I have found a new sense of independence and liberation since retiring from city government. I have a lot to say and now have the freedom to express my opinions. If my opinions offend someone, please accept my apology. My opinions are not facts, just the musings of a relaxed and happy retiree. Enjoy!
15 thoughts on “I’m not the only one blogging about city government”
Thanx for the link.
This post was interesting;
dd
“City Directors
I was a Director for the City of Sioux Falls for over 23 years. I worked for 5 Mayors, each with their own styles of management and agendas. As an appointed official I served at the pleasure of the Mayor. Those past Mayors afforded each director the time to demonstrate their skills and abilities to serve the new administration. Some directors just didn’t “fit” and were told that and were given a timeline in which to find other employment before their appointive service was terminated. That was a good professional policy. Afterall, these were career professionals, not political junkies. Mayor Huether has started something at the Director level that has been feared for a long time with this form of government. That is, changing the appointive director positions from career professionals to political patronage appointments. This is apparent by his firing of Directors Hall, Bartunek, and Buseman and appointing either friends or political cronies. Two chose to exercise their bumping rights. The other one, when indicating the desire to retire, didn’t even get the professional courtesy to leave gracefully and respectfully. This action happened right out of the chute so it appears he had it planned before being sworn in. Clearly, city ordinance provides for the authority to appoint and no director should have any doubt that they are there only by the grace of the Mayor. The appointive level director team is extremely important to the success of any Mayor. Mayors need to surround themselves with senior executives that will work to achieve their goals and objectives. How does a new mayor know who will work or not work unless he/she takes time to legitimately evaluate those career professionals. Directors have no political agendas. They are there to work for the betterment of the community and they know it is there duty to serve the elected officials. The constant threat that more changes were and are forth coming is a poor management trait. The Administration is the backbone of city government which provides stability against the backdrop of changing elected officials. Employees look for stability. Career professionals at the appointive level provide that stability, but more importantly, provide the wealth of knowledge and experience in which a newbie Mayor needs coming into a brand new and foreign environment. The appointive director level positions should not be used to pay back friends and political contributors or campaign workers. I fear change is in the wind.”
How did Reid Holsen, get a mid managemnt position in the Human Resources which was your old department, Jennifer?
“The appointive director level positions should not be used to pay back friends and political contributors or campaign workers. I fear change is in the wind.â€
~Jennifer Holsen
Those winds Jennifer HOLSEN fears will be blowin’ in SF city government have been blowin for a long, long time. Case in point. Jennifer bailed from the city with her golden parachute as Director of Human Resources in October 2008 making around $120,000 a year. William O’Toole, an $80,000 a year Human Resorces Manager was promoted to Director. All well and good so far. Right? Rrrrright. You’d think Human Resources would keep fillin’ in the blanks from within? Wrong. They hired from outside to fill O’Tooles vacant $80,000 a year managers position. Who got it? Reid HOLSEN. Reids claim to fame aside from sharing the same last name as Jennifer? Ever seen those God awful “Ask The Mayor” segments on channel 16? Who can forget the moderator setting those beachballs on a tee-ball stand for Munson to hit out of the park. Who was that guy playin’ setup guy for Munson? You guessed it. Reid Holsen. Go figure.
I didn’t hire my brother. That would be highly inappropriate and unethical . Ask the HR Drector who replaced me. He hired him, not me.
I will take Jennifer’s side on this, I think someone who has worked for the city that long would know better, as she has suggested.
Right Jennifer, wink-wink, Otoole made his own decision aboit hiring your brother. Otoole who didnt go to the bathroom without checking with you first as he sucked-up to get your blessing for the job from Mindless Munson. Any of us who might not be in City Hall everyday but watch how it works are really not that easilly hoodwinked. Scott, if you can’t see through that set-up cronyism arrangement-then its no wonder you were so blindly a goof-ball Kermie follower. Wake up!
Hey, I’m just taking Jennifer’s word on it. If she wants to lie about it, that’s her deal not mine.
Whats up with her blog though? Have you visited that site? It’s like you go into a serious case of slow mo – or is it just me? I’ve tried hitting it a couple of times and it looks interesting but I slow to a standstill everytime I visit
Whats up with her blog though? Have you visited that site? It’s like you go into a serious case of slow mo – or is it just me?
