The Vanguard to a large degree credits the efforts of Bruce Colby for keeping the district afloat last year financially and putting the district in position to be able to possibly ride out the next year and a half without a slew of pink slips. In fact, if you look at the article below, without the efforts of Mr. Colby, we would likely be telling a very different story.
On the other hand, the Vanguard has been in general, particularly critical of Davis City Manager Bill Emlen. We can look at his recent handling of the Grand Jury report investigation into the fire department as an example of clear mismanagement. The list can go on and on from there.
However, the Vanguard does indeed need to give Mr. Emlen relative praise compared to Mr. Colby in terms of the handling of their own contract extensions.
Bruce Colby has already drawn criticism from this blog for his taking what amounts to a 5% COLA increase on an ongoing basis during a time when his teachers will once again get zero cola, and during a time when the district will once again have to tighten its budget.
Moreover it seems that district felt that if they did not raise his salary, Mr. Colby would be looking elsewhere and the district may find itself doing a CBO search during these economic times. The district is already without a full budget office staff, to have to find a replacement CBO at this stage would be devastating.
So it seems we can support the job effort but not the approach of Mr. Colby. I write that as one who genuinely likes the guy and thinks he does a very good job.
The bottom line here is principle not the money itself. A 5% pay increase is not going to make or break the district’s budget. But the principle of the matter is important as is the loss of flexibility. Essentially, Mr. Colby’s raise requires his own office to operate unstaffed in order to accommodate increases in his salary. In short, he’s doing more work for the additional pay, the question is whether the district will regret the loss of flexibility in the future.
On Tuesday night, by contrast, we have City Manager Bill Emlen taking the opposite approach. Mr. Emlen is basically saying what we believe Bruce Colby should have said, in light of the current fiscal crisis, Mr. Emlen is forgoing a cost of living adjustment and a merit increase. Mr. Emlen will receive the same base salary as he did last year.
Not that he is going to the poor house with his $158,000 salary. However, on a comparative level, Mr. Emlen is making considerably less than many of his counterparts and certainly than his counterpart with the school district, Dr. James Hammond (let alone Mr. Colby).
We do take some issue with the city council however. Mr. Emlen once again has had the time frame extended by which he would have to relocate to Davis from Vacaville. He now has until June 30, 2012 unless the city modifies the city code requirement for the city manager to reside within the City.
Mr. Emlen has now been city manager for two and a half years. The current claim is the drop in the price of the housing market and therefore the loss of money. However, that is of course a recent excuse. Frankly, this is not the people of Davis’ problem.
It was suggested in the Davis Enterprise article that Davis has not suffered from a loss of service based on the fact that Mr. Emlen does not reside in the city. First of all, how was that study performed and quantified? Second and most importantly, this is a matter of principle and following the current laws on the book.
Nevertheless, this is largely a side issue. The city manager has set the tone at least for now, that he is not going to be asking for more money during tough economic times.
The larger question though goes well beyond the tens of thousands in dollars in the midst of a budget deficit that will extend into the millions that the city manager saved the city. The larger question is whether Mr. Emlen can deliver for the city good strong employee contracts that will lead to a sustainable budget into the future. The larger question is whether Mr. Emlen can do a better job of handling crises that arise such as the Fire Department Grand Jury investigation.
The bottom line here is that while we applaud one single aspect of Mr. Emlen’s conduct, namely his professionalism with regards to his own contract, we have to question and somewhat harshly the overall job he has done.
At the same time we applaud the job that Mr. Colby has done, we question his priorities when it comes to his own contract situation.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
This story if you have proofed it reads horribly , the story is all over the place .So you proclaim , move to Davis like your suppose to ,and take a huge financial loss while your moving to Davis.Here is a guy trying to do the right thing , all the way around , but you still have to find fault.Put yourself in the shoes of the articles you write and walk in them for a while if you can …
He’s done the right thing in terms of the contract, he gets commended for that. I am criticizing the council not Emlen on the issue of moving to Davis and following the law. Fine the housing market has gone down, what was the excuse prior to the housing collapse?
