Is there something in the water that causes bureaucrats to go
crazy? The Dispatch has discovered that city administrator Jay
Baksa arranged a sweetheart deal whereby Police Chief Gregg
Giusiana and Assistant Chief Lanny Brown retired and were rehired
the next day, a practice which nearly doubled their pay to $277,772
and $247,426 respectively.
Is there something in the water that causes bureaucrats to go crazy? The Dispatch has discovered that city administrator Jay Baksa arranged a sweetheart deal whereby Police Chief Gregg Giusiana and Assistant Chief Lanny Brown retired and were rehired the next day, a practice which nearly doubled their pay to $277,772 and $247,426 respectively.
This deal took effect in November, but Mr. Baksa saw no reason to mention it to the city council, the rest of the police department, or the citizens of Gilroy.
And just last week, lame duck Superintendent Edwin Diaz unofficially negotiated a 7 percent raise for the principles and administrators of GUSD, meeting with the board in closed session in apparent violation of the Brown Act, then moving into open session, where the Board caved in 5-0.
The principals and administrators, who called themselves the Unrepresented Employees for the occasion, were each making in the neighborhood of $100,000 before the raise. Now each will tack on an extra $7,000, approximately. Not bad.
My co-columnist Lisa Pampuch is entirely correct when she says that the worst aspect of both shenanigans is the secrecy, including the probable violation of the open meeting act. But there are plenty of minor aspects that are almost as maddening.
For example, Jay Baksa justifies his flimflam on the grounds that it saves the city $116,000. Let us see: the chief used to make $146,196 and the assistant made $128,868; that was a total of $275,064. Now between them, they make $525,198. That is an increase of $250,134.
Most of the money will now be paid by the state. So the city ends up paying only about $159,000, which saves Gilroy $116,000 … and costs California $366,198. Cute trick.
What Mr. Baksa leaves out of his calculations is that whether the money comes from the city, the state, the feds, or the UN, it all ultimately comes from the American taxpayer. There is no other source of public money.
Another question is why healthy 50 year olds are allowed to retire with 90 percent of their highest salary. Thanks to the union, police officers and fire fighters are allowed to retire at 50, because 51 year olds cannot chase down crooks or dash into burning buildings. But police chiefs and assistants do not chase down crooks. They sit in swivel chairs at huge desks and go to meetings.
It is clear why using this loophole to double dip is fairly common among the upper ranks of public employees. Who would refrain from making almost twice as much for the same work? (Aside from someone with a conscience about swilling from the public trough, I mean.)
Just as sickening is the display of GUSD’s principals and administrators, each commanding a salary in the $100,000 range, lined up with caps in hand, pretending to be Oliver Twist begging for a cup of gruel: “Please, sir, I want some more?”
The rationale here is that the poor classified employees – bus drivers and lunch ladies – deserved a raise of 7 percent because their salaries were so low. Then the certificated employees – teachers – deserved a 7 percent raise, because they work so hard and the future is in their hands. So the principals and district administrators deserve a 7 percent raise because that is what “the other units have received.”
And we wonder why district office and administration expenses eat up so much of the budget that there is no money left for the classroom. Then those poor teachers have to buy Kleenex out of pocket, so obviously they need a raise …
And the Board promulgates this Ponzie scheme with a 5-0 vote! Jaime Rosso made the motion, Pat Midtgaard seconded it, which is exactly what one expects from running dog lackeys of the public employees union. Javier Aguirre voted aye with no apparent qualms.
Disappointingly, Tom Bundros and Francisco Dominguez voted for it, while making vague noises about advocating changes in the future. (Promises, promises.) Just as disappointing, neither Rhoda Bress nor Denise Apuzzo had the guts to lodge a protest vote; both abstained instead.
Government bureaucrats completely lose sight of what is normal and reasonable in the private sector. Why not? The money they frivol is not their own. It is enough to make one vote libertarian.
