It's unofficial: Jerome-Robinson named new Menlo Park city manager

While Ms. Jerome-Robinson may be a wonderful person and steller choice, and my early interations with her have been most positive, the decision-making process missed an opportunity to build a more democratic Menlo Park.

Even if Council thought they had the best candidate, I would have held at least two public "workshops" where staff, residents, small business owners, stakeholders and other participants could talk in small groups with Council and Ms. Jerome-Robinson listening in to the discussions. The discussions likely would have confirmed Council's choice. However, they also would have given Council and Ms. Jerome-Robinson important input that they otherwise likely would not have heard. The public forums would also send the important message that the public's input is valued and sought.

The small group discussions would have fostered community and built relationships that would help us all work better together towards what should be our shared goals and priorities. I also suspect that the discussions would have laid important groundwork towards other important priorities, such as the need to update MP's Mission and the need to identify a shared vision for the next 10 years.

Why was a very cogent comment by Ed Moritz deleted?

This announcement is troubling. It brings back a very unpleasant memory. I had returned from living in the mid-west to Menlo Park. Some friends invited me to attend a City Council meeting. The meeting was in February or March of 2008. The key topic that evening revolved around labor issues.

I remember council member John Boyle asking the city finance director a simple question. He asked what proportion of the total city operating cost was made up of labor costs. The city finance director was Ms. Starla Jerome Robinson.

The scene turned awkward. Maybe it was because I had just left a company of 22,000 where the finance officer had a command of details that would have resulted in an instant recitation of all current and historical important cost details. Or maybe it was the title she had of director of finance. To me that title would indicate an assignment of keeping and understanding accounting details.

Ms. Jerome Robinson began fumbling with the pages in a binder she had in front of her. She seemed to be looking for an answer to Mr. Boyle’s question. The city is a service organization, so it should be apparent to most having business or accounting experience that a large portion of the costs would be employee salaries and benefits. A figure of 70 to 80 percent would not be unusual. But she had no answer. She would not even give a guess at a percentage range. She said she had not brought the right binder with the information, so she did not have an answer.

I was amazed. Here was an employee being paid a high level of salary to keep facts and figures and she could not provide the Council with an answer. Was it possible her boss, the city manager, told her not to answer?

This performance should be available on the videotapes of City Council meetings for anyone interested.

Now, as city manager, it appears Ms Jerome Robinson will be leading the negotiating team as the city deals with various labor groups. Let’s hope she brings the right binder, or a knowledgeable finance director, to those meetings.

The cogent troubling item comes from one moment in a City Council meeting 11 years ago? 11 years ago!?
That’s the standard of perfection we are holding people to now?

One data point is just that - one data point.

However, sometimes one data point leads to the discovery/disclosure of other relevant data points that either confirm or disprove the original observation.

It is never wise to suppress either facts or opinions.