Resignation Letter Shockwaves...In San Francisco?

Another Mayor Is Cleaning House

"...Request for resignation letters has sent shock waves through City Hall".

This story is not about Pittsburgh. San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom is shaking things up in his city, too.

From the San Francisco Chronicle:

"Although he refused to say how many resignation letters he plans to accept, City Hall observers say the mayor is probably targeting a handful of individuals he wants to remove from their posts, but doesn't want to have to publicly fire".


There's more in this story about their mayor:

"...who is running for re-election in November but faces no serious political threat in the race, told department heads and commissioners in letters Monday that the request signals his desire to 'make bold changes in the coming term.'"


...and there's analysis in this editorial:

"...department heads, aides and commission appointees have until Friday to offer their resignations - and he'll decide which ones to accept."

You can check out Mayor Newsom's two letters here and here.

An Astrologer/Blogger there is blaming Pluto and a solar eclipse.


Meanwhile, there's a video online of my Channel 4 Action News story about Mayor Ravenstahl's city government shakeup. I can't provide a direct link, but one appears within this Pittsburgh Channel story.

.

Read More...

Summary only...

City Directors Who Act... And Actors Who Direct

[Post updated at 7:06 a.m.]

All of the talk in city government about "acting directors" brought to mind the theater casting calls for "singers who dance" and "dancers who sing". I googled "directors who act" and "actors who direct" and found this show business quiz.

As The Burgher of "The Burgh Report" blog notes, we are now marking 90 days since Mayor Luke Ravenstahl asked for resignations from ten top city officials. The 90 day mark may be significant, because the city code says that no one may serve as an "acting director" for more than 90 days. The mayor's news release back in June said that "all directors not appointed by Mayor Ravenstahl have been asked to serve the city in an acting capacity".


I say that the day "may be significant" because in recent weeks, the mayor has been telling reporters that he "never accepted" the resignations, but is keeping them in his desk. When I asked the mayor about this a couple of weeks back, he denied ever describing those affected as "acting" directors. While the news release from the mayor's office plainly described them in that way at the time, my check of Channel 4 Action News video that aired back in June does not show the mayor himself uttering the word. (Our raw, unedited tape is long gone. I'm sure other reporters are rummaging through bins for their old tapes right now.)


(To read the mayor's June news release, go to this link, then click 'Read More..." at the bottom of that post.)

The Burgher argues in his post that the issue is cut and dry--and not in the mayor's favor, but it appears there the mayor may find wiggle room in the city code. As The Burgh Report itself quoted from the city code back in June,


§ 210. REMOVAL OF HEADS OF MAJOR ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS.
The mayor may remove the head of any major administrative unit at will. A removal shall not be effective until the mayor transmits reasons to council in writing.

§ 221. REMOVAL OF AUTHORITY MEMBERS.
The mayor may remove any member of an authority at will except as otherwise provided by law. A removal shall not be effective until the mayor transmits reasons to council in writing.


Some City Council members complained months ago that Mayor Ravenstahl never notified them in writing about the shakeup as the code requires. It seemed at the time to his critics to be an ignoring the law; it may now actually provide the mayor a technicality backing for his assertion that he never formally accepted the resignations. If the mayor never "transmits the reasons to council in writing", can he argue the removals will "not be effective"?

The insights of the affected directors themselves would be valuable on this point, but they are understandably silent. Some were so cautious as to ask me not to even mention their individual "no comment", out of apparent concern that saying even that much to a reporter might endanger their job security.

The only "acting" department head who freely discusses that status is Acting City Solicitor George Specter, who's been holding the post on a temporary basis for more than a year. He stepped up after the late Mayor Bob O'Connor-- acting from his hospital room-- dismissed several of his top administration officials.

Specter acknowledges that there is no enforcement provision in this law and says that no one has ever tried to force the issue. He also points out that his "acting" directorship is far from the longest-running in city history.