The Vanguard to a large degree credits the efforts of Bruce Colby for keeping the district afloat last year financially and putting the district in position to be able to possibly ride out the next year and a half without a slew of pink slips. In fact, if you look at the article below, without the efforts of Mr. Colby, we would likely be telling a very different story.If the district were in such good fiscal shape, we would not have needed P & W.
I’m sorry but your comment shows you do not understand the budget situation. Measure Q (P was the library parcel tax) was simply an extension existing parcel taxes. That had nothing to do with Colby or the district, it was simply the continuing of a previous tax.Measure W was needed because of the state budget situation. This is why Woodland and frankly every district in California is going to be having cuts in teachers and programs. Davis is not in that position, in part because of W but also because they managed to save enough money last year to buffer the district.
And who is this ‘We’ you reference, when you say, …we applaud one single aspect of Mr. Emlen’s conduct?…Is it your editorial board, or board of directors, or is it One Guy With A Computer?
DG: …It was suggested in the Davis Enterprise article that Davis has not suffered from a loss of service based on the fact that Mr. Emlen does not reside in the city. First of all, how was that study performed and quantified?…The Enterprise story cites the contract, not a study: …Although Emlen doesn’t live in Davis, that has not been a detriment to his performance, according to the contract….Harriet Steiner, the city’s attorney, wrote the contract and included this language:…The City and Emlen further agree that there has not been any detriment to the City by reason of Emlen residing outside of the City….I’m not sure why she bothered to put that language in the contract. I guess it might serve to protect Emlen personally, in case someone ex post facto claims in a lawsuit that Emlen is liable for some harm done, due to his not fulfilling the obligations of his prior contract.–Rich
I suppose Bill thinks our brains have been frozen(like his stolen idea to freeze his pay..) Does he seriously believe no one notices the extreme coincidence between his action and that of our new President?? C’mon Bill…can you just get to work, stay focused and come up with ONE genuine idea? You are a FRAUD! And Harriet covered your lazy A** because of the power outage a year ago and the complete ineptitude of this City.
…most importantly, this is a matter of principle and following the current laws on the book…Interesting that this was your take on Bill Emlen’s contract but not on the 500-foot rule for Sue…
It’s more interesting the continued misrepresentation of my position on Sue’s property. The issue is not the 500 feet but whether or not she has a conflict and who should pay for that assessment to be made.
I have no opinion on Emlen or his performance, but don’t understand why Emlen needs to reside in the city of Davis in order to do his job. Here’s an article about a suburban Pittsburgh town thinking about removing its residency requirement.http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/east/s_580189.html
I can think of two reasons why a city would prefer its top administrator to live in town:1. Availability. In case there is some kind of an emergency, the city manager would mostly be around to direct the chief of police, the fire chief, public works, etc. If the city manager of Davis lived in San Jose, for example, four hours a day he would be on the road commuting, and then when he was home, it would take him at least two hours to drive back to Davis.2. Commonality of interests. Insofar as the city manager makes decisions, helps to make decisions, or implements decisions he affects the quality of life and maybe property values in Davis. Thus, if he lives here, when he does a good job, it benefits him; whereas if he lives elsewhere and he fails to do a good job or makes bad decisions, that won’t harm him (short of being fired).FWIW, I’m not sure if I buy those two arguments, but I think that is the reasoning behind the language in our statute.
Let me throw this out to play devil’s advocate, would people have a problem if city councilmembers weren’t residing in their city of governance?
Yes.I think the city manager should have to live in the city he is managing. He should not have been hired unless he was imminently going to move to Davis. How that can be fixed now, I don’t know? It seems like it is too late to do anything about, unless he is just fired, which I would be fine with.
