 2013; and to defer any final decision on a new permanent City Manager until after that election when the new Council is seated.
Because the last thing the City needs is to hire a new City Manager who promptly finds himself/herself under the authority of a new mayor and three new aldermen who had no hand in and, therefore, no “ownership” of, his/her appointment.
To read or post comments, click on title.
7 comments so far
…”seriously consider offering the new ACM a term that runs through April 2013; and to defer any final decision on a new permanent City Manager until after that election when the new Council is seated.”
Agree with you 100%. That makes a lot of sense. However, I personally hope Dave Schmidt will still be mayor. He’s been great for our city so far.
Nice try dog….the process followed here is serverely flawed and there is no way the appointment should be approved much less even considered at this point in time. If it was Frimark or any other mayor attempting to do something like this without any kind of comprehensive, formal, transparent process he’d be taking a shalacking.
EDITOR’S NOTE: The only substanctive criticism you offer is the conclusory “the process followed here is severely flawed” – but without identifying in what way(s).
As we understand the process, everything that Schmidt has done so far is in conformity with the City Code. We also understand that each alderman has already been provided a resume and other information about the candidate, including contact information with the encouragement that they contact him/her with questions about his/her qualifications, etc.
If you want to be taken seriously, identify those allegedly severe flaws in the process AND provide your idea of a “comprehensive, formal, transparent process” for the hiring of an interim ACM – so that the Council can consider its merits not only in the context of the current hiring effort but also as the basis for amending the relevant City Code provisions for future ACM hirings.
You have suggested that the Finance Director is facing a hostile bureaucratic workplace. Is this, indeed, the case? How does the hostility manifest itself? What are the results of such hostility? And what, in the light of the Director’s apparent competence, can be done to put a stop to this problem?
That aside… I agree with your premises regarding the appointment of a city manager.
EDITOR’S NOTE: We did not use the term “hostile” because it has various legal implications and consequences that do not necessarily describe the situation at City Hall. The situation, as we understand it, is more in the nature of strong resistance to change and whatever inter-personal dynamics such resistance might engender.
I am pleased to see another member of the Schuenke then Hock team leave town. But if resistance to change is the order of the day, then more change in management is needed.
For example, in my mind the salary compression issue is only an issue because the management people who see it can’t pry salary increases out of the City Council in what I will call step 2 of the compensation program that rewards management with the same or more than they pressure the Council to give the unions.
I believe that at least one Dept Manager firing is still needed to get the real attention of all those loyal, long term salaried employees who have a good deal, know it and resist change to keep and expand what they have.
I also do not see that there would be any healthy experience lost by getting rid of virtually anyone on the salaried roster except Finance Director
I think your idea of ending up with a city manager who has the support of all the elected officials is a good one. I just hope that the amount of time you suggest is needed to accomplish this does not kill the healthy momentum that the Mayor and the Council have in taking back our community for the tax payers
I also hope that Mayor Schmidt runs and is elected to a second term as Mayor.
EDITOR’S NOTE: You’ve touched on a real “hot button” issue: the lack of any incentive for City management – i.e., the City Manager, the department heads, or the Police and Fire Chiefs – to control the costs, including personnel costs. The first step in doing that, in our opinion, is to make all union negotiations open to the public (both live and broadcast, as well as taped) so that the taxpayers can see and hear the demands made by the unions and the responses of their City officials. Until that happens, the City’s “negotiators” will continue to sell out the taxpayers in order to avoid binding arbitration and/or strikes; and because it is the path of least resistance generally.
Anyone hear what happened? I went to the meeting, but they were in closed session and I had to leave before they came out.
EDITOR’S NOTE: See newest (08.01.12) post.
Any updates on what happened at the meeting?
EDITOR’S NOTE: See newest (08.01.12) post.
I just read in the H-A online that they hired someone, Shawn Hamilton, 37, of Coal City. Here’s a quote from the article:
“Knowing some individuals in Park Ridge and reading some of the things I read, I thought my skill-set could be a win-win for the citizens of Park Ridge and for Shawn Hamilton,” Hamilton said.
I’d like to be cautiously optimistic but I’m afraid that anyone who refers to himself in the third person like that makes me irrationally suspicious.
EDITOR’S NOTE: See newest (08.01.12) post. Anytime we hear somebody constantly referring to himself in the third person, we are reminded of the Saturday Night Live skits about presidential candidate Bob Dole.
But in Hamilton’s defense, he does use the first-person pronoun “my” in the same sentence – so he may be treatable.
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>