That distinction would go to Kathy Krause: she was Mayor Tom Murphy's acting public safety director for more than a decade. Murphy took office insisting that Pittsburgh's police chief would report directly to him and not through a public safety director. His administration never formally changed the structure of city government, however. In fact, some state and federal agencies apparently required that their formal dealings with the city involve its public safety director. Krause filled that role in a low-profile "acting" capacity for twelve years.

Council President Doug Shields introduced a bill back in July that would make changes in the city rules governing the use of "acting" directors. That bill has been held back in committee three times, so far: on July 2nd, July 18th, and July 25th. It's scheduled to come up again for discussion and a vote in today's council meeting. Some in city government say they expect that action on Shields' legislation will be delayed once again. The 90 day anniversary of the mayor's resignation requests to the directors may bring some discussion of the issue in council this time.


Footnote: All ten director positions are posted as current openings on the city's website. One position of note no longer posted there is "Press Secretary", though it's been vacant for nearly two months longer than the rest. Dick Skrinjar was moved out of the job back in April. Joanna Doven has been Acting Press Secretary for 4 1/2 months, though the mayor has said periodically that since April that he hopes to make a final decision on that post soon. While Skrinjar called himself "Director of Communications", the position is not a department-level job and does not require confirmation by city council.

.

Read More...

Summary only...

Mayor's Shakeup 2: The Summer Sequel

Update: Click here for my Channel 4 Action News story,
"Ravenstahl Wants Department Heads To Resign".
(I've also reposted this blog entry to repair some software-related missing text.)

When he launched his first multi-player shakeup, I blogged that "the mayor hints he's not done, saying there could be 'perhaps a reshuffling of the entire fifth floor.' "

Looking back, we now see that late April was an especially eventful week for Mayor Ravenstahl. That Monday, he made his much-discussed trip to Oakmont to meet Tiger Woods. That Friday, he removed then-Press-Secretary Dick Skrinjar from his role as the mayor's top communications advisor .



At the start of May, I noted that it was unusual to vacate such a high-ranking post without having someone waiting in the wings. Days after the change, the Mayor said Skrinjar's permanent replacement would be in place within four weeks. So far, it's been more than six weeks and the mayor says he's more than a hundred resumes have crossed his desk. The city website now lists December 31st, 2007 as the last day to apply.

Councilman Jim Motznik tells me: "I've heard the rumor of the street that I wanted to be the public works director and the mayor has offered me the position, and that's not correct. I haven't been offered the public works director job, and I'm not interested in it."

Last night, after 7 pm, the mayor's office issued this news release:

Mayor to Conduct National Search for City Director Candidates

Ravenstahl Asks For Resignation of All Directors Not Appointed on His Watch

[PITTSBURGH] June 14, 2007 Mayor Luke Ravenstahl asked for resignation letters from current City of Pittsburgh departmental directors and board chairs of the Pennsylvania Water and Sewer Authority, the Urban Redevelopment Authority and the Pittsburgh Parking Authority today in an effort to take a new look at how our city departments and authorities can better serve Pittsburgh. All directors not appointed by Mayor Ravenstahl have been asked to serve the City in an acting capacity and are encouraged to reapply for the position in order to prove they are the best person for the job.

“All Directors are admirable colleagues of mine who have been working very hard,” said Mayor Ravenstahl. “However, I am not satisfied with the condition of City government. As Mayor, I owe it to the people of Pittsburgh to build our government with the best people who are capable of doing the best job. Leadership may need to change, but I am making a tough decision in order to ensure that this City is heading in the right direction.”

A national candidate search will take place effective today in order to put the best possible team in place to serve the city. The process will take a period of time. The market will dictate the level and scope of applicants and in turn create the timeline.

The following directors were already appointed by the mayor: City Planning Director Noor Ismail; Fire Chief and Public Safety Director Michael Huss; Police Chief Nathan Harper; Personnel Director Barbara Trant; Budget Director Scott Kunka."

Read More...

Summary only...