You must sign in to take advantage of that feature. Enter your user name and password below. No user ID yet? Get one for free.


Forgot your password?

A blog about News.
About noholdsbarred


Member Since:
August 03, 2007
Last Signed In:
November 21, 2009
Profile Views:
3873
Blog Views:
103395
View Profile
Send a Message
Send To A Friend
Sign Guestbook
Add as a Friend

Previous Posts
Statement by CARB board member
Lies and cover ups tarnish California Air Resources Board
Strange encounter ends in arrest
PG&E smartmeters WILL be tested
Suspcious guy at my door last night
Adoption day "magical"
Closing courts wrong approach
Wars never end for veterans
Pet adoption day in Tehachapi Nov. 21
Indian casino OK with me
Archives
August 07
September 07
October 07
November 07
December 07
January 08
February 08
March 08
April 08
May 08
June 08
July 08
August 08
September 08
October 08
November 08
December 08
January 09
February 09
March 09
April 09
May 09
June 09
July 09
August 09
September 09
October 09
November 09
Subscribe!
RSS 2.0 feed RSS 2.0
Add to My Yahoo
Add to My Google
Add to Bloglines
Add to My AOL

Share!


noholdsbarred - > No holds barred -> The buck stops at the council
The buck stops at the council

I’m not sure what kind of management Bakersfield’s City Council thinks we should get for our money, but I, for one, don’t want to pay people to harass, discriminate and retaliate against employees.

That’s apparently what’s been happening at the Fire Department, according to a jury verdict returned in March. Until recently the council has maintained a deafening silence on this issue.

Last Sunday I wrote a column detailing management practices in the Fire Department that are so poor they cost taxpayers $1 million in a lawsuit by former firefighter Robby Pratt. (At least one prior suit found the department’s practices “arbitrary and capricious” and cost us about $100,000.)

The city lost on all 13 questions in the Pratt case. Most important, jurors said, Fire Department managers did harass, retaliate and discriminate against an employee.

It doesn’t get much worse than that.

What, I wondered, did the City Council intend to do?

Not a peep. Nothing.

I had to call around and put the question to each of them directly.

In fairness, they all (at least those who deigned to call me back) had answers.

But remember, this verdict came down six months ago with zero council reaction.

Monetary issues in Pratt were just recently settled, but that should not have kept council members from publicly seeking some kind of assurance that management had changed, training had increased or something had happened to assure taxpayers we wouldn’t have to walk down this path again and again.

“I would think the city fire department, city manager and council would welcome a review of their personnel and management practices,” said former City Councilman and tireless advocate for open government Mark Salvaggio.

“It doesn’t mean (Fire Chief Ron) Fraze loses his job. It should mean we all become wiser from this, not be afraid of discussing it openly.

“What can it hurt?”

Council members Irma Carson, Harold Hanson, David Couch and Sue Benham all agreed they would be asking for some kind of accounting or report at the city’s next meeting (Sept. 9).

Councilmembers Zack Scrivner and Ken Weir didn’t return my repeated phone calls, nor respond to my emails.

Councilwoman Jacquie Sullivan said she hadn’t had a chance to consider fallout from the case and couldn’t comment because “I don’t know the thinking on that.”
Others had given some cogent thought to this issue, which has been going on since 2004.

“The policies we have in place, if they’re being followed, should protect us,” Benham said. “But are we doing business in a responsible way? I would like to have (City Attorney) Ginny (Gennaro) take a look at that.”

Couch told me after last Sunday’s expose, he called Gennaro and asked if there was some way the city attorney could lay out what happened in that lawsuit from the city’s perspective.

“It certainly appears embarrassing,” he said of the verdict.  “We ought to have a case study using this case to say ‘Here’s what went wrong,’ ‘Here’s when’ and ‘Here’s how we’re going to fix it.’

“But I don’t think all of that can be made public because of personnel issues. That’s the frustrating part about what you’re asking.”

Hmmm. I’m not buying it.

That catch-all, government invisibility cloak of “personnel issues,” which has been used to hide a multitude of sins in my opinion, can’t be used this time.

