'At will' employees, such as the CM, are on probation 24/7/365...yes, some of them have contracts but that doesn't mean that they can't be dismissed at any time...such as when the new CM for Fillmore was dismissed from her last job...there is little reason to enter into a contract with a new CM, except maybe for one year or six months, to see how it works out... unless you are hiring a true 'hot shot'...

Naw, haven't seen the contract and no doubt never will...the Council is not necessarily an 'at will' employee in the general sense of the term, however, I get what you are sayin'...Their contract comes up for renewal every four years...and of course there is a mechanism to terminate that contract, which, as you know, I am not in favor of...at this time...

The challenge for an at will employee is when the Council makeup changes, and whether that person can or will continue to please the majority of its members...as we have seen in the last almost a year now...

I wouldn't honestly expect at this particular juncture in time for Fillmore to have attracted a true hot shot, like Rick Cole was at the time he was hired... Whether or not you believe in the Rick Cole Spiel, he was a guy that cities really wanted to hire, so Ventura made some pretty good sweetheart deals with him to get him over...

In 2009 Fillmore, tho, we have a season where the really good CMs are pretty much stayin' where they are at, and if they are out there lookin', they feel the pitty pat of little feet tryin' to kick 'em out the door. And most of the really good CM's are in good positions right now...for a CM to want to come over to a contentious situation like Fillmore might, and I say MIGHT, mean that they are looking for a new beginning...and ya know, that's okay...It's NOT the kiss of death for a CM to be fired or to resign in lieu of termination...what ya gotta do is look at the reasons why that happened...

There's a CM who was fired from a city here in Ventura County a few years ago, and wound up in another city in another county and has done quite well, and really has fallen into an ideal niche... The same issues that got him fired are still in his game plan, but he's able to keep that Council happy, so there ya go...and hopefully, he'll stay there many years, he's a good guy...

It may be surprising to some to know that the average tenure of a City Manager is about 4 years per town. That's the nature of the business. Fillmore was extremely fortunate to be able to have Roy for such a long time. That really is remarkable. When you can consentrate on your job you can actually get things done. Having a stable staff is also a key to progress. I believe Yvonne Quiring can bring that stability to the city and I look forward to working with her.

Steve

Yes, Steve, this is a prospect for hope. Right now this is all there is. Just wished to heck Roy could be used as a consultant to Yvonne for the time-being in particulars of her new position, but this is an impossibility (maybe).

Sure hope she is not easily influenced and realizes the face of being pressure-cooked before she comes on-board by the proponents of the council and what this socially and professionally relates to. Good luck, Steve. Continue to keep an open mind and be optimistic. Maybe you can teach her to skateboard, that is, if she already does not know how and can teach you a thing or two!!

Well, guys, having laid on some of the negative issues, I'm optimistic that Ms. Quiring is gonna work out just fine...again, I say that the unanimous vote is a strong indication in her favor...I have heard of CMs who have actually turned down the job if the vote wasn't unanimous... So while I wished I was more neutral about the Council, I'm gonna start out being that way about the new CM...

CPR, I read what you have written, and it makes sense to me, as does Steve's words...I know that there isn't a whole lot he can say about the subject at this moment, but here's to the hope that staff can return to what it was before...stable and knowledgeable...and motivated...

Whatever--some really good points you made, kinda goes back to the rules we learned in Kindergarten, eh? I do have to say, your name 'Whatever' reminds me of the 80's--it was the response I got from my teenage daughter, each and every time we conversed...LOL

Ha, ha; FillmoreNative - I still say that term every now and then, myself! BUT, it has to said this way - not fast...but in a modulated, slow, emphasis on every syllable, and monotone manner. I know you can say it this way, if your daughter said it before and how you remember it to be. It is actually part of my dialogue!

Whaaateeeveeerrrr!

oh, you forgot the eye roll....the eye's have to roll towards the ceiling, whilst pronouncing Whaaateeeveeerr!
but it's ok, I've got the perfect revenge...a teenage granddaughter...

Speaking of eye-roll---I've got one for "The Eye"

Tee-hee; don't we all? Whatever!

Wow !! The new city manager is going to be paid $156,000 per year. This is $23,000 more per year than the previous Fillmore Manager. I guess Gary Creagle was right when he said that we should compare ourselves to the Fresno area rather than the Ventura County area, because Ms. Quiring made $164,000 in the large town of Lathrop, CA (population 17,000). Creagle in his usual uninformed way was trying to argue that Fillmore salaries should be lowered, not raised! But Creagle has been wrong before.

