 |
Business Directory |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coupons |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Classifieds |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| | Author | Messages | |
gilbertglcn
Posts:223
 | | 01/11/2008 2:46 PM |
 Alert | This information was possted on the Maricopa Monitor web site, January 11, 2007. My questions to the Mayor follow this information, at the end of my posting here.
From the Maricopa Monitor, January 11, 2007:
An anonymous letter, mailed Jan. 9 from Phoenix, was sent to the Maricopa media, regarding a recent City Council agenda item concerning promoting Human Capital Manager Karen Shaffer, which was ultimately pulled prior to the Dec. 18 Council meeting.
According to Mayor Kelly Anderson, the agenda item was pulled a week before he received the letter.
"We felt that the new city manager should be part of that decision and had decided when we put Roger (Kolman, the Interim City Manager) in place that things would remain status quo until a city manager was hired. Kevin Evans was aware of the decision," said Anderson this morning.
The letter strongly objected to the promotion of Shaffer, made several unsubstantiated accusations against her. It also called for independent investigations of her and Interim City Manager Roger Kolman.
The letter ended with "Signed, Your Staff and Citizens."
"Things like this (promotions, etc.) will be considered once he (Kevin Evans) gets here, in about 10 days," Anderson said, after making it clear that the letter did not affect the decision to delay considering Shaffer's possible promotion.
©Casa Grande Valley Newspapers Inc. 2008
My questions to the Mayor are;
1. As the City Council did not appoint Mr. Kevin Evans until the last order of business on December 18th, am I to understand he was NOT the City Manager prior to December 18th?
2. If he was not the City Manager prior to Decemer 18th, why are you discussing personnel related matters with him, before he is even selected as Manager?
3. If you did discuss this with him prior to pulling the agenda item, did you speak to every other City Manager candidate on exactly the same matter?
4. Do you find it appropriate to discuss personnel related matters with Non-City staff, as regardless of who you spoke to; none of the City Manager candidates where City employees at the time you claim to have had a discussion on this?
5. Do you often conduct business in shady and behind the doors ways, or was this just one of the few time you conducted yourself as the City's mayor in this fashion.
6. Do you plan to do the right thing and resign from office? As you do not have an adequate control of the City your were elcted to lead, and it seems you are willing and able to conduct business in very unethical ways.
| | | |
| | Winthorpe
Posts:18
| | 01/11/2008 3:47 PM |
Alert | You pose some very interesting questions Gilbertglcn.
Although I don't belive the mayor is an un-ethical man, Indeed your account of the timeline does make sense. It makes you think there is more to the story than meets the eye.
It's also obvious that no one else knew about this "Things Will Remain Status Quo" edit, as someone had to put this on the agenda in the first place.
| | | |
|
| | mrwonderful
Posts:276
| | 01/11/2008 4:22 PM |
Alert | | I think he must of attended the former county manager Griffiths class on sneaky ways and means. | | |
|
|
| | Tempter
Posts:41
| | 01/11/2008 8:38 PM |
Alert | We are well aware of the desire amongst a few people that they want the interim city Manager gone and that Karen Shaffer is the next target.
We are also aware that individuals posting have connections to the city and spend there time working in the dark accusing others of doing the same thing.
It's time to move on as this is a non-issue.
Let the New City Manager spend his time focusing on making the city better and not answering the sensless accusations that are the cancer of this city. | | | |
|
| | chessman
Posts:250
| | 01/11/2008 9:27 PM |
Alert | | Nope. The first order of business needs to be getting healthy. Clean house and establish a professional government first, develop plans and strategies second. Without a strong organization behind it, the best plans ever made will fail. | |
This message was composed entirely of 100% recycled electrons; minimum 35% post-consumer content. | |
|
| | DesertDweller
Posts:2562
| | 01/12/2008 7:49 AM |
Alert | A non-issue? I will be when it's answered and not until then. We have open meeting laws in this state that are designed to keep shady back room deals and preferential treatment out of government.
This is a legitimate question: Did the Mayor and other council meet in private and discuss selection of the new City Manager before revealing their selection to the public? If they did, then the citizen selection process was a real scam. If they didn't, then the Mayor has some explaining to do relative to his comment. | |
Stupid should hurt!
Desert Dweller - Senior Member - Posts: 2982 - Joined: Feb 2006 | |
|
|  | TheSmokingGun
Posts:0
| | 01/12/2008 8:19 AM |
Alert | gilbert...we know you are city employee, but your sudden change and apparent support in the direction of Shaffer is a little interesting.
My questions to the Mayor are;
1. As the City Council did not appoint Mr. Kevin Evans until the last order of business on December 18th, am I to understand he was NOT the City Manager prior to December 18th?
-City Staff had been in contact for negotiations prior to this meeting date.
2. If he was not the City Manager prior to Decemer 18th, why are you discussing personnel related matters with him, before he is even selected as Manager?
-He was extended the job
3. If you did discuss this with him prior to pulling the agenda item, did you speak to every other City Manager candidate on exactly the same matter?
-This was unnecessary
4. Do you find it appropriate to discuss personnel related matters with Non-City staff, as regardless of who you spoke to; none of the City Manager candidates where City employees at the time you claim to have had a discussion on this?
