Sunday, March 29, 2015

15% Off the Top - Another Name for Decapitation

Earlier today, I listened to a really fascinating, revealing and depressing piece on NPR. It was a profile of a woman who used to work at the Federal Reserve, and it told of her trials and tribulations when the Fed was actively "regulating" Goldman Sachs a few years back.
 
Long story short...This woman was highly educated, highly professional, and highly ethical. So, needless to say, she had, as the Jerky Boys once said, problems with her fucking boss. In other words, even though she had been hired specifically to help oversee internal ethics and policies, she was chastised, punished, and ultimately fired for doing exactly that. Turns out the Fed didn't really want to regulate anyone; they just wanted to, yes, go along to get along. Though they were the ones with the authority and the duty to protect people from predatory financial institutions, the heads of the Fed didn't want to make waves, and this woman was a wave-making machine.
 
Now, these regulators weren't necessarily on the take, or even corrupt, in the purest sense of the word. No, they were just cowardly, and quickly adjusted to the institutional ethics of, essentially, doing nothing.
 
Sound familiar?
 
It got me to thinking...Let's imagine that a given institution, be it private, public or regulatory, that 5% of the people working there are actively corrupt. These are people willing to lie, cheat and steal to benefit themselves. Then let's imagine that 10% of the people there are, for whatever reason (nepotism, cronyism, poor hiring practices) are simply inept, unable to actually do their jobs. Now, let's spread this bad 15% evenly throughout the organization.
That leaves 85% as still fairly functional and honest, right? There's poison in the system, yes, but it should still function, right?
 
Well, maybe. Imagine that 15% of your diet was poison. You wouldn't last long, would you? How far would your car get on fuel that was 15% soda? Would you be satisfied if the person handling your finances said up front that they were going to steal 15% of whatever you gave them to invest?
 
Does anyone really dispute the idea that probably 15% of Port Angeles City staff members are corrupt and/or incompetent? That's staff, not City Council members. (They undoubtedly have a much higher percentage of incompetence, if not corruption.) As has been pointed out here in a recent comment (reprinted below), it could be logically argued that much of the anger and angst directed at those holding elected office is, in fact, misdirected. Put another way: It's the staff, stupid.
 
Staff hires. Staff proposes. Staff sets budgets. Staff "manages" the flow of information. Staff stonewalls. And, let's face it, bad staff prosper when there is lax oversight - and it's at that point that the electeds come into play, in theory. But the power and influence held by City Managers and County Administrators and Human Resources Directors is huge. So when those people are part of the hypothetical rotten 15%, what are we to do? When the issue is raised to elected officials who respond by shrugging their shoulders, or invoking a line separating them from direct management of staff, what are we to do?
 
Here's what one of you had to say recently:
 
Follow the money? Yes. But, most of the time, it isn't the city council members making the money. They are only part timers, putting in a few hours a month, rubber stamping what staff puts in front of them.

That isn't to say a few council people haven't found "creative" ways to use the position for their personal gain.

Think about it, though. We are directed to focus on the people who really have so little to do with the policies and decisions that have such dramatic impact on our lives. Actions and policies that cause us to sell our houses, move to new communities, find new jobs, move our children to new schools, and more.

We are directed to focus on the part timers who we pay only a few hundred bucks a month, instead of focusing on the full timers who write the staff reports, who find and "recommend" the consultants, and who define the way issues are to be considered.
 
So again, the question comes up: How can members of the public address the problems caused by rotten staff members? Can we hold those who seem to be unaccountable accountable? How? How do we police those we can't fire or recall directly? And how long can any community afford to keeping paying a 15% (or higher) surcharge for the "service" of dysfunction?
 


31 comments:

  1. Take your 15% idea and apply it to the City budget, CK. It's around, what, $120 million or something like that? I'm sure there are plenty of people in City Hall who would do all sorts of bad things for even 1% of that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You ask: " So again, the question comes up: How can members of the public address the problems caused by rotten staff members? Can we hold those who seem to be unaccountable accountable? How? How do we police those we can't fire or recall directly?"

    I don't think it has to be that hard. BUT, people have to care enough to make an effort. The way it has been, staff knows it can get away with pretty much anything it wants, and virtually no one will do anything about it.

    Even Le Whetham got a taste of staff's arrogance at the last meeting, when he asked the police chief how many smart phones were issued to officers. Fair question, given all the electronic gadgetry a modern patrol car is outfitted with these days. His queries were obviously not welcomed.

    A couple things can be done. One is to elect council members who are committed to a platform of reviewing the contracts and job descriptions of city staff, and to tightening up on staffs' work performance accordingly.

    And, almost more importantly, form a citizens' oversight committee to review projects, consultant reports, and staff reports. Within our community, I'm quite sure we have professionals in every field who could donate a few hours a month to review sections of reports they have expertise in. Then, as is needed, this group meets to compare, discuss and compile reports that are given to these new council members, so that they are informed independently, and can ask intelligent questions.