Mayor Walker's justification for paying the $156,000 is because that is the average salary of City Manager's in Ventura County. I would like to see her salary survey and wonder what cities in Ventura County she used to come up with that average. For over 20 years Fillmore used the average salary for Santa Paula and Ojai to determine the salary levels for Fillmore employees. I wonder if Walker and her crew will be willing to use this new average to determine the pay for all Fillmore employees, or is it just to pay for a new city manager and let the rest of the employees eat cake?

At a City Council meeting on June 3, 2008 Jamey Brooks said “he has come to create division and not to create peace”. He further stated “The citizens think salaries of management are way too high”. He stated “The total cost of the manager is more than $200,000 per year” (salary $132,000, benefits $71,000). He went on to say “We are a small town. Mid-management staff cost more than $1 million in total costs. This is too much to pay for poor management, and that is what we are getting”.

I'm on vacation and don't have access to the council package. Yes, $156,000 is more than has been paid to previous City Managers in Fillmore. Fillmore has under paid for quality city managers for 20 years.

The alternatives aren't good. I believe Ms. Quiring is qualified and competent to do the job right. On the other hand if the selection is "nixed" due to a few thousand dollars what or rather who will be selected. I can tell you, from my perspective, that new leadership at city hall is greatly needed. If we say "Open accessible government" is a goal I'd like to see the City Manager respond to all council members. I'd like the "unwritten rule" of not emailing council members kicked to the curb.
The cost to continue in our current mod with the current people is just too great a price to pay. We want ethics, we want people to do what they say and say what they do. Enough is enough, it's time for quality leadership.
That said I'm on vacation and we'll just have to see what council does.

Steve Conaway

Steve

What do you mean unwritten rule of not emailing council members kicked to the curb? You lost me.

JB

Junebug, looks like Steve took CPR's advice~

In a previous campaign speech offered up in the famous Cesarean Obama Oratory style, he quipped about the following statement concerning Washington, DC politics:

"What Washington needs is adult supervision."

Maybe Fillmore can use some too.

Having said that, the tough jobs for those like Steve Conaway, and the remaining professionals in City Hall that privately and publicly hold high principals to Fillmore residents at large and the business community, probably wish something like what Obama said comes true for Fillmore, the sooner the better!

'FillmoreNative', I feel that Steve has his own achievement goals and professional routes he will undertake, without my input or suggestions. But thanks for the reference.

I'm sure Steve needed this vacation! Rest up and be back soon Steve.

...IF he comes back, 'FillmoreNative'...IF he comes back!

I'm back in the Fillmore Operations Center.

last seen on interstate 5, Oregon border, headin north...can you blame him?

'FillmoreNative'...that wasn't Steve! That was Creagle!

Wishful thinkin'...

Pancone, I just FULL of wishes today. But as an old saying goes..."IF WISHES WERE HORSES, BEGGAR'S WOULD RIDE."

It's late, or early, depending on your bio-clock. Just want to let you know that through a split vote the City Council has hired a qualified City Manager. Ms. Quiring will begin on 10/1/09.

LOL you guys---glad you are back Steve...

Excellent news, Steve...

hey, what are you doing up so early?? I've got barking dogs next door, what's got you up so early?

You don't wanna know...the story of my life anymore!!! LOL Hey, there was a story about barking dogs in Simi last week in the Star...access their web site and get the story, there's a vehicle here whereby you can intiate a hearing process...however, it takes multiple neighbors to complain...

HEY, do 6 dogs and 3 puppies qualify as a NUISANCE???? I'll give that site a look-see!

Steve - and other's - though the "split vote" decision was made, does this mean that the voting was "hung?" To me, a "split vote" is a vote process whereby those on the voting panel, (or voting community) had equal 'yes' and 'no' votes. This means no decision was reached. Explain this, please.

If the new city manager, Yvonne Quiring is officially hired, I have to tall you that I personally hold reservations if this is the right choice or fit for the job. However time will certainly tell.

In any case, welcome, Ms. Quiring to the City of Fillmore.