-Do you feel it's ethical for a lame duck interim city manager to help his friend out one last time before the new guy takes over? Do you feel it's morally right to elevate a person who is conducting unauthorized investigations on staff to a director level position.
5. Do you often conduct business in shady and behind the doors ways, or was this just one of the few time you conducted yourself as the City's mayor in this fashion.
-Nothing shady occurred.
6. Do you plan to do the right thing and resign from office? As you do not have an adequate control of the City your were elcted to lead, and it seems you are willing and able to conduct business in very unethical ways.
-No need to resign. The mayor did the right thing. | | | |
|
| | GilaGuy
Posts:789
| | 01/12/2008 8:58 AM |
Alert | Posted By Tempter on 01/11/2008 8:38 PM
We are well aware of the desire amongst a few people that they want the interim city Manager gone and that Karen Shaffer is the next target.
We are also aware that individuals posting have connections to the city and spend there time working in the dark accusing others of doing the same thing.
It's time to move on as this is a non-issue.
Let the New City Manager spend his time focusing on making the city better and not answering the sensless accusations that are the cancer of this city.
It's a non-issue because you say it's a non-issue? I don't think that is how it works, sadly.
I don't believe for a moment that the new City Manager will have to deal with accusations of this sort, because by all accounts, he is a man of integrity. The "cancer of this city" is not the fact that accusations have been made, it is the fact that there were often verifiable misdeeds behind them. That's a very real and palpable difference, and leads to a very simple solution: stay away from tomfoolery, and accusations will stay away too.
Try it. It works in other towns. | | | |
|
| | azcarcarrier
Posts:310
| | 01/12/2008 2:52 PM |
Alert | | Very good response GG for your summation of the issue at hand in city hall. I wish more of these wantabe politician,advisor, whatevers would do some homework and hold on until the new manager has an opportunity to sort everything out. These wantabe's should call the Huntsville Item in Huntsville, Texas and ask a few questions before looking like an idiot. Mr.Evans was given a good recommendation by the publisher and other councilmen. Please do your homework before blurting out. | | | |
|
| | CliffinAZ
Posts:406
| | 01/13/2008 4:59 PM |
Alert | Does anyone know who "Tempter" is? He/she is quite clearly looking to suppress any questioning of potential wrongdoing on the part of the city. As Gila Guy says, many actions--as well as the less than transparent nature--of the city leadership have left residents with plenty of reason to be less than trustful. (And as an example of highly questionable actions, one needs to look no further than Rick Buss and the incredibly generous severance package the city gave to someone whose many illegal and improper actions had a negative impact on all Maricopans. Is it really appropriate to give such a huge chunk of city taxpayer money--or any of our money at all--to someone who so obviously abused the power of his position in a clearly illegal manner? Just an example...)
The distrust and negativity that follow are nothing more than the direct consequences of such actions, which are the true "cancer" of this city. It's as simple as action and reaction, and the only resolution in sight is a much-needed house cleaning. | | | |
|
| | TheSmokingGun
Posts:0
| | 01/13/2008 5:23 PM |
Alert | | So what will the public say when it's revealed that there never was a DPS investigation? | | | |
|
| | azcarcarrier
Posts:310
| | 01/13/2008 6:58 PM |
Alert | | This thread is an absolute reason why annexation any part or parts is totally wrong. Maricopa City and the founding group put this mess together and have failed to solve anything properly yet. There are a few stars like Marty McDonald with the PRL, but other than him I haven't stumbled on any others yet. This City needs to establish a City Hall and then start working outwardly to gain control and direction. Cleaning house would be priority one if I was the new city manager. If you are going to be on the hook from January 20,2008, then I sure would want my select staff to know terms and conditions required of position. To maintain this cancer ridden staff of bad attitudes, lack of respect, and money mongers, please stop all annexation procedures ASAP. | | | |
|
| | GilaGuy
Posts:789
| | 01/13/2008 8:08 PM |
Alert | Posted By TheSmokingGun on 01/13/2008 5:23 PM
So what will the public say when it's revealed that there never was a DPS investigation?
Please tell me you are joking. | | | |
|
| | DesertDweller
Posts:2562
| | 01/13/2008 8:11 PM |
Alert | Posted By GilaGuy on 01/13/2008 8:08 PM Posted By TheSmokingGun on 01/13/2008 5:23 PM
So what will the public say when it's revealed that there never was a DPS investigation? Please tell me you are joking.
My question would be, was one asked for or not?
| |
Stupid should hurt!
Desert Dweller - Senior Member - Posts: 2982 - Joined: Feb 2006 | |
|
| | TheSmokingGun
Posts:0
| | 01/13/2008 8:15 PM |
Alert | | Manipulation is a word we can all look up at dictionary.com and it's probably a word that describes how certain people handled things back in August. Details will come, when they come. | | | |
|
| | Tempter
Posts:41
| | 01/14/2008 7:26 AM |
Alert | Smoking Gun you are right. There are plenty on here who think and act like they are in the know, but they are far from it.