    As has been pointed out, and said before, it is not good enough to show up every couple years at election time, check a couple boxes, and think our interests are going to be adequately represented. Look what that has done for us?!

    We're headed into a local election cycle right now. Now is a great time to work on these things. Find decent people to run for offices, and SUPPORT THEM after they are elected. Candidates don't need to be anything other than decent, honest people willing to listen, and be part of a bigger, group effort to change things.

    Once there are enough of these people on council, they can fired Bloor, control the consultant gravy train, question these crazy projects, and demand more accountability from city employees. Maybe a weekly review from each city department on what was done, and what is planned for the following week? Or, simply writing on time sheets what each employee is doing for that day, and having those publicly available on the 'net?

    Mostly, though, people need to actively and constructively participate.

    The poison you describe permeates when there is no accountability, and only an open, publicly accessible government that has active public oversight is remotely accountable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes but...Council members don't hire and fire, so they can't just go in and fire Bloor. At one time, there was a clear majority of Council members who wanted to get rid of Glenn Cutler, but he got to retire in peace and glory instead. The City Council hires the City Manager. The City Manager is in charge of everyone else. That one-step remove seems impossible for Council members to bridge, if they even have the courage or wisdom to want to.

      Delete
    2. Who are these staff people? Can we name some names?

      Delete
    3. There's the answer, get a new city manager who did not "grow up" within the corrupt system. Dan McKeen, formerly the fire chief for port angeles, came in with such promise and then promptly kept the gravy train running. When the chief of police rudely responded to Lee Whetham's question McKeen should have sent him home without a day's pay for insubordination. When citizens report to Dan that they have been lied to by city personnel there should be repercussions but there are none. They have circled the wagons and anyone who attempts to breach the inner sanctum is met with lies and obfuscation to a point they go away muttering to themselves. What they should do is go to the auditor's office and pick up a packet to run for city council. Then also pick up a dozen voter registration forms and make sure all your neighbors are registered voters. Then, and this is the critical part, get your ballot in and be sure your neighbors get their ballots in. Now is the time to take back the city.

      Delete
    4. If the majority of the council directs the city manager to fire Bloor, the City Manager cannot refuse them.

      If the city council directs the city manager to review the contracts of salaried employees, the city manger cannot refuse to do that.

      The problem has been that we have had a string of either cronies who work to keep things the way they have been, or gutless "go alongs" who sat and did nothing.

      As you might remember, contracts with the unionized employees were recently renegotiated.

      It CAN happen. Not trying makes sure nothing changes.

      Delete
    5. I'm not sure if it's entirely legal for the City Council to just directly state they want a staff member fired. Hopefully someone more versed in that can comment here. But from what I've heard, that's a sticky wicket to navigate. Again, look at how Cutler was never fired, even when it was clear a majority of the Council wanted it. Now, that could be down to Dan McKeen's lack of spine, but it could also be something more.

      Delete
    6. The city lies to everyone -- council and citizen of Port Angeles, alike.

      Delete
    7. "get a new city manager who did not "grow up" within the corrupt system"

      I disagree. In the past PA has gone to great expense to "attract talent" from outside--and these outsiders have quickly become entrenched in the same corruption as the locals. I'd actually say McKeen is one of the least offensive city managers I've seen in a decade.

      I don't think McKeen is corrupt unlike, say, Madsen. What I really think we need is an extremely strong-willed asshole of a boy scout. Someone to clear out city hall, who makes enemies, who isn't planning on sticking around long because he or she will be dragged through the mud and kicked out soon as can be. Assholes don't make friends, even with the public, but it's what we need right now.

      Delete
    8. "What I really think we need is an extremely strong-willed asshole of a boy scout. Someone to clear out city hall, who makes enemies, who isn't planning on sticking around long because he or she will be dragged through the mud and kicked out soon as can be. Assholes don't make friends, even with the public, but it's what we need right now."

      But enough about Max Mania.

      Delete
  3. If there was going to be anything like a whistleblower, I'd think they would have blown by now. Karen Rogers, Glenn Cutler, Larry Williams, Kent Myers - the big, obvious targets have all left City Hall, but the poisonous culture remains, diffused throughout the system. With jobs so scarce here, people so afraid, and everyone being related to everyone else, it's hard to imagine anyone blowing the whistle now, unless possibly it was done by someone from outside the area who got on the inside, like Max or Sissi.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I can not remotely imagine Sissi being a whistleblower.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sissi lives up to her name -- weak and ineffective fearful wimp

      Delete
    2. She's a typical "go along to get along" type. I sincerely hope she does not run for re-election or, if she does, that someone will run against her.

