Volsky on “Liz”, City’s Costliest Employee

LIZ HERNANDEZ CITY’S COSTLIEST EMPLOYEE

By George Volsky

 

City records – budgetary figures for the last decade –  indicate that  City Attorney Elizabeth Hernandez who is leaving City Hall December 31, 2010 to return to private law practice has been the most expensive employee heading the most expensive office that Coral Gables has ever had.

Since the beginning of the 1998-1999 Fiscal Year through September 30, 2010, the city’s legal office cost Coral Gables residents close to $7 million, of which she received about $2 million. Long-time analysts of the city’ wage structure, including retired top officials, regard those amounts as extraordinary high, especially since during about half of Hernandez’ city employment her office consisted only of her and one assistant, a knowledgeable, underpaid paralegal who did most of the work.

Hernandez relied on the paralegal’s expertise because, as several high city officials have noted there were legal issues she was unfamiliar with. In addition, it is known in City Hall that she used to be very often away from her office during working hours busy in extensive “social” activities, as Commissioner Chip Withers euphemistically called those absences at a recent city commission meeting.  According to City Hall officials, Hernandez had ample time for her extensive “social” outings because there were virtually no legal cases, sometimes involving simple court appearances or one-page letters, which she wouldn’t outsource to dozens of law firms or individual attorneys.

(There is a consensus in City Hall  that although Hernandez is supposed to strictly adhere to the law in all matters, regardless who might be affected by her rulings, “Loophole Liz” – the sobriquet she is referred often by countless city employees – she has essentially seen her job as being the defender of the commission, which had hired her, especially the mayor, and her friends in the administration, especially a few favored department directors.   Another unanimous opinion of city insiders is that had Hernandez not announced her departure from the city she would have been asked to leave. It was because finally there were three commission votes against her: Commissioner Maria Anderson, once her supporter but lately on the fence, had reportedly decided to join her colleagues William Kerdyk and Withers, who for a long time wanted the city attorney removed. )

The above-mentioned budgetary totals, even though they include Hernandez’ salary and her office’s expenses through Dec. 31, are assuredly much higher. It’s because documents pertaining to the period from the  Fiscal Year 1996-1997 – when Hernandez was hired – to FY 1998-1999 are not available at the Finance Department; they are said to be stored in a city repository and could be made accessible only at a very high cost for “labor and research.” That labor, under Hernandez was the task of IT, the Information Technology department which was supposed to enter that fiscal-legal information into the city’s data base but never did.

Still, had the 15-year expense of a city legal office would been only about $7 million, with the attorney making about $300,000 a year, some lawyers could persuasively argue that the cost wasn’t really excessive. (According to city records, In FY 2009-2010, Hernandez salary was $197,954; plus slightly more than 50 percent in benefits, she pocketed over $300,000. She is Coral Gables’ highest paid employee.)

But in addition to the $7 million that Coral Gables has paid for its legal office, in the city budgets there are expenditures of  close to $8 million which over the years Hernandez used to retain outside attorney, sometimes for minor legal work that the job description requires city attorney to perform.

Yet, the total of $15 million does not represent all the cost of the city’s legal expenses either. Analysts of city budgeting point out that since 2001 – coincidently the year when Don Slesnick became mayor – the city paid exactly $1,067,071 for what the budget calls “Judgments  and Damages.”  Again, that figure could be much higher because some payments for lost cases, among them for employees wrongfully fired – separations which had to have the city attorney’s imprimatur, do not seem to be included that category, part of the budgetary “Non-Departmental” expenditures, a large appropriation without explanation.  For example, in the 2007-2008 budget there is the “actual” expense of $381,606 for “Other Miscellaneous Expenses.”   No enumeration for the “actual” outlay was provided.

Also, apparently hidden somewhere in the past city budgets was the money  which Hernandez had spent at will, using her PC (Purchasing Card) often for what appeared purely personal expenses. Over the years, for example,  she has been paying for expensive lunches and other items that were very little or totally unrelated to Coral Gables business. On at least one occasion, she paid with her PC for wine consumed at lunch, which the city prohibits. That was confirmed by her lunch companion Robert Meyers, head of the Miami-Dade County Commission of Ethics and Public Trust. Before taking possession of their Purchasing Cards, city employees must sign a statement which prohibits them to pay for alcoholic beverages and personal expenses.

There are also indirect expenses born by city taxpayers as a result of Hernandez’ actions or inactions, part of the gallimaufry of personal and legal skeletons that repose in various city closets and which hopefully will come out to be reported soon.

 

 

Coral Gables Labor Unions (Firefighters, Police and General Employees) and Candidates for Mayor and Commissioner: Time To Act

This is pretty obvious to everyone except the city commission of Coral Gables and the mayor, a steady supporter of city labor unions (and they of him).

Faced with growing budget deficits and restive taxpayers, elected officials from Maine to Alabama, Ohio to Arizona, are pushing new legislation to limit the power of labor unions, particularly those representing government workers, in collective bargaining and politics.

State officials from both parties are wrestling with ways to curb the salaries and pensions of government employees, which typically make up a significant percentage of state budgets.

Labor leaders, who argue that government employees are not overpaid, worry that many of these measures have a much better chance of enactment than in previous years because of Republican electoral gains and recession-ravaged taxpayers’ reduced sympathy toward government workers.

“We will also have to look at our system of pensions and how to ensure that they are transparent and actuarially sound and fair — fair to the workers and fair to the taxpayers,” Mr. Brown [of California]said in his inaugural speech on Monday.

via States Seek Laws to Curb Power of Unions – NYTimes.com.