CPR, the split vote was 3-2 with Walker, Conaway, Hernandez voting in favor and Brooks, Washburn voting in opposition. The only reason Brooks and Washburn voted no was to make it appear that they were being consistent with their past pronouncements that a City Manager should not be paid $156,000 per year. This was just political cover for them. The City Council went into closed session before the vote so they could all get their stories straight and make sure they had the 3 votes necessary to hire the City Manager. Just another example of the hypocrisy of the City Council and especially of Brooks and Washburn. It would have been interesting to see which one of those two would have had to cave and vote for the salary increase if Steve had not got back from his vacation to vote.

By the way, now the City Council claims that the cities that should be used to compare city salaries with are Moorpark, Ojai, Santa Paula, Port Hueneme and Carpinteria. To my knowledge, Fillmore has never used these cities in the past, especially not Moorpark. But now that these are the comparable cities I hope that all of the employees in Fillmore get a salary raise based upon using these five cities as comparables. I am certainly not against paying the City Manager $156,000. I just think it is hypocritical of Brooks and Washburn to take the stance they took when they said that paying fore than $120,000 was too much and then to turn around and hire someone at $156,000.

The City Council's agrument that they got the most qualified candidate for that price is questionable. When they recruited for the position they said the salary was going to be $132,000 so their probably were a lot of qualified candidates who did not even bother to apply. I am sure their would have been a lot more qualified candidates if the City had recruited at a starting salary of $156,000 and the Council might then have had more qualified candidates to choose from. I stated in a Letter to the Editor back on March 17, 2009 that "the new Fillmore Council members do not have any understanding of what municipal staffing is about…and they don’t realize that when they go out to the job market for replacements, that they will have to offer a competitive compensation package. Otherwise, the only employees they will be able to attract are those with little or no experience or those whom no other government entity wanted".

The Council last night also had to acknowledge that the $95,000 salary that they have offered for a new Finance Director is to low and they are going to have to raise the offer in order to attract qualified candidates. Jamey Brooks what has happened to your salary cutting sword? Washburn showed her ignorance of the budget last night when she asked the question about why the salaries (in the budget that she and the other just adopted) were so high! She stated she is confused and did not know how that happened! This is the budget that she and others gave such high marks to for being open and transparent and yet she did not even know that she approved a budget that included 6% to 20% raises to management and mid-management employees.

As Rush Limbaugh would say, I am not making this stuff up folks, these guys don't know what they are doing.

Crea8PalmRoyal,
5 votes total on the council. Minimum quorum of 3 at all times. Majority rules. Without going into a few exceptions that is the rule of the vote. My comment about a split vote was intended to inform others that 3 council members voted to hire Ms. Quiring, 2 were not supportive. It's only fair to report that it's my opinion that Brooks and Washburn's objection had to do with salary and not capability or support of Ms. Quiring. Perhaps they'll take some time to explain their vote and comments themselves.
And I agree that the benchmark cities needs to be consistent across the board.

Let me just say that an employment contract protects both parties. Pervious posts and alternative thoughts on the issue have been voiced and I heard them. I don't think the city would be able to hire a city manager worth their weight without a contract, regardless of salary. I came to my decision after considering all the alternatives and possible consequences and believe it best that Fillmore moves forward in this manner.

Steve Conaway

The sad part of it all is that a lotta folks know that Washburn is quite often confused...not just now...not just about the budget...not just about CM issues...but it's a constant in her public persona...I don't know her personally...but this confusion does not bode well for a council member in contentious times, BUT I will hand it to her admitting that it is so...unfortunately it comes as too little too late, I hope that this confusion issue is something that she will consider in her future. She's not the only confused one...so is Brooks, but he doesn't have the fortitude (almost used a word I KNOW would get changed!) to admit that it is so...

It would be good, and, unfortunately, pie in the sky...if those two would just break it down to basics, admit that they have known virtually nothing about the affairs of this City, and begin the process to educate themselves...this education process is common among boot council members, but these two immediately alienated the very folks charged with this process, ie senior staff and fellow council members... Whether they did this or not, trust has been broken, probably never to return...

I hope somebody is documenting all of the hypocrisy and paradoxes and conflicting statements into one neat little document... Unfortunately, I have not done so, and I plead guilty to laziness in this regard...other things on the plate...but such a thing, with supporting facts, would be a very telling document...all on the public record, all able to be backed up with...yes...facts...

