About the Author
Mike Kanin is the Publisher of the Austin Monitor. As such, he doesn't report on much--aside from the workings of the Monitor--any more. In his previous life as a freelance journalist, Kanin has written for the Washington City Paper, the Washington Post's Express, the Boston Herald, Boston's Weekly Dig, the Austin Chronicle, and the Texas Observer.
Most Popular Stories
- New forecast modeling puts Austin homeless population near 4,600
- Garza makes major changes to city organization
- Texas Legislature could derail Austin’s transit expansion
- Report: APD Training Academy curriculum review flawed, hampered by resistance to reform
- Landmark Commission stalls demolition at former summer camp in Northwest Hills
Discover News By District
- The process of implementing automated parking pay stations at Zilker is almost finished
- APD crime crackdown during SXSW resulted in multiple arrests and drug seizures
- It’s time to hurry up and get storm debris to the curb
- Bijan Robinson helps city raise awareness of water safety
- Council OKs plan for libraries
Spelman vents frustration at staff over work on city leave bank
Friday, August 23, 2013 by Michael Kanin
Months of frustration over delays in a long-planned change to City of Austin leave rules boiled over Thursday in Council Chambers. There, Council Member Bill Spelman called out city staff for what he cast as foot-dragging over the issue of allowing some employees to contribute sick leave and vacation hours to others.
Spelman laid out his concerns by way of explaining why his office had not shared changes in Thursday’s proposed city leave bank with city management. He began with a loaded question to Assistant City Manager Anthony Snipes: “Mr. Snipes, you understand why I did not provide you with this amendment several days ago?”
After a long pause, Snipes responded that he did not.
“We – meaning my staff…first began discussion with you and your staff on this issue in September of last year. They had lots of meetings, they spent lots of time talking to your staff about this,” Spelman replied. “And it dragged on and it dragged on and it didn’t get anywhere because all the way through they got a very strong impression – I wasn’t there, I can’t vet this because I didn’t see it – but all three of them got a strong impression that your staff did not want to work with us on this.”
He continued: “This took as long as it did because we weren’t getting any help from you. So it seemed to them…that if we gave this to you several days in advance you would just come up with a whole bunch of – I almost said excuses, and I think I’ll continue to say excuses – for why you can’t do it or why it’s going to cost too much money, and (you) would try and talk us out of it. It seemed to them and it seemed to me at the time that providing this to you at the last possible moment would be the best way of avoiding excuses.”
Spelman then noted that he and his team “had failed at that. You came up with additional amounts of money that you think this is going to cost, and you came up with some arguments for why it is we shouldn’t do it,” he continued.
Finally, Spelman closed by suggesting that dealing with Snipes and his office was like “pulling teeth” and that he ultimately did not believe him.
In the end, Council members unanimously approved a
Snipes offered a measured response to Spelman’s accusations. He noted that he had not been in charge of the issue for the entire length of the process, and added that their efforts were a part of a detailed examination of a leave bank designed to “go back and look at the best way we can implement a leave bank process.”
“I believe that based on the work that staff has done of course for the last month-and-a-half in putting forth a leave bank that we’ve never done before, I think that staff did a very responsive and deliberate job in trying to bring forth to this Council the best leave bank proposal,” Snipes said. “It’s disheartening that you believe that we can’t be collaborative because my staff works very hard to provide the best possible service to not only your staff, but Council. So, if that’s the case, I do apologize.”
Spelman was joined in his concern by Council Member Mike Martinez, who returned to the theme of unfilled vacancies. “I wanted to ask you about the 10 vacancies that you have currently in HR, and if they are still vacant, then if you could use one of those vacancies as a temporary stop-gap measure?”
Mayor Lee Leffingwell expressed concern about the initial projected cost for the program, a figure that Washington and his staff put at well above $500,000 if city staff were allowed to contribute to the leave bank bi-weekly.
Spelman’s fix made the program a membership-based one that will allow city employees to join should spur of the moment – a fact that would allow sufferers of unexpected events to join, should they need it. With that addressed, program costs dropped to $117,000 and Council approved the ordinance unanimously.
You're a community leader
And we’re honored you look to us for serious, in-depth news. You know a strong community needs local and dedicated watchdog reporting. We’re here for you and that won’t change. Now will you take the powerful next step and support our nonprofit news organization?