Gila, as usual it's the same people starting the fires. I expect the same people to be involved when the new city manager takes over. Some people never change. | | | |
|
| | gilbertglcn
Posts:223
| | 01/14/2008 8:42 AM |
Alert | Smoking Gun - My opinion on the potentially behind doors conversations of the Mayor have nothing to do with support or lack therefor of Ms. Shaefer. You state that the Mayor spoke with the Manager to be once an offer was extended; well that is interesting, since the Mayor claims that the agenda item was pulled a week before the December 18th meeting. As a result, if, as you state, the Mayor spoke with the Manager to be, that would have been sometime around December 12th - prior to the remainder of the council agreeing to offer a contract. You respond that it was unnecessary to speak to the other candidates on this matter, yet, if the conversation took place prior to the field being reduced to one; it was indeed necessary to be fair and discuss this matter among all of the candidates.
This is where my concern lies, and the timeline offered by the Mayor does not make sense; if the conversations occured as they should have. Again, even during negotiations, why would a Mayor be discussing personnel issues with a non-employee? Negotiations are one thing, especially since the entire Council had not yet voted on offering a contract to anyone until December 18th? Are you then telling us that neogiations took place before the final vote on the matter?
If on the other hand the Mayor, as you state, spoke with the Manager to be, this would have occured prior to all of the interview process even being completed, which does make a mockery of not only the City Manager selection process, how the City promotes people, and how the Mayor, the Leader of our Community, runs things. I am sure the Mayor will do the right thing and provide us, the voting public, specific time lines as to what occured when, in order to clear this all up. If he does not, then he is all but admitting that conversations took place, prior to final employment selections were made for the City Manager's position. | | | |
|
| | CliffinAZ
Posts:406
| | 01/14/2008 9:40 AM |
Alert | Posted By Tempter on 01/14/2008 7:26 AM
Smoking Gun you are right. There are plenty on here who think and act like they are in the know, but they are far from it.
Gila, as usual it's the same people starting the fires. I expect the same people to be involved when the new city manager takes over. Some people never change.
It seems your view is that anyone who questions the actions of the city council is a troublemaker. And my point again is that the questioning and lack of blind trust is simply the outcome of many actions on the part of the city council. Folks have a right to question and scrutinize the decisions that directly impact them, without being branded negatively for it. Furthermore, the question of "being in the know" or "not being in the know" wouldn't even be an issue at all if the council would make such decisions in a more transparent manner/ have a more transparent decision-making process, rather than the smoke and mirrors that we are currently seeing.
It's not all about the "same people" either. The city council has unfortunately lost the trust of many--if not the majority of--Maricopans at this point. | | | |
|
| | DesertDweller
Posts:2562
| | 01/14/2008 2:29 PM |
Alert | The people, like myself, who you see talking on here about these issues are, in fact, the same few. However, there are a lot of people reading this and more reading the newspapers. People don't trust or respect the present city government. Rick Buss was severely under-qualified for the job he had and he didn't have the moral or ethical fortitude or the management skills to lead a new city government. Sure, he was instrumental in incorporation. He might have even been able to handle the city manager job if he had a mentor.
The legacy that he's left is a city government in shambles. If a leader is absent, someone else will step up to the plate to be the leader. If a leader is arrogant, immoral, subversive, and secretive, and forces his bullying influence onto everyone in his organization, you get what you have now. Leaders do so by example whether they intend to or not.
Maybe it's a good thing that there won't be an investigation and criminal prosecution, although it's pretty apparent that at least the investigation is necessary. Maybe we can leave this stuff under the rug and move on. But at least there are a few cancer sores that need to leave Maricopa government if it is to get better, and the sooner they are gone the sooner the healing can begin.
| |
Stupid should hurt!
Desert Dweller - Senior Member - Posts: 2982 - Joined: Feb 2006 | |
|
| | GilaGuy
Posts:789
| | 01/14/2008 7:53 PM |
Alert | Posted By Tempter on 01/14/2008 7:26 AM
Gila, as usual it's the same people starting the fires. I expect the same people to be involved when the new city manager takes over. Some people never change.
Indeed, some people never change. This isn't the first time you've made such a statement, and it isn't the first time I've replied that none of us here started anything. It was reported by the media for those of us who, unlike you, are not in the know.
And, frankly, being "in the know" makes perfect sense as to why you'd seek to shovel things under the rug repeatedly. Every time something has come up, you've been among the first and the loudest with the "nothing to see here, folks" mantra. Your vested interest in doing so means nothing less should be expected, but I'll let you divulge that information yourself.
If the new City Manager was cut from the same cloth as some members of our current and former leadership, then yes, I'd say you could probably expect the same. Most people are equal-opportunity with their opinions. They don't like corruption from one person and they don't like it from another. That just goes to show that this isn't a personal debate, it is a political one...that the who isn't nearly as important as the what. And that is how it should be. Nobody should be given a pass for who they are, and neither should they be slammed solely on that basis.
Fortunately for all of us, every account has it that the incoming City Manager is a strong leader and an independent thinker. Just what this City needs right about now! My guess is he'll be welcomed with open arms. | | | |
|
| |
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.6 |
|
|
|