I’d have to be shown the law that says council members can’t examine possible management problems that have already been examined and cross-examined in open court.

Nitpicking aside, I give grudging kudos to those council members who’ve stepped up to the plate on the taxpayers’ behalf, even if belated or half-hearted.

There is one a bright spot to this dingy story.

And that is that Human Resources, which blundered so unbelievably badly on the Pratt case, seems to have turned around and is steaming along under the capable guidance of Javier Lozano, a certified human resource specialist with loads of experience.

Since taking over close to three years ago, Lozano has made sure the city is compliant with state and federal harassment training requirements, launched a supervisor development program, holds twice monthly seminars on diverse topics and has increased outreach to every department in the city.

His philosophy is that HR should be absolutely neutral, take every complaint seriously and make recommendations but not lay down edicts.

His efforts are paying off.

Now, he said, “People are coming to us before they make a mess.”

That’s great, but council members still need to account for the Pratt mess at their feet.

Opinions expressed in this column are those of Lois Henry, not The Bakersfield Californian. Her column appears Wednesdays and Sundays.

Comment at
people.bakersfield.com/home/Blog/noholdsbarred, call her at 395-7373 or e-mail lhenry@bakersfield.com

Posted in these Groups: Neighborhoods/Regions, Politics
Topics: city council
posted by noholdsbarred on Saturday, September 5, 2009 at 03:54 PM
Report a Violation
Viewed 509 times
6 comments from 6 users

1

posted by cityres on Sep 6, 2009 at 07:18 AM

Lois, great job in not letting this story die, for not looking the other way as our council seems to do on so many issues. They give me the impression that the public will forget about this when the next controversy comes up. The big problem all along has been, the council is relying on the cities management team to tell them what happened in this case. The City attorney and Fire Chief have already said that they did nothing wrong. Now the council is gong to go back to the City Attorney and ask for accountability in this case. They City lost on all counts! What do you think their answer is going to be? You guessed it, they did nothing wrong. If the City was interested in doing a real study into this, they would have started it six months ago. Instead they wait until Lois exposed them to the public. The taxpayers deserve to know the truth. The City is obviously not going to take any responsibility on this huge disgrace on their part. An independent organization needs to come in and investigate. This way the council will hear from all sides instead of just getting the one-sided version that City management keeps giving them. City management seems very reluctant to this option as they have proven over the last six months. If their is nothing to hide then what could it hurt. One thing is certain to come out of this, the taxpayer should not be burdened with losing anymore money from legitimate lawsuits.

posted by Carlos42 on Sep 6, 2009 at 09:49 AM

What should we expect in the land of "Mean JUstice"? A change in attitude? Please,"I don't know the thinking on that".


posted by Lingtaowoo on Sep 6, 2009 at 10:24 AM

I think Lois and crew did a fantastic job of blowing the lid off of this ' business as usual ' city council....

Questions have been raised and answers must be first ran by attorney(s)....which means---THEY don't know how to answer them without putting their butts in a legal sling---which by the way-is being furnished by OUR tax dollar---

This will be interesting to see how it plays out----

If it was any other ' business '.....THEY would have been fired and sent down the road kicking rocks.....

Can WE really afford these people to conduct ' business as usual '.... how much money do we really have in the bank to pay for stupidly---heck...THEY don't even know---remember the MILLIONS that miraculously showed up during the budget cuts...

 

posted by RedHeadedFred on Sep 6, 2009 at 01:17 PM

Way to hang with the story Lois...  maybe your followups will result in the Council actually taking some resposnible action ... doubt it though - unfortunately Tandy is bullet proof and there is no one on the City Council who has the backbone to seriosuly question him ..  just watch - there might be some minimal posturing for a night or two,  but in the end business as usual will prevail in Tandyville..


posted by BillJones847 on Sep 6, 2009 at 04:43 PM

Harassment, intimidation, and corruption has been a part of city culture since Alan Tandy took over.  You are only going to see on window dressing on the issue as long as he remains.

posted by swright2 on Sep 8, 2009 at 11:12 AM

So So much the City and County are alike in this type of issue.

1

  (You need to be signed in to leave a comment)

Advertisement