It is great to have the City Manager live in town, but that usually comes with a cost. Typically, a city would offer below market loans to make that happen. Is that added cost really worth it?
The City Manager should work on consolidating services and save money. One example is Fire – 80$-90% of the call activity is medical yet AMR is providing the paramedic services. As a result the DFD is being underutilized and the city is paying for two service providers instead of one.
Typically, a city would offer below market loans to make that happen. Is that added cost really worth it?…In his original contract, Bill was offered a flat $15,000 to cover his expenses to move to Davis (this includes costs associated with originating a new mortgage and so on). In the updated contract, that figure remains the same.
I think Antonen got much more than that – and he did move to Davis. Still the question remains – is it worth $15000 for him to move 20 miles east. What is the real benefit?
No one really addressed my point about elected officials and residency requirements–are they necessary and if so, why?
They are not necessary and are fundamentally discriminatory particularly in the highest-priced housing market in the Sacto. region. If people were serious about this mullet-headed rule they would also give the city manager a housing subsidy. What is appropriate is requiring employees to live within a radius that would enable them to respond promptly in case of an emergency.I know a great many public employees and many will tell you that it is a relief to not live where you work. A high profile city official can get little privacy or down time if every other person in the supermarket is stopping them to complain.Let this issue go. It’s a dead horse.
…No one really addressed my point about elected officials and residency requirements–are they necessary and if so, why?…Um, should Iowans be able to run for the California legislature or Koreans be able to run for Congress? Something about being an elected representative requires a real-time connection to the represented area, methinks.In case it’s not apparent, employees are not elected.
A. Tell that to McClintockB. So what? Emlen is far more powerful than any elected official. So if there is a good reason why elected officials need to be from the city of residence, then isn’t there also a good reason why the most powerful official in city government should be?
…Let this issue go. It’s a dead horse. …If it were a dead horse, it wouldn’t have appeared in the contract. It was a minor issue, but it was raised prominently in the contract.
…… No one really addressed my point about elected officials and residency requirements–are they necessary and if so, why? Why don’t you just answer your own question like you and your buddy Rich Rifkin always do .This blog should be called the … DavidRifkin Blog …for the you got my back I’ll get your back journalism ..And you got the nerve to blast the Davis Enterprise ,Davis schools , City of Davis employees ,and every other decent aspect of this city .
ANON 9:26 Right on , tell Blog Boy how it is !!!!!
Would the idiot who has an apparent lack of sophisticated vocabulary quit calling David Greenwald blog boy. I mean how old are you? There are several 10 year olds who could come up with a better more elaborate insult than that.P.S. I agree with …blog boy…COLA increases are completely unecessary and wasteful in these trying times. All high earning city employees (police, fire department, community develepment department managers, administrators) should have their raises suspended. It’s ridiculous that people making over 100k in this city and are quite frankly professional wards of the system, should still be getting raises. Police officers get to retire at only 50 years of age with 100% of their salary. So do firefighters. They get 100 thousand dollars a year, plus social security, plus medicare just to sit around and do nothing. Now that’s a welfare check I’d love to get.
