Gusse: Job-cut recommendations not personal

When city council and staff went to their budget retreat in early May, a budget deficit of almost $300,000 was on the table.

The retreat was an all-day session with each department presenting to council their operating budgets and any requests for additional manpower, equipment or programs. It also was City Manager Brenda Fischer’s first week on the job.

In preparation for the retreat, Councilmember Julia Gusse sent an email to Fischer with recommendations to cut five positions from existing staff. Gusse had worked for the city for a year and a half in Developmental Services. She was laid off from her job in 2009 and elected to council in 2010.

She described the experience of losing her job in her email to Fischer:

“My recommendations for layoffs is heartbreaking but in reality it is something that must be done. I have been there — done that — and it is something that I would not wish upon my worst enemy. As you know, I was one of the individuals laid off in 2009. I am not certain if you have ever been laid off but I have to tell you this is a roller coaster of emotions that I never want to take a ride on again. The instant sense of rejection can kill a person’s morale and the way the city’s previous lay-offs were handled was inappropriate and the previous City Manager’s personal agenda without taking into consideration the future of the city.” 

She also had the experience of being turned down for a city job, police alarm coordinator, for which she applied. Based on that experience, Gusse explored her options of pursuing a lawsuit as she felt she was a victim of discrimination, according to her email: 

“Before you hear it from someone else, let me tell you that this is the position that I applied for and although I was highly qualified (with my previous military experience) I did not get hired. I started the discrimination process when another less qualified individual was hired but I (regretfully) chose not to file an EEOC complaint.” 

In August 2010, InMaricopa reported that city employees were in fear as Gusse had requested extensive information on 21 city employees. The article, titled “As Gusse prepares report, city staff works in fear,” stated city employees were calling Gusse’s actions a “witch hunt.”

Gusse countered: “I am not after anyone’s job. I am just doing some research and will report my findings at a future council meeting.”

Also in the article, Gusse retracted some editorials she had written and apologized for writing them before she had discussed the issues with fellow councilmembers.

Now, almost a year later, Gusse said she doesn’t hold a grudge.

“In hindsight, being laid off was the best thing that could have happened to me. During the year and a half that I was unemployed I ran in the council seat election, completed my M.A., and I now have a great job. I tell you these things because I do not want for you to think that I am bitter about the layoffs or that my recommendations are anything vindictive.”

She goes on to write:

“Nonetheless, there is much contention amongst the police ranks in regards to this individual and the fact that this staff member carries a badge and has a higher salary than a first year police officer.” 

The four other positions Gusse recommended cutting were plans examiner, development services expeditor, public works inspector, administrative assistant II for building and safety, and a reduction in the information technologies department.

Her recommendation to cut the development services expeditor position also was explained in the email. Specifically, she mentioned, ABACUS, the project management firm contracted by the city to oversee capital improvement projects like the new city hall:

 

“With ABACUS and the slowing of permits and construction, this position is unnecessary. The title says it for itself — I ask you — what is there to expedite? Don’t get me wrong, I understand this position does more than “expedite” plans but please take into consideration the need for the individual to have a job vs. the need for this position to be with the city at this time.”

 

She also explained her reason for cutting the administrative assistance for building and safety position:

“We have many inspectors that can seriously do this job and justify their daily work load. I worked this position (while the employee was out on medical leave) and I can tell you that this job can be finished in two hours a day.”

Fischer said she did not believe any of Gusse’s recommendations were made for personal reasons. When she received Gusse’s email, Fischer said, she had not met with many of the department heads to review their operations. Further, it was noted at the budget retreat that Fischer was still in a review process and would need additional time to make assessments on individual personnel decisions.

“How I took this, I was three days on the job and it was the day before the retreat and we were faced with a deficit, and I looked at this e-mail as one of the ways we would eliminate this deficit to balance the budget without the use of reserves,” Fischer said. “I took the details that were in there, as an explanation to me, a new person on the job, as to what some of those positions did.

“The councilmember stated she worked for the city, so she had the unique perspective of somebody that worked with the city. So at that point in my tenure, she was more knowledgeable on these things than I was,"Fischer said.

She added that she appreciated Gusse's perspective and input to what these roles were doing.

Fischer said after the retreat she met with the Development Services Director Brent Billingsley to do a comprehensive review of his staffing and compare it with other cities with similar capital improvement projects. Two positions that were unfilled were eliminated, which resulted in what Fischer called significant savings to Planning and Zoning, a division of the Development Services Department.

After a review of forthcoming projects, she did not recommend any layoffs. Fischer added her role was to continuously look at the efficiency of all operations and needs of the city.  

“If the economy changes again, because there are so many unknowns, it would be prudent to review operations accordingly,” Fischer said. “We are hoping, though, with the new projects, the work load is increasing.”  

Gusse maintains her recommendations were never personal and has always been upfront with her experience while she was a city employee. She said her role as a councilmember was to best serve the needs of the city. From a budgetary standpoint, she explained that even her vote for (Central Arizona Regional Economic Foundation) CAREDF was based on the resources of that organization in comparison to having multiple city positions doing the same work.

“I believe it was cowardly for us (council) to pass the buck on the lay-off decision to the new city manager on her third day on the job,” Gusse said. “I also did not agree with the termination of CAREDF — an organization with multiple employees and connections throughout Pinal County.

“For the price tag of $63,000, that is equivalent to one employee, including benefits, they could assist in our much-needed efforts to bring economic development to Maricopa,” Gusse said.

She said cutting ties with CAREDF was a mistake because it could have brought in multi-million dollar projects that could have created much-needed jobs in the city.