Must be you Buzz. Her site moves along just fine for me. Lotsa’ interesting topics BTW. I can especially relate to her personal musings about being a grandparent and early retirement. Good job. Jennifer, no one here said you personally hired your brother. I understand fully when you work for a government run entity you have to sometimes play along to get along. Especially after 25 years. I agree with and carry the same sentiment as you with many of the topics you have started. One exception of course being the DT Event Center. 😉 I have a question though concerning another city practice. City employees hired prior to 1997 get paid for unused sick leave and vacation time when they retire. Those hired after 1997 still get paid for unused sick leave but at a lowered cap of 280 hours for non union, 240 for union, and 312 for firemen. I’m fine with that. Rank and file should be rewarded financially for not abusing sick leave. In the private sector, most employees just lose it when they retire, IF they earn any at all. Small wonder employees suddenly become ill in their waning days of employment.
There is one element to this I do not agree with though. In a period of two and a half years, from ’04 to June of ’06, the city spent nearly 1.6 million on unused sick leave and vacation time to 68 employees for an average of $23,392 per employee. The largest chunk of that $1.6 million came in the form of payouts for unused sick-time. Those are some hard numbers to swallow in view of the fact 40% of the jobs in this town don’t even pay $23,392 a year. And short of having a government job, pensions checks are only the stuff of dreams. But still…I repeat, employees should be financially rewarded for not abusing sick leave, so I’m fine with that one time payout at retirement time. But applying that one time payout to your last years salary for figuring LIFETIME retirement monthly pension checks? Just a little bit too far IMHO. You have been quoted as saying this is a sacred benefit for city employees. At the same time you must know this is a practice that will break the backs of Sioux Falls taxpayers. From your blog I gather you will be a watchdog for frugal city spending, EC aside. 🙂 How do you square yourself with that kind of spending of Sioux Falls taxpayers dollars?
How, when, and why did this practice start in the first place?
I like the topics Jen writes about to, but she needs to link the stories she is referencing and put quotes in their own boxes.
As for sick time, I think it is a good thing to have when ‘you are working’ but it should not accumulate to be used as a retirement benefit. Silly.
Personally the city should just take a lesson from the private sector when it comes to benefits. Give them PTO rather than sick and vacation time, and then provide matching funds to a retirement system like a 401(k) instead of a unsustainable pension system that provides incentives to get promoted only to retire a short time later (which explains why a Fire Chief only seems to last about two years).
I’m all for providing solid benefits, but name any comperably sized private company in Sioux Falls that offers equal levels of pay, vacation time, sick time, health insurance, AND a pension system. I dare say you won’t find any.
Costner.
I have thought long and hard about your last post. You know I come from a union background and am recieving a monthly pension check. I feel I earned that pension and in fact believe it is a sacred right that cannot or should not be taken away. Anyway, that pension check costs you,the taxpayer, NOTHING.
There was a time when the private sector was a better option than working for the city. But that was a long time ago. Things have changed. The private sector now lags far behind the city in all aspects of pay and benefits. Most city employees get a pension that gets them 60 to 75% of their base pay per month. That pension is figured by the highest 3 year average of their last ten working years. Getting paid for unused sick leave is one thing. Applying that figure to lifetime monthly pension payouts is another. An example. Let’s say you averaged $120,000 for your high three years. Now throw in the $40,000 sick leave payout to your last years salary. Instead of getting 60 to 75% of $120,000 a year you’re now getting 60 to 75% of $133,000 a year. FOR life. Unused sick leave in the city is the gift that keeps on giving…at our expense. It has to end.
I agree with Costner, it should be PTO.
I have been missing you for several weeks. You always was my “wake up call” for the day. I hope family or yourself are all well. We need you filling us in on city government. Thanks.
Thanx for the link.