Where do I start? I have been a long time reader of this garbage. I guess in a way I’m adding to all this negativity but hopefully in a positive way. First I’ll start with the topic.. Emlen’s decision on his current contract is some how an example of being a team player by not adding to his salary. I believe he’s doing a solid job. Strong B in my mind and that’s well above passing. As regards to the grand jury report maybe a strong C but also passing as well. Truth is not every person is going to be happy about all decisions or ideas that he makes or comes up with. I whole heartedly believe he’s doing the best he can with what he has to work with. Maybe he’d be a strong A if he had some team players with city council. I’m not say all but there’s the few or couple who know who the are. SG and LH of the council need towake up and smell the coffee. Get off the David and Riftkin band wagon and learn to appreciate the city for what it’s potential could and can be. Put your hatred of some of the departments, (public safety) aside and learn to appreciate a service that is awesome. Second, changing the retirement to a two tier is not only unfair but down right selfish. I’m sorry if your retirement isn’t as exciting as a public employ, the the FACT of it is is that it’s a civil service job and anybody has the right to apply for the spot. Just going on a hunch on this one but maybe the ones complaining didn’t do all their homework on career day and were thinking with their quick money wallets and were not looking at tomorrow when the economy goes in the toilet. Do I smell jealousy? Thirdly, there is a reason why public safety gets 3% @ 50. Please show me the stats where firefighters and police are living 20 to 40 years sucking down the city money. It may be a little better now but it’s still no higher then the 10 years after they retire. I haven’t even factored in the public safety that was forced to retire because of injury or some form of sickness that they might have contacted working on calls! Oh, I’m sorry I know it’s rough when you chip a nail writing some false statement on here but come on you mean to tell me you can compare that to firing a gun in a life or death situation. The tittle itself should explain it enough. …PUBLIC SAFETY… Yes that includes you. Yes, I understand nobody likes to pay for insurance. Especially if you’ve never had to use it. But when it comes time cause you wrecked your car or you need to see a doctor, you are sure glad you’ve been paying. Well think of public safety in the same way. Maybe not now or hopefully not anytime soon but there will come a day when you or someone you know is going to be in need of emergency help. I use to think there was no possible way I would ever need any help, but that day came and opened my eyes and I’ve been greatful ever since. Last one for now. I believe it was David who said to balance a budget you need to either cut spending or services or bring in more revenue. Well I don’t see that there is much room for cuts in the city. Nobody likes loosing their job and the Davis residents are very active in town and don’t want to loose their awesome activties that Davis has to offer. Nobody likes raising taxes either. We all know something has to happen. So, why don’t city of Davis residents quit spending their money in other towns or another city and allow some business in the city of Davis. I’m not talking about walmart or a costco but please some. I know people love the small town feel but wake up this is not a small town anymore. We’re out growing our services. I have faith in the smart residents of Davis to grow in the right way. We need to bring revenue. When the city banks on 60% of it’s revenue on failing auto dealerships. To me that’s not a smart move.
John Doe:I agree with you it was commendable that Emlen has chosen not to add to his salary. I don’t give him a B. He has not addressed any of the key problems that face Davis. We could go down the line here, but the city has not solved its long term fiscal problems, has not gotten a handle on the employee compensation system, has not figured out a way to resolve basic infrastructure problems, has not figured out a way to increase revenue, etc. Emlen has only marginal oversight and control over the departments in the city. There is often little accountability and the city does not require very basic reporting. This was uncovered somewhat in the fire department investigation, but really I’ve noticed it as a consistent theme with public records requests–the city often has no idea how taxpayer money is being used.The Grand Jury report was absolutely bungled by Emlen. It is not like he did not know this was coming down the pike. He had several months to figure out how to handle it, couldn’t figure it out. It took two months to get the report from his desk to the council and he couldn’t figure out a way to have the council review the key findings. That’s at best. He also appears to have sugar coated it.On your second point, I don’t think I have ever said I favor a two tier system.On your third point, I’m not sure why someone in retirement still needs to earn six figures of the public dole. Long term, the city recognizes this is not viable, which is why they are actively looking into ways to change it. The most likely solution appears to having employee contributions into the fund.I’m all for emergency help, the question is whether we are really going to get less service at 70K than at 100K per year. Did we really get worse service twenty years ago? I don’t think so. There is also a considerable question as to how much work is performed for that salary. More on that when I get new data from the city.As to your final point, I agree with as to the long term solution to the budget problem of bringing in more revenue. Although it is interesting to note that cities with higher revenue are not in better shape right now than cities with lower revenue. That is something to ponder when you consider a panacea. The problem right now is that you are not going to bring in new business right now, so that is not a short term solution. So we are backing to cutting services and taxes.
