Report: City administration, council ‘dysfunctional’
The
“dysfunctional” administration of the City of Manteca over the course of the
last three years came as the result of a lack of leadership from the City
Council and inexperience in the city manager’s office, according to the San
Joaquin County Civil Grand Jury.
In
a scathing report that was released on Thursday, the grand jury found that the
dysfunctional atmosphere at City Hall was attributed to a combination of
factors, including ineffective leadership at the council level, a general lack
of knowledge by certain department heads, and redundancies in leadership that
led to a tremendous amount of waste — all of which led to an atmosphere of
uncertainty among city employees watching from the sidelines as nearly every
single department head in the city turned over during that period.
The
investigation into the City of Manteca began after a number of requests were
submitted to the San Joaquin County Civil Grand Jury — which, unlike a criminal
grand jury does not have the power to indict criminal wrongdoing, but instead
serves to ensure transparency in the operations of government agencies within
the designated county — back in 2019, but because the report was not going to
be ready in a timely manner, the investigation was shelved.
When
news reports about turmoil at City Hall began to mount, and even more
complaints started to roll in, the body took up the matter again, conducting
more than 20 interviews with current and former employees and members of the
city council.
“Upon
thorough review, the Grand Jury concluded that several basic administrative
protocols were missing from the management of the city: lack of consistent and
formal personnel practices, lack of training and succession planning, and
absence of financial acumen which in turn led to insufficient checks and
balances,” the grand jury wrote in its summary of the investigation. “There is
also a need for improved internal employee grievance processes. Overall lack of
leadership from the council and inexperience in the city manager’s office
created the dysfunctional administration that is struggling to effectively
manage city operations.”
After
interviewing witnesses and combing through thousands of pages of documents, the
grand jury is recommending that Manteca:
- Develop, implement, and adhere to hiring, promotion, and termination policies.
- Utilize open recruitment, both internal and external, for all vacancies.
- Implement succession planning so that institutional knowledge is maintained.
- Develop and implement definitive onboarding and training plans for all employees.
- Develop a grievance procedure that provides an option to allow grievances against top administration to be dealt with by an external third party.
- Ensure the management of the city’s finances are transparent, current, and within the confines of budgetary constraints.
In
its summary, the grand jury pointed to a number of factors that were to blame
for the current situation Manteca finds itself in.
“The
nature of our democratic form of government is not static. Changes are
inevitable, leaders change, laws change, people and ideas change, and cities
grow. The same is true for city employees: periodic elections decide the mayor
and city council, employees are hired, fired, transferred, or retire. These
changes are common but are generally not crippling,” the grand jury wrote in
its conclusion. “However, when there is extraordinary and unprecedented loss of
key personnel, it can be disconcerting to the city’s employees and the public.
“This
can lead to rumors and conspiracy theories about what is happening at ‘City
Hall’ and leaves remaining city employees uncertain about their futures. All
these changes can also reveal problems that might otherwise go undetected. This
is what happened in the City of Manteca.”
Inconsistent employment
practices
In
the first section of the report, the grand jury found that Manteca did not
follow best practices when it came to recruiting employees or promoting
employees from within, chiefly with the way former City Manager Miranda Lutzow
was given the job of Interim City Manager.
While
Lutzow had management experience in cities prior to coming to Manteca, she had
never been in a position equivalent to city manager, and subsequently promoted
others into similar roles that further exacerbated the issue, according to the
report.
“In
general, executive hiring can be accomplished in two ways: outside candidate
recruitment or internal candidate promotion. Promotion from within city ranks
usually involves a long-serving, tested and trusted employee, who has the
expertise to be an executive serving the community,” the report stated.
“Manteca’s appointed city manager was neither a long-serving employee, nor did
the candidate have any experience as a city manager. Only one council member
expressed concerns about the lack of experience and voted against the appointment.
“The
city manager then appointed the city clerk as interim assistant city manager,
who had no municipal management experience, but was seen as supportive of the
city manager. Neither position went through any kind of recruitment process.”
The
grand jury found that the promotions to both of those positions led to some of
the turmoil at city hall as and throughout the wider community as they
“struggled to learn the job.” The recommendation to the city moving forward
will be to draft and adopt written recruitment policies and procedures for all
executive positions and follow them by the end of this calendar year.
In
addition to issues with the city’s top brass — including the rushed way in
which the previous city manager tried to reorganize the structure of the city
to include 27 new positions without complete job descriptions or funding
mechanisms to pay for them — the grand jury also found that insufficient
training and development, an inconsistent promotion policy, a lack of a formal
succession plan, and a flawed grievance procedure exacerbated the issues.
