Facing an overflowing crowd of agitated Hollister employees, the
City Council on Monday delayed approval of a plan until Jan. 28 to
lay off 36 workers, including several senior officials.
The Council had intended to approve the resolution Monday before
30 speakers took the podium
– some blasting officials, others pleading for further talks on
the issue.
Facing an overflowing crowd of agitated Hollister employees, the City Council on Monday delayed approval of a plan until Jan. 28 to lay off 36 workers, including several senior officials.
The Council had intended to approve the resolution Monday before 30 speakers took the podium – some blasting officials, others pleading for further talks on the issue.
City Manager Dale Shaddox and a Council subcommittee had put together the “Reduction in Force” to reduce the workforce by 21 percent and cut $1.8 million from the payroll next fiscal year.
Without the layoffs, Shaddox projected the dwindling General Fund reserve would be entirely erased in three years, and the city would be in debt $10.4 million by 2009, he said. Even with the layoffs now, he projected the reserve would be exhausted by 2007.
As nearly 150 residents looked on from a standing-room-only crowd, Mayor Tony Bruscia motioned after two and a half hours of public comment to reconvene Jan. 28. The Council unanimously approved the suggestion.
Regardless of the decision to push off the approval, Bruscia after the meeting expressed doubt that any positions would be saved in the next two weeks.
“Between now and that meeting, I doubt (the number of layoffs) are going to change,” said Bruscia, who requested order from the crowd on several occasions. “What I’m concerned about is that between now and July, that number’s going to grow, and that we’re going to need to lay off more.”
The proposed layoffs include three department heads, 13 employees from the Public Works Department, eight from the Planning and Building divisions, three from the Police Department and eight total clerical staff members.
The department heads include the fire chief, finance director and planning director positions.
Shaddox and other officials say they have exhausted all means of cutting the budget – and that more paring is likely needed. For one, a proposal for tax measures on the November ballot is forthcoming. But even that, coupled with the layoffs, will not be enough, Shaddox says.
Shaddox, who advised the Council to approve the plan Monday, said he reviewed – and will continue to review – every cost-cutting suggestion submitted from the 175-person workforce. One proposal mentioned several times included city workers going to shorter work weeks – 72-hour pay periods – which would spread the personal losses to a broader base of people.
“They’re all good (suggestions),” Shaddox said Monday afternoon, “and they would save the city some money – but not the kind of dollars to fill this huge gap.”
After an approval of layoffs – now Jan. 28 at the earliest – a complex process will begin that involves meetings with city unions and discerning who will lose jobs. Employees with seniority have “bumping rights” to accept demotions or equally ranked positions in their departments.
“I believe we need all five months to do this work,” Shaddox told the Council.
That notion and many other comments from the city manager, though, were met by an array of rumbles, sighs and head shakes throughout the gallery.
Some entire families showed up to support opposition of the plan. A front table below the Council dais – usually reserved for public meetings – was occupied by two families of employees effected by the cuts.
One of those families was the Hillstocks – Danny, a city engineer, and Diana, an administrative assistant at City Hall. They brought another family member along, too – their newborn baby.
“It will undoubtedly put us in harm’s way,” said Diana Hillstock, whose position made the list, while her husband’s did not.
Others in attendance warned of dropoffs in service levels – while defending specific departments or positions.
Fire Chief Bill Garringer, whose position would be vacated under the plan, sat and listened as several people requested his job be saved. Several people spoke in support of clerical workers set to lose their jobs.
One man who has worked in city engineering for 20 years cried foul at the bumping rights system, which somehow has left him without seniority and, if the plan is approved, a job.
Some people spoke in more general terms about the impacts.
“Tonight, the spirit of this community is dying…” said Brad Pike, a Hollister resident and also a San Jose firefighter.
Everyone who spoke, though, did not denounce the plan or city leadership. Resident Steve Perreira, an electrical engineer, was the one speaker in support of the plan. He said many jobs in the city workforce are not needed.
“I don’t really want to save these jobs, but I want you people (the city) to get more revenue,” Perreira said.
Overall, the Public Works Department would be hardest hit with 13 layoffs, followed by Community Development with eight, the police department with three and several other departments with one or two positions to be vacated.
Regardless of what happens Jan. 28, Council members and Shaddox are distraught at the layoff situation.
“I never thought I’d be in this place,” Councilman Brian Conroy said after the meeting. “I never thought I’d be sitting here having to decide these issues.”
Bruscia defended Shaddox afterward and criticized people who have questioned the city manager’s motives.
“What are his motives here? He’s trying to do what’s best for the city,” Bruscia said. “And he’s worked very hard to do that. And people who are short-changing him – it bothers me.”