Volsky on Slesnick “The Mayor Does it Again”

GEORGE VOLSKY

THE MAYOR DOES IT AGAIN

Early last Thursday morning, a friend woke me up: “Have you seen our   mayor, his hands outstretched like Nixon saying ‘I’m not a crook.’?”  Not fully awake I replied: ” What are you talking about?” The friend laughed and said: “Look at today’s Neighbors.”  Believing it was a joke I didn’t get to it until a couple of days later after I rescued the Herald’s Neighbors section from trash.

It took a while to find the picture of our allegedly Nixonesque mayor. It had never occurred to me to glance at the Neighbors’ last page. Neither selling nor buying a residence, I was not interested in what for a long time has been an advertising space paid for by “Slesnick and Associates,” a real estate firm of the mayor’s wife,  Jeannett, of which he  is presumably a shareholder. (It makes one wonder how many people have looked at that page during this busy, apolitical holiday week.)

But instead of the usual Jeannett Slesnick ad on the Neighbors’ back page there was the face of the ever-happy and insincerely grinning mayor. Given the reflective and somber mood in the country – and in Coral Gables – the smile seemed highly inappropriate.  No surprise here. Few in our city, even the mayor’s acolytes,  would accuse Slesnick of gracing residents with simple, believable sincerity.

Still, standing in front of the City Hall building, the happy mayor – his hands widely extended-  projected  an image of the elected official who less-than-humbly asks constituents  to forgive him for the mess he has inflicted upon them, doing it with the trite,  less-than-redemptive sentence  “Wishing You the Best in 2011.”

(For the record, my friend was partially right. Nixon, trying to squash the unfolding Watergate scandal, uttered his historically famous phrase “I am not a crook” in a televised address.  The memorable outstretched-hands “Tricky Dick” picture  was taken when having already  resigned the presidency to avoid almost certain impeachment  Nixon was boarding a helicopter to leave Washington in disgrace.)

The Nixon analogy or not, the mayor’s  message (whatever its text, a comment later) cannot be laughed off because  it raises several serious political and ethical questions.

First, Slesnick is already officially a candidate for reelection and as such has to follow state regulations or at least faithfully adhere to axioms of  political ethics and transparency. Second,  his message  is clearly a political advertisement even if he pretends it isn’t one. Only with a very strong amplifying glass readers can decipher  at its bottom “This ad was not paid with public funds.”

The disclaimer appears vintage Slesnick. Evasive at least, it does not reveal the pertinent information which, according to several election law experts,  voters are entitled to. It only indirectly tells residents (who have a magnifying glass handy) that the mayor did not dip into city funds to purchase the page. But it does not say who paid for the ad’s elaboration and insertion, and how much the Herald charged for it.

It could well have been Slesnick himself (thus why he didn’t state it clearly), his spiritual guru or his friend. But unless the full provenance of the ad’s funding is revealed, the payee might have been a person with a widely known unsavory or even felonious record.

Had the disclaimer  said “Paid Political Announcement” – as it should have been –  the money would have come from Slesnick’s political campaign fund, whose detailed proceeds and expenses must be  periodically reported to the Coral Gables’ clerk’s office. (Some experts said that most newspapers would not have accepted Slesnick’s  vaguely-phrased disclaimer as the Herald did.)

Even if he doesn’t say so, Slesnick’s advertisement  is unabashedly political. His “New Year’s resolutions“ sound like his reelection platform. Yet his “resolutions” are at least laughable. The man under whose tenure city payroll benefits grew from about 35 percent in 2001 to the economically unsustainable 70 percent in 2010, now says he wants to control the cost of government.  And he hasn’t yet reimbursed the city – as some residents still demand – for countless expensive meals and liquor he and his friend, the former and disgraced city manager David Brown, had consumed at the taxpayers’ expense.

Slesnick wants to  “encourage and promote smart growth of our business district”  and “recruit and welcome new businesses.” Yet over the years the “economic” efforts of our “Smiling Society Mayor” have consisted almost exclusively of cutting ribbons and being photographed at cocktail parties.

The mayor also intends to “work” with the School Board to improve and expand education opportunities in Coral Gables – an issue he invented out of pure cloth. Finally, Slesnick promises to “focus” on promotion of culture. That – with a cruel irony – comes from the elected official with a bloated office who last September agreed, without a pip, to a 50 percent cut in the city’s 2011 cultural appropriations.

Are Slesnick and his ads – presumably last Thursday’s was not his last – believable?  Is Slesnick’s word his bond?

Ask Miami Mayor Tomas Regalado, our mayoral candidates Tom Korge and  James Cason, Vice Mayor Bill Kerdyk, reportedly Stan Adkins, Slesnick’s own long time political advisor and many other prominent residents. In strongest possible terms, Slesnick personally assured all of them  that he would never for mayor again.

Property Assessments Should Continuing Falling

Assessed property values should continue to fall in Coral Gables, but not as fast as recently.  Property tax revenues should continue to be a challenge for the newly elected mayor and commissioners.

The outliers are Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach Counties in Florida, where appeals are declining. They have lowered assessments by about 22 percent from 2008 to 2010 after years of steep drops in home prices.

As the appeals wind through the legal process, assessors will have to adjust taxes to reflect market values, and property tax receipts will have to come down

via Property Tax Appeals Flood Cities and States – BusinessWeek.