It
was the inconsistent administrative leave and employee termination process,
however, that resulted in a concrete damage.
Over
the course of the last two years, the grand jury found, paid leave, investigations,
severance packages, and wrongful termination lawsuits have cost the City of
Manteca more than $1 million.
Ineffectual city
management
It
was the promotion of Lutzow, the report states, that kick started a process
that led to the majority of the issues the city faced.
According
to the report, Lutzow promoted former City Clerk Lisa Blackmon to the role of
assistant city manager despite the fact that she had no executive experience,
and the two decided to split up the duties of the city manager. The decision
was made to bring in a third executive position by promoting Toni Lungren to
the role of deputy city manager, and the duties were spread out to include her
in the management trust as well.
“The
team interviewed candidates for employment, attended meetings, and conferred on
potential actions together, duplicating efforts,” the report reads. “The new
administrative team projected themselves as team-oriented leaders, who welcomed
new ideas and changes.
“However,
they were intolerant of any resistance to their ideas.”
The
report also claimed that the administrative team quickly became overwhelmed,
making costly mistakes in the process — specifically the decision to give all
paid employees three extra days off during the holiday season while claiming
that it wouldn’t end up costing the city any extra money.
That
decision, the report states, was made without realizing the 24-hour staffing
for the city’s vital public safety services, which ended up costing the
taxpayers more than $240,000.
But
the city’s top brass still had people to answer to.
The
report claims that the multiple members of the Manteca City Council routinely
violated the Manteca Municipal Code when it came to how orders were relayed
through the chain of command. According to Section 2.08.080 of the city’s
governing rules, the council is mandated to direct orders to staff through the
city manager, a process that was routinely bypassed, the report claims, by the
mayor and some members of the council who went so far as to give detailed plans
to department heads without the knowledge of the city manager.
The
decision to bypass the city manager, the report states, robbed the public of
the right to have its business conducted in the open and created confusion
among city staff.
Faulty financial
operations
The
third and final section of the report addressed the city’s current financial
condition, the factors that led to it, and the impact on the city council’s
operations and the decisions made without the full scope of the city’s
financial position.
Part
of the problem, the report said, was a lack of personnel with the training
needed to manage a complex financial network like Manteca’s.
“The
city’s financial accounting software and computer hardware were never fully
implemented. The inability to manage and extract information made it difficult
to prepare financial reports in a format that was easily understood by elected
officials and the public,” the report reads. “There was a lack of personnel
with advanced training or specific accounting skills which would enable them to
maintain accurate reconciliations, post accounts, and properly account for the
various interfund transfers being directed by city management.”
While
things that were supposed to be done weren’t actually being done, none of that
was apparently known to the city council which were, the report claims,
provided information that was less than accurate to make decisions with.
And
the fact that the information that they did obtain wasn’t delivered in a timely
fashion before those decisions were rendered was a different issue entirely.
“The
cumulative impact of the conditions in the finance department was the lack of
timely, accurate information being provided to the city council and
departments. With account reconciliations and fund balances in question, and
numerous internal transfers implemented among restricted funds, the city
council was working with a distorted and inaccurate understanding of the city’s
financial condition,” the report reads. “The city councilmembers were unaware
of these distortions and inaccuracies, or the extent of their fiduciary
obligations to the city.
“They
relied on the information provided, asking few or no questions. Oftentimes,
agendas and staff reports were not delivered with adequate time for public or
council review.”
The city’s response
Now
that the report has been issued, the city will have 90 days from the receipt of
the report to respond to the numerous findings and outline how the city will
implement the 19 recommendations made by the grand jury.
If
it disagrees with any of the findings, the city will have the opportunity to
address that in its response with a reason why and any alternative information
that may be pertinent.
The
City of Manteca did issue a statement once the report became public, outlining
the various implementations that have been put in place that satisfy many of
the recommendations that were included in the report.
The
release notes that the city has begun the process of conducting a thorough,
professional search for a city manager — which the report recommended — as well
as establishing a financial ad hoc committee to more closely monitor the city’s
finances and using the newly-created city attorney’s office to rework the
city’s existing policies and procedures and implement enhanced employee
training.
“Ultimately,
we are intent on providing stable, sustainable, and transparent governance for
this community and will continue to work to enhance the trust and confidence
our residents have in their local government,” the City of Manteca said in a
statement about the grand jury report. “Our City Council consists of local
leaders who love their community and want to see it thrive.
“They
will provide the necessary vision to move our community toward the future by
working effectively with staff.”
The
City Council will ultimately respond to the report.
Manteca/Ripon
Bulletin
JASON CAMPBELL
July 16, 2021
No comments:
Post a Comment