Briggs chafes at council disrespect

Published 1:00 pm Wednesday, November 15, 2006

The city administrator blasts councilors for ignoring staff, pursuing their own agenda.

The City Council’s lack of respect for staff, mercurial approach to finances and failure to learn from past mistakes is contributing to a breakdown in city government.

This, and more, came from a speech by City Administrator Mary Jo Briggs, who blasted the council for a range of issues she says are harming staff morale and putting 2007 budget deliberations in jeopardy.

“I have never seen such a wholesale lack of respect and trust for professional staff,” she told the council during day-long budget deliberations at City Hall on Monday. “When you as council leaders demonstrate this lack of respect for city staff in these chambers, it sends a message to the community that this behavior is OK. It is not.”

Briggs, in her prepared comments, expressed frustration with the council’s tendency to brush aside projects developed with hundreds of hours of staff time – often, over months and many weekends – either because the council changed its mind or was swayed by a single citizen who may not represent the best interests of the island as a whole.

Briggs asked the council for better communication and a greater collaboration. She took issue with the council’s lack of “significant consideration” of the administration’s preliminary budget proposal, and the subsequent retooling of core spending.

“What council initially did was throw out $2.4 million of all decision packages and capital requests, without asking or hearing the justification and rationale that staff had for proposing them,” she said.

The council then, Briggs said, “inexplicably” added $2.4 million in additional non-motorized transportation projects and open space money without adding the staff support to accomplish the new council goals.

While the council has expressed the need to fix the city’s problems retaining and hiring staff, the administration’s request for assistance in the human resources department was delayed by the council.

“What message does this send to our employees?” Briggs asked.

In her 30 years of public service, the administrator said, she has never seen such “limited discussion” between elected officials and administrators about budget proposals.

“This defies logic,” she said.

Briggs said the council “must change” to avoid the “miserable and unproductive experience” of last year’s budget deliberations.

She outlined three changes: The council, she said, must “make decisions and stick to them;” it must “trust and respect” staff”; and “listen (to) and respect their advice.”

Council reaction to Briggs’ speech was mixed. Some members said Briggs touched a nerve that needed prodding. Others said the city administrator was out of line.

“It wasn’t a very productive way of engaging the council,” said Councilman Bob Scales. “I would have preferred a more constructive dialogue than accusations and finger pointing.”

Councilwoman Debbie Vancil called Briggs’ comments “disappointing.”

“The administration presented the (council) with a balanced budget, but not a sustainable budget,” she said. Vancil added that the administration has failed to incorporate many “alternative approaches” put forth by council on how to retain staff and implement long-range fiscal management strategies.

Conflicting views between the council and administration “isn’t a sign of a lack of respect or ability to partner,” Vancil stressed.

Councilman Kjell Stoknes, on the other hand, took Briggs’ words to heart.

“What she said was well-founded,” Stoknes said. “We, as a council, are falling into the trap of not providing money for staff to do what they need and what we’re asking them to do. We need to be cognizant of that.”

Word of Briggs’ speech spread quickly among citizens who regularly participate in city-led efforts.

Bob Campbell, who has participated in numerous citizen committees over the last 15 years, said Briggs’ rebuke was long overdue.

“A despicable situation has developed at City Hall,” he said Monday, calling out councilors Scales, Vancil, Nezam Tooloee and Jim Llewellyn for “voting as a bloc” to “micromanage city affairs and not let the mayor and administrator run the city.”

While the four councilors have, in recent meetings, joined together in agreement on significant budget changes, Scales denied Campbell’s accusations.

“I have always been an opponent of the City Council trying to micromanage staff,” he said. “That’s not our role.”

But it is the council’s role to vote its conscience, regardless of the possible perception that such actions could appear collusive, Scales said.

“Saying we vote as a bloc…that’s our job. That’s how the system works,” he said, adding that the council voting record, taken as a whole, would show no consistent teaming pattern. “Even if it did, I’m still voting for what I think is right.”

The council will hold a public hearing on the proposed 2007 budget Monday at 5 p.m.