This is what I figured, Roy, on the voting issue. Brooks and Washburn just made it "look good", but the intent of their vote was really as you stated, just a cover-up with more 'smoke and mirror' effect this council really stands for. Of course they had the 'closed-door' meeting - the vote was anticipated and planned this way!

In a previous statement I made, I mentioned about the salary increase (per the new CM) and the city councilmembers included; but noplace did I see mention in the review of the council meeting were mention of equating a systematic raise for any of the departments in Fillmore, such as Fire, Sheriff, Police, School, etc. This is too lopsided, Roy; and I can see a train wreck coming! If the new CM DOES hold private department head meetings soon, she is going to get quite an earful, I'm afraid!

Brooks and Washburn made quite a few statements, including the "too much" salary of $120,000, now bending to the fact that paying $156,000 for a CM is adequate? Then, on top of all this, relocation payables such as auto mileage, moving company costs, housing (temporary and/or permanent; to include real-estate fees, closing costs, etc) and all the ancillary costs not mentioned already, is not "too much"? Again, something is out of torque here. Any mention on the "buyout" on Ms. Quiring? Who paid that? Was this not in the neighborhood of over a quarter of a million dollars...in the $300,000's? I guess to holy heaven, these guys don't know what they are doing. This is unbelievable, to say the least!

Hi, Steve, and welcome back, Kotter! I doubt that comparing those cities with Fillmore's salary bases can be stated reasonably, Steve, without the general public knowing a few facts. Facts such as, the population of these cities, tax bases, expenditures versus revenues, number of city employees and costs of city assets, etc. I realize this is surface-scratching in the previous line items, but if we are to compare apples-to-apples, we have to make an outlay of statistics, and statistical information is what we do not have at this time - or do we?

We may never know the truth of the voting matter by the council members in question - they seemed to never know what they were talking about from the beginning, anyway, and hide facts (if they actually know any). Whatever they say would not interest me much.

True, employment contractual agreements and terms of that contract protects both parties. Nobody can take disagreement with you in your decision, Steve, however, again, how come there are no preliminary clauses in-writ that puts a probationary period on this hire of Ms. Quiring? If it is there, please allow us to know about it; so far, I have not seen statements supportive of any probationary period from 6 to 12 months (standard) for the new CM. This is also a "protection" agreement therein a contract.

Pancone, personally, without substantiation, but knowing Fillmore has adequate people with a concept of someday bringing legal and competency issues into play, someone is/are making these calculations. I can throw out guesses, but this is not for me to state. All these meetings are recorded in some way, except for the 'closed-door' private WWB cabal's meetings, I'm sure of that!

Speaking to the issue of "comp cities" Fillmore has benchmarked salary and what I call "bang for the buck" off of Ojai, Santa Paula, Port Hueneme and sometimes Carpenteria. This is first to use Moorpark. In the past Roy Payne and Tom Ristau have proven over and over that Fillmore provides more "bang for the buck" than any other city around. Cost of providing service verses population, cost of overhead verses population, etc. In the end Fillmore has done more with less than other cities in Ventura County. This is a fact and shouldn't inflame anyone, but it might.
In the near future the Granicus software will be online. It'll allow anyone the ability to stream council meetings at their leasure. It provides a hypertext link function which allows any and all to search by key word and jump to area of the meeting. This should be an excellent tool for those that want to stay tuned into the council meeting.

Steve Conaway

Thank you for the information (9/9/9:32pm), Steve. I understand more now, on how the comparisons are judged. But, in the writings of the past, it led me to believe that the Council were preparing their estimations based on what these mentioned cities paid their City Council's; only; disregarding those other very important statistics which we also need a dramatic investigation of, before equal comparisons can be ascertained.

That was my point. Now, the Granicus software is fine material. We can take a look at the narratives of the council meeting at that time and get a run-down. Although this software seems to be annotating the Council meetings, what I would like to see is that the Fillmore public will not have to wait another two weeks for something to come out of City Hall or have to rely on Gazette hard copy or its web site updating us in the interim. The gaps still are not closed-in yet. I'm speaking of a daily update, Steve; if daily items-of-interest are established by the Council, and those items can be posted to a single thread. No incoming communication can be made - just the outgoing communication from the Council - and all this would fit-in nicely with the daily business. This is what I mean to say; but maybe I did not make myself clear before. Anyway, I'm not holding my breath.