Second in a series
Re “A Strong Opinion About the City Manager’s Performance”
How close is Culver City to naming an interim City Manager to succeed Mark Scott, who begins his 10th, and likely final, month in the position on Monday?
In a closed-door assembly preceding Monday night’s 7 o’clock meeting, City Councilmen will receive a first-week update from the Human Resources Dept., which has been charged with identifying potential fill-ins.
Meanwhile, School Board President Steve Gourley, a former Councilman and one of the most outspoken Culver City politicians in recent times, continues his critique of City Hall’s response to a $6 million to $8 million budget deficit.
“I am fairly certain,” Mr. Gourley said, “that the city went to the (six municipal) unions and asked them to take cuts in pay. They were unable to persuade the unions to do that. And so the best they could do was this retirement bonus that Mark Scott presented to the City Council for approval.
“With the city having passed this, which is the easiest way out, they now have to face the more difficult decisions of whom they are going to cut.
“It is difficult, for reasons ranging from personalities to what job you want done.”
Question: To the contrary, Mr. Scott argues that by doing it his way, the city’s fiscal goals are being achieved more quickly. By subtracting upper level employees and their salaries, you are saving more money faster, without touching service delivery workers.
“Such a formula would make sense to me, had this process started six months ago. Now it is absolutely necessary because they have delayed for so long. I am not just saying this City Council, but the Council before that and the Council before that.
“They have been putting off these decisions. Right now, they should be in a position — I do not know the last time they negotiated union contracts — where they can renegotiate union contracts, and/or deal with their own administration, who may not be covered by union contracts, to be working for less money.
“I want to point out that I was in total agreement with Dr. Dana Russell (who recently retired from the School Board) when he said — I may be paraphrasing — ‘I don’t understand the difference between public and private employment. I made less money this year than the year before. Why is it wrong that the public employees make less than the year before? They still have job security. They still have adequate pension benefits. What is the problem?’
“That certainly is the question.”
Question: Do you advocate across the board cuts?
“That is too easy of a solution, telling someone who has two employees to take a 10 percent cut vs. asking someone who has 200 employees to take a 10 percent cut — now that might be doable. Certain areas make the city money. Why would you cut somebody who brings money in just for the sake of making it even across the city?”
Question: If you were City Manager, would you junk Mr. Scott’s retirement plan?
“No. I think that may be the only decision they have at the moment. But for the immediate future, they will have to cut more.”
(To be continued)
