COMMENTARY: One Million Dollars Shortfall Shibboleth

• In a slow economic recovery post-recession, the last action local government should advocate is taking money from the productive, wealth-creating private sector and appropriating it to government. With the number of “for lease” empty business spaces in the commercial district, our city government does not provide an incentive to business owners to open a business in Carmel with talk of government increasing taxes and fees on businesses and individuals. Let the economic recovery continue prior to considering any and all increase in tax rates and fees. Note: Even in the current slow economic recovery, the State of California had a recent “mini-boom” in tax revenue in the amount of $11.8 billion in two months, according to the WSJ.

• A consultant’s study of the Police Department should be conducted to determine if the City requires one third of its city employees in the Police Department for the Police Department to fulfill its mission and determine options for cost-saving police services, similar to the study of the Fire Department. Conventional wisdom is that the City cannot afford a stand-alone Fire Department, yet the City has a stand-alone Police Department which costs much more to operate than the Fire Department. In addition, the Public Safety Director position was originally created to avoid the hiring of an independent fire chief which was only later understood to be a violation of the law, not because there was a desire to integrate public safety functions.
Note: Just because the City had one hundred city employees at one time does not mean the city requires one hundred city employees now or at a future date to meet the needs of the city. The policy of eliminating city employees, particularly senior management city employees, was not to decrease costs primarily, rather it was the mayor’s (and council’s) policy decision to centralize power in the city administrator and mayor.

• Carmel-by-the-Sea taxpayers should ask themselves how it is that our city has one of the highest per capita spending levels of any city in the State of California, yet basis public asset stewardship responsibilities have not been accomplished and there are no future plans to address those stewardship responsibilities.

• In the context of the city council voting unanimously to authorize CSAC-EIA to pay $867,876.72 to settle claims of harassment, discrimination and retaliation by a former city employee, not accepting responsibility for City Hall’s decade-long “hostile workplace environment,” not hiring a Human Resources Manager to implement the City Harassment Prevention Policy, wasting thousands of taxpayer dollars on an “over lawyered” and not adopted revised Harassment Prevention Policy, the mayor and interim city administrator not answering basis questions from citizens on city council agenda items, street maintenance issues, regional water project issues, et cetera, city council members deserve a vote of no confidence at this time.

• Once a permanent city administrator is hired, the city council could work towards gaining a vote of confidence in their actions if council members publicly recognize the failure of past city councils’ policy of centralizing power in the city administrator and mayor and provide policy direction to the new city administrator to proceed with searches for a Community Planning & Building Director, Public Works Director, Human Resources Manager and Community & Cultural Director. With knowledgeable, experienced Directors/Managers, citizens would have confidence in the decisions of the city council with regard to the operation of our city government.