      Delete
  5. Welcome to Washington Take. Through layers of complexity a systematic means of taking is created. Taking at the city level, taking at the county level and taking at the state level. People who live and breath by taking. Taking from your home, taking from your car, taking from your businesses, taking from gas, taking from booze, taking from you while you're alive and taking from you when you die. Our Legistakers dream and dream how to take from you so they may live and thrive. The takers are smarter than you, control you and deceive you and will endlessly work to take even more. Work hard and sacrifice so you can give even more to the takers.....ha. Take from the rich to give to the poor, take from the rich until there are no more. Washington Take is alive and well.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I don't disagree with your model, CK, but, in terms of Port Angeles and Clallam County, I think you're being overly generous in terms of your percentages.

    Seems to me that we've got more than 5% on the take here, and we certainly have more than 10% of incompetents. Sue Roberds at the city? Totally unqualified, and unprofessional and rude on top of that. Bill Bloor? He couldn't adjudicate his way out of a paper bag. Rich Sill at the county? Zero experience for his post as human resources director, and a proven history of questionable behavior on his part.

    Then there are all those who aren't exactly corrupt, and aren't incompetent, at least not on paper. I'm thinking about people like Phil Lusk and Nathan West, people who have actual education and experience in the real world, but who just go with the rotten flow in their jobs here. They have to know better, but do they ever even so much as utter a peep of protest? They do not.

    So, like I said, I think your model is sound enough, but that we're worse off than what you've presented as a hypothetical. We don't have a localized cancer; it's spread throughout the patient, to a lethal extent. And I for one don't know how we start to address such a huge systemic problem, short of the state or feds coming in and arresting a whole bunch of people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The problem are the empire builders in city hall (and, yes Sue Roberds is one, for certain, Bloor the boob, another) and no one to break up their outrageous power plays.

      Delete
  7. Or, with Public Records Requests. Any member of the public can request documents on, say, how many times Karen Rogers voted on Excelteck contracts while on city council. Or, how much money the contracts that Karen Rogers voted to give to Excelteck were for.

    You don't have to be "on the inside" to effectively expose what the city has done. Right, or wrong.

    So, as you sit at home, think of the things you want to know about, and then write an email to the city clerk asking for any and all documents, emails and other communications that pertain to that topic.

    Anyone can do it!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sure, just try. You get stonewalled, and/or they copy needless stuff, because the fees are outrageous.

      Delete
    2. Hasn't been my experience, at all. They HAVE to provide what you ask for (unless it is "privileged" in some way), or else you can sue them.

      The trick, as with google searches, is to use the right words to get the results you want. Otherwise, like with google searches, you end up with pages of junk.

      Delete
    3. No charge to receive a scanned doc from the City records archives by email, generally within a week. Done it. Helps to have some clear and reasonable idea of what you're looking for.

      Delete
    4. Not so, they can put whatever you want copied on a disc and there is no charge. The city clerk is absolutely professional about Public Records Requests. Don't bother with the school district unless you are ready to file suit they are completely buttoned down--and for good reason. They are completely incompetent and don't want the news to get out. They'd rather stonewall a public records request all the way through the court system than fess up to their incompetence.

      Delete
  8. The pivot point in this equation is the city manager. And Dan McKeen, nice guy that he may be, is totally outgunned and unprepared to cut off the rotten limbs that need to go. To see real, meaningful and lasting change, we need a complete turnover on the city council, AND a new, honest, professional city manager.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ex Navy, just like Cutler.
      We need to quit having ex-lifer military guys -- they think the teat never runs dry.

      Delete
  9. We need professionals at all levels. Professionals with a work ethic commensurate with the salary schedule.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Look at the trouble OMC has in recruiting professionals. Even if the pay is pretty good (especially for a depressed town like this), these professionals take one look at the failing schools, the utter lack of culture, the inept local governments, and keep on going. There are plenty of other nicer small towns that have their act a lot more together than this one.

      And the downward spiral continues.

      Delete
    2. Yes, But, the Lincoln is STILL for sale!

      Delete
    3. OMC has a TERRIBLE reputation. Just ask around, most medical professionals scoff at the "quality of care" and bitch about the incompetent board the OMC has. Most people who deal with multiple hospitals advise people to "avoid at all costs".
      And, if you do have an issue, and write a letter to them, they never, never, NEVER respond. They're quick to put someone into collections, but fail to ever review what it is they've billed. A miserable organization.
      The reason they can't find professionals to work there, is because there are many, many better hospitals to work for. Why waste your time on a sh*t-hole?

      Delete
    4. OMC is the "death panel" Sarah Palin was talking about. If you are on Medicare you get substandard service and if they can slough you off on the tribe or some other clinic all the better. VIMO and the Klallam Tribe Clinic is dumping ground for the OMC. Now, you come in with private insurance and need expensive care then hey, the red carpet is rolled out with concierge service. Of course you know how ethical they are they have Karen Rogers at the head of the OMC Foundation. What could go wrong there?

      Delete
  10. No faster way to kill a conversation than to bring up personal responsibility.

    You mean I have to do something other than point fingers at other people? You mean I have responsibilities to be engaged in the community I live in?

    No interest, there.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete