Regarding our current controversy over the retirement and
immediate rehiring of Police Chief Gregg Giusiana and Assistant
Chief Lanny Brown, my perspective is probably a little different
than most. Let’s review what has happened.
Regarding our current controversy over the retirement and immediate rehiring of Police Chief Gregg Giusiana and Assistant Chief Lanny Brown, my perspective is probably a little different than most. Let’s review what has happened.
Giusiana and Brown have retired. They were immediately rehired and retained in their current positions as hourly city employees, making the same money as previously. The good news is, the city will save over $100,000 because as retirees, they no longer have the pension and benefits tail that the city previously had to pay.
Much has been made of the fact that, with their retirement pay and new incomes as hourly employees, Giusiana and Brown will each be earning about $250,000 per year. As a capitalist, I say, so what? Many police officer and firefighters, who retire early do so, including Gilroy Fire Chief Dale Foster, who is retired from San Jose fire. So, I agree with City Administrator Jay Baksa that the situation, as far as finances go, is “win-win” for both the city and the cops.
But why the secrecy? The fact is, nobody knew except insiders at City Hall, and that “nobody knew” includes our City Council, as well as the rank and file in the police department. If the City of Gilroy is saving we citizens big bucks from the general fund, out of which we pay for such important things as sidewalk improvements, they should shout it from the rooftops. But they didn’t; this paper had to bring that to the public’s attention against the wishes of city staff.
It also appears, according to Section 703(C) of the City Charter, (http://www.ci.gilroy.ca.us/cityhall/pdf/CityCharter.pdf) that the requirement that the city administrator shall “appoint, suspend discipline, and/or remove subject to the provisions of this charter all officers and employees of the city EXCEPT that department heads shall be appointed and removed with the consent of the council” may have been violated. I suppose a rather thin defense of that could be made by saying “they’re now just hourly employees,” but that doesn’t pass the smell test, and let’s hope the city realizes it.
Those of you who have read my column over the years know that I like Lanny and Gregg (and cops, generally) and consider them friends. I also said, in a column after a Memorial Day parade in which Gregg appeared while interim chief that we should hire him permanently. We did, and his reign has been a good one.
But on Dec. 5 of last year, during a Dispatch Editorial Board meeting at which I was present, Gregg appeared to talk about the apparent mishandling of a rape case. He handled it perfectly, explained what happened, accepted blame and told us how the situation was remedied for the future.
Also, during that meeting, Giusiana, who we now know had retired just days before, was asked about his future as chief, specifically his retirement plans, and he failed to honestly advise us that it had all ready happened. I can’t tell you how disappointed I am that he failed to make that disclosure. Bad mistake, Gregg.
Elected officials, like our City Council members, have a myriad of written laws that govern what they may and may not do. Like any organization, especially political ones, there are also unwritten laws. Things like “you will appear in public with stupid reindeer antlers affixed to your head,” “you will stop to talk at the grocery store no matter how rushed you are,” and “you will shut up, not grouse forever, and get on board when you lose a decision you considered important.” They all understand these rules, and of course, there are expectations they have for those who work for them, as well.
There is a cardinal one. It’s “you will not allow me to be ambushed by the press about something I should know about.”
Recently, this has happened twice; the current controversy and the Westfield Mall project. As a former elected official, I know all too well how our council members felt when asked for an opinion on these subjects, and had no knowledge. Were I still on council, I’d be polling my fellow members to see if anyone else wanted to have a come-to-Jesus meeting with the city administrator. The subject of that meeting might well be “Who the hell runs this town, anyway?” because this secrecy is either a gigantic brain fart by the city administrator, or the assumption of power he does not in fact possess.
Last week, as a newly-appointed Library Commissioner, I attended a “Ethics and Public Service” seminar mandated by state law AB1234. Linda Callon, our city attorney, was the instructor. I have the handout I received there in front of me.
One of the pages describes “Ethics laws and principles,” and the bullets are “The law-minimum standards. What we must do.” The next is “Ethics principles-guidance to what we ought to do.” The last statement on the slide is “Asking yourself how would this look in the newspaper?”
So, I close with a question for the city attorney and city administrator: Linda and Jay, how do you like the newspaper coverage so far?
