Council takes first look at cuts in Town Hall staff

"These discussions will be more fruitful when the council meets in closed session and can frankly discuss employee compensation, said Assistant City Manager Eileen Wilkerson."

Any closed session discussions on general employee compensation would be ILLEGAL under the Brown Act. The personnel exemption allowing closed session discussions pertains only to discussion of a single individual and to certain labor negotiations.

"The Brown Act authorizes a closed session “to consider the appointment, employment, evaluation of performance, discipline, or dismissal of a public employee or to hear complaints or charges brought against the employee.”"The personnel exception specifically prohibits discussion or action on proposed compensation in closed session, except for a disciplinary reduction in pay."

Good clarification Peter
A closed session discussion on a disciplinary reduction or even elimination of Wilkerson's salary sounds like an appropriate use of council time to me.

Peter, I think she wants it to be discussed in closed session because frankly the suggestions that are coming out of this report are absurd. Atherton is in a financial CRISIS and the recommendations coming out of the report are simply to spend more money rather than to cut back:

1. Hire a secretary for an Assistant Town Manager…when we shouldn't even have an Assistant Town Manager?

2. Hire an Environmental Programs Coordinator?

3. Hire an additional public works employee?

Well, I tend to "say it like it is" and I know some people don't appreciate this, but there is something disturbing about the arrogance that is associated with this management coming up with a report that says spend more money in this environment.

"Closed session is not necessary, City Attorney Wynne Furth said."

What she should have said was that such a closed session would be ILLEGAL. Why do I have to teach the Town Attorney what is the law on closed session?

Here are my recommendations for cutting costs

Eliminate the assistant city manager position.
Eliminate the finance director position.

Conduct a national search for a director of administrative services.

Allow both Louise Ho and Elaine Wilkerson to apply but provide neither of these two with any guarantee of future employment. Let both of these individuals know that Atherton expects the best and brightest and if either of them can demonstrate that they are more qualified and more eager to serve the Town's problems than another competitor for the job then one of them can stay but not both.

Promote the City clerk to full city clerk. Her demotion was done only to justify a higher salary for the Assistant City Manager. The town will save about $180,000 per year by consolidating the finance director and assistant city manager positions. This will be more than enough to pay the $10,000 or so more that the Deputy City Clerk is being paid.

Contract out for police services. This will save $2 million annually. This will also quite probably reduce legal costs in the future.

My subcontractors have been communicating with me how difficult and time-consuming it is to get the Town of Atherton Business License. Apparently, this function has been "outsourced."

Selling Business Licenses is not that complicated or time-consuming. Why can't it be done at one of the counters? Shouldn't this be part of Ms. DellaSanta's or Ms. Brabenec's job? If everything is going to be outsourced, what are we paying these people for?

"Those are all issues that I've inherited," Mr. Gruber added.

Heard that before???

If only this were handled like a private business, Gruber just in the last week would have been run out of town.

So it's apparently clear that he has neither the ability to think on his feet or when he has time to sit down and to potentially compose something reasonable.

Closed session or no, the outcome is going to be the same.
Atherton is in financial trouble and, I personally think it is for a good reason.
Outrageous spending and not enough coming into the coffers.
It is no different than any city in America and particularly in the wealthiest groupings of our towns in San Mateo County.
Laws will not be changed even if they were to be of any help.
The diversity of all our adjoining cities does not alter the fact that besides our own governments, the failure is widespread among communities which are not known for the wealth of its citizens alone among the rest of America.
Laws are going to have to change all over the U.S. no matter whether one likes it or not. There is no other way.
People cannot rely on the LAW as something that cannot be changed, altered or found to be outdated and lethal to our country.

One interesting way to save taxpayers' money AND improve the quality of our city/town councils would be to consolidate Menlo Park and Atherton into a single entity - Menlo Atherton.

And in the process the voters could pick the best new council members.

While we are at it, let's really make some changes:
1) consolidate Menlo Park and Atherton
2) add in the adjacent unincorporated areas of San Mateo County
3) 1 City Council elected on the basis of fiscal responsibility
4) 1 police department or outsource to the Sheriff
5) add in ALL the schools which all located within the new city boundaries and have the City Council also serve as the Consolidated School Board with a Schools Committee

The result - Huge savings and clear accountability and responsibility.

Peter,

You might want to making it match the MPFPD district boundaries. Throw in EPA and make it really interesting.

Can't imagine the consolidation would impact your Atherton property value too much ...

Why Not asks:"You might want to making it match the MPFPD district boundaries. Throw in EPA and make it really interesting. "

I agree it make a lot of sense but I think that the political realities would doom including EPA - I don't see Menlo Park and Atherton voters being willing to take on the incredible challenges of EPA. Sad but true.

Peter,

If you're going to go down that path, why not change the Town charter to allow for retail businesses and collect sales taxes? Why not annex some of the contiguous unincorporated areas?

With that kind of change, Atherton could survive as an independent political entity and still enjoy much of the character which actually drives up the property values.

Seems premature to throw the baby out with the bath water and merge cities together when such obvious alternatives exist.

Why Not states:"Atherton could survive as an independent political entity "

Having Atherton 'survive' is not one of my objectives. My objectives are good government, fiscal responsibility and efficiency - Atherton as it exists provides none of these.

Peter,

You may be in the minority.

I think most people vote for what will preserve their property investment. Consolidating with Menlo and sucking in some unincorporated areas *might* make for better, more efficient government.

For Athertonians, there is a great deal of risk with little upside. Particularly when there is a higher probability of success with simply allowing for limited retail.

Good for you, though, for having such noble principles.