I have been preaching for over a year about the lack of control exercised by the City Council over the senior staff, municipal operations, financial activities and ethics. Today I'll provide more detail concerning staffing.

Many of you will remember the so called lay offs in 2004. The number of employees had climbed from just over 200 in 2001 to 253 in 2004. The story goes that the former Finance Director discovered a major shortfall in revenues which caused the need to cut the payroll. Forty-four employees were terminated or convinced to take early retirement. This action reduced the total staffing to 209 full-time employees.

In the subsequent 2005 budget, the Council authorized 215 full-time employees. In the 2006 budget they again authorized 215 employees. So, what did the staff do this year? They increased the number of full-time employees to 242. I understand the staff "consulted" with the Council on a couple of the additional employees but did not on the balance of 27 positions. Think about it. The staff just increased itself without our elected representatives' involvement. Remind me, we have elected representatives to do what?

Guess what the staff wants for staffing next year? You bet; 252 full-time positions. Now what was that count in 2004? Maybe 253? Our Council is so oblivious to what goes on in the City that they believed in the staff presentations that showed only a modest increase of ten positions. The staff compared requests to actual; not approved and it went right over the Council's head. I have already picked up some flak by telling some members of the Council that they are increasing the number of employees by 37 over their previous authorization; not ten.

When the supposed mistake that caused the layoffs in 2004 was found before the last Council elections, but kept secret until March of this year, the Mayor expressed her feelings in the March 2nd issue of the Sentinel. "Despite the unfortunate nature of the city's layoffs in 2004, the increased funds in the city bank account isn't entirely a bad thing. It gives us more flexibility. The bottom line is that we have $10 million in savings now instead of the $8 million that we had before. This infusion of cash will help council get to its priorities faster."

As the proposed budget shows, the City staff had its own priority. The staff increased itself by 27 employees this year and the estimated year-end balance went from $11.1 million in 2005 to $8.8 million for this year; and is projected to be only $5.1 million at the end of 2007. As you move around in the city, check out all the improvementsmade by the City this year with the extra 27 employees. Remind me, we elect a City Council to do what?

Now for a teaser about a future posting. The Council is proud of its great commitment to communicate with the residents. We have the web site, Connection, Channel 8 programming, the televising of meetings, occasional flyers, PR articles and numerous ads. How much are you willing to pay for all this?