John Doe Said 3:08 Right On, Tell Blog Boy the truth !
…Thirdly, there is a reason why public safety gets 3% @ 50. …It should be pointed out that 3% at 50 has not always been the standard. Perhaps 2% at 55 is more reasonable and affordable. If the benefit can not be sustained then it must be changed.
You fight every housing proposal and then complain that someone doesn’t live in Davis but works here. Same could be said about most who work here or go to school here.
"If the district were in such good fiscal shape, we would not have needed P & W."Good fiscal shape like whom? Are you suggesting that there is another school district out there that DJUSD should be emulating?I appreciate the many intelligent minds out there who keep abreast of the many perspectives and details that I miss. Please do share…
…You fight every housing proposal and then complain that someone doesn’t live in Davis but works here….Irrelevant. It’s not like he hasn’t moved here due to lack of vacancies.
David M. Greenwald said… …B. So what? Emlen is far more powerful than any elected official….That’s absurd. Section 5.1 of his contract reads: …He understands and agrees that he works at the will and pleasure of the City Council and that he may be terminated, or asked to resign from his position as City Manager, at any time, with or without cause…How can one be …more powerful… than the people who can terminate one’s position at any time? Your statement either defies logic or is a very unflattering assessment of the elected representatives of your fellow Davisites.
That’s the sum total of the council’s power over the city manager. That was a whole discussion two weeks ago–basically the council can fire the city manager that’s it. And they cannot even demand to see information that would allow them to assess his performance. Watch that discussion from two weeks ago during the fire hearings, you’ll see exactly what I’m saying.
Mr. Greenwald, Keep in mind the average life of a firefighter or police officer is 57-62. They’ll probably be dead before collecting all that money you so hatefully believe they don’t deserve. By the way, why don’t you become a volunteer police officer or firefighter. I am sure they’d love to have you on board!!!
…Keep in mind the average life of a firefighter or police officer is 57-62. …I’ve seen that statistic mentioned, I’ve never seen the source of it. Does that include those killed on duty or is that the average age of death upon retirement at age 50. It makes a huge difference.In other words, if you retire at age do you have only 7 to 12 years to live? Or is that brought down by on the job deaths?Curious about this.
…Keep in mind the average life of a firefighter or police officer is 57-62….If you Google …life expectancy police,… you’ll find that not only is this statistic not substantiated, it seems to be entirely untrue.
Sooo.. from last night’s city council, it sounded like they unanimously wanted to renew Emlen’s contract. Guess they were not as concerned as all the posters here. Honestly, I think the city council are zombies sometimes when they just rubber stamp stuff like this when there are issues of Emlen’s performance to discuss (or maybe they did discuss behind closed doors? Or is that kind of thing supposed to be public? Who knows?) It came off like, oh we have no issues whatsoever with Bill Emlen, let’s renew his contract.
The actuarial number which matters most is how many years beyond age 50 is a healthy American police officer or firefighter expected to live. According to the actuarial tables, a healthy 50 year old male will on average live another 31 years.However, a healthy cop or firefighter will live on average longer than that. Why? Because they were more physically active during their working years than most men, they made better than average wages, had access to and were able to afford better food, and they always had high quality health services and preventative medical care, unavailable to men working in lower paid professions. Also, because of their rich pensions, they experience lower financial stress in their elder years than retirees from most other jobs.It is probably the case, especially for those working patrol in crime ridden cities, that working as a police officer can be a high stress job. Stress is a risk factor, contributing to shorter life spans. However, most police officers, especially in towns like Davis, don’t have any more stress problems from their work than teachers, lawyers, salesmen and so on. Firefighting, once a dangerous profession, is remarkably safe today, especially in towns without a lot of large wooden structures or old high-rise tenaments. The odds a fireman is seriously injured on the job is 23% as likely as a plumber, for example. The vast majority of firefighters reach retirement age in good health.