01-30-09, Herbert Molano Responds to the Opinions of Nancy Kent and Sharon Weisman Regarding Glendale Management Compensation

It is not always easy to express an opinion contesting the reasoning of people who’ve contributed to the community in many ways. For many years I’ve admired the steadfast devotion to the causes of Nancy Kent and Sharon Weisman in particular.

For years I’ve reserved most of my criticisms to members of the city council who’ve ran for office under one set of expressed values, only to transform themselves into their real and opposite selves once they got into office. But this time, I feel the need to clarify a misconception of a problem that is causing the residents a great deal of distress. The opinions of Ms. Kent and Ms. Weisman leave out of the discussion of management compensation some very troubling aspects in the agreements executed by the city council with the Glendale Management Association (GMA).

The supporting argument that Glendale managers have consistently given the city council to justify their salaries is their need to seek compatibility with salaries that others in similar positions have obtained from other cities. This, at first glance, would look reasonable to most people. What it leaves out is the discussion is compensation for performance.

A significant portion of the city’s funds go toward the planning and execution of projects. The department of public works, for example, contracts out for road reconstruction, bridges, sewer systems, building reconstruction, etc. Other department employees also get involved in proposing, planning and managing large-scale projects.

What is astonishing is that with almost certain regularity these projects wind up significantly over budget and, often, wind up with some lawsuit with the contractor. Even more troubling is that when the public wants to investigate whether the employees responsible for overseeing those projects have the proper credentials in project management, we are told that such information is confidential and cannot be released.

In the past ten years tens of millions of dollars in project cost overruns and millions more lost in legal battles have denied Glendale residents much needed capital improvements.

But project management is only part of the problem. The city has also lost millions of dollars in sexual harassment lawsuits. Any reasonable person would think that strong policies would be put in place to avert future occurrences. Yet, only a few years after losing a multi-million settlement, the police department was embroiled in another one.

I could run a series of essays on just such dereliction of duty and performance. I’d leave you with the reminder that I’ve yet to find documentation of any management employee reprimanded, demoted or terminated for such atrocious lack of management acumen. They want their high six-figure salary but none of the accountability that should go with it.

So when your utility rate goes up, it’s often due to the city seeking to build up the shortage to the general fund. That the current city council agreed to have the GMA be the negotiating entity for management pay and benefits is a testament that these councilmen were unqualified to hold such leadership positions when they ran for office.

What I also did not fully comprehend is their lack of fortitude to defend the Glendale taxpayer and those utility rate payers who are today bearing the brunt of those mistakes with their higher electric and water utility bills.

Herbert Molano

818-974-6374