This post was interesting;
dd
“City Directors
I was a Director for the City of Sioux Falls for over 23 years. I worked for 5 Mayors, each with their own styles of management and agendas. As an appointed official I served at the pleasure of the Mayor. Those past Mayors afforded each director the time to demonstrate their skills and abilities to serve the new administration. Some directors just didn’t “fit” and were told that and were given a timeline in which to find other employment before their appointive service was terminated. That was a good professional policy. Afterall, these were career professionals, not political junkies. Mayor Huether has started something at the Director level that has been feared for a long time with this form of government. That is, changing the appointive director positions from career professionals to political patronage appointments. This is apparent by his firing of Directors Hall, Bartunek, and Buseman and appointing either friends or political cronies. Two chose to exercise their bumping rights. The other one, when indicating the desire to retire, didn’t even get the professional courtesy to leave gracefully and respectfully. This action happened right out of the chute so it appears he had it planned before being sworn in. Clearly, city ordinance provides for the authority to appoint and no director should have any doubt that they are there only by the grace of the Mayor. The appointive level director team is extremely important to the success of any Mayor. Mayors need to surround themselves with senior executives that will work to achieve their goals and objectives. How does a new mayor know who will work or not work unless he/she takes time to legitimately evaluate those career professionals. Directors have no political agendas. They are there to work for the betterment of the community and they know it is there duty to serve the elected officials. The constant threat that more changes were and are forth coming is a poor management trait. The Administration is the backbone of city government which provides stability against the backdrop of changing elected officials. Employees look for stability. Career professionals at the appointive level provide that stability, but more importantly, provide the wealth of knowledge and experience in which a newbie Mayor needs coming into a brand new and foreign environment. The appointive director level positions should not be used to pay back friends and political contributors or campaign workers. I fear change is in the wind.”
How did Reid Holsen, get a mid managemnt position in the Human Resources which was your old department, Jennifer?
“The appointive director level positions should not be used to pay back friends and political contributors or campaign workers. I fear change is in the wind.â€
~Jennifer Holsen
Those winds Jennifer HOLSEN fears will be blowin’ in SF city government have been blowin for a long, long time. Case in point. Jennifer bailed from the city with her golden parachute as Director of Human Resources in October 2008 making around $120,000 a year. William O’Toole, an $80,000 a year Human Resorces Manager was promoted to Director. All well and good so far. Right? Rrrrright. You’d think Human Resources would keep fillin’ in the blanks from within? Wrong. They hired from outside to fill O’Tooles vacant $80,000 a year managers position. Who got it? Reid HOLSEN. Reids claim to fame aside from sharing the same last name as Jennifer? Ever seen those God awful “Ask The Mayor” segments on channel 16? Who can forget the moderator setting those beachballs on a tee-ball stand for Munson to hit out of the park. Who was that guy playin’ setup guy for Munson? You guessed it. Reid Holsen. Go figure.
I didn’t hire my brother. That would be highly inappropriate and unethical . Ask the HR Drector who replaced me. He hired him, not me.
I will take Jennifer’s side on this, I think someone who has worked for the city that long would know better, as she has suggested.
Right Jennifer, wink-wink, Otoole made his own decision aboit hiring your brother. Otoole who didnt go to the bathroom without checking with you first as he sucked-up to get your blessing for the job from Mindless Munson. Any of us who might not be in City Hall everyday but watch how it works are really not that easilly hoodwinked. Scott, if you can’t see through that set-up cronyism arrangement-then its no wonder you were so blindly a goof-ball Kermie follower. Wake up!
Hey, I’m just taking Jennifer’s word on it. If she wants to lie about it, that’s her deal not mine.
Whats up with her blog though? Have you visited that site? It’s like you go into a serious case of slow mo – or is it just me? I’ve tried hitting it a couple of times and it looks interesting but I slow to a standstill everytime I visit
Whats up with her blog though? Have you visited that site? It’s like you go into a serious case of slow mo – or is it just me?
Must be you Buzz. Her site moves along just fine for me. Lotsa’ interesting topics BTW. I can especially relate to her personal musings about being a grandparent and early retirement. Good job. Jennifer, no one here said you personally hired your brother. I understand fully when you work for a government run entity you have to sometimes play along to get along. Especially after 25 years. I agree with and carry the same sentiment as you with many of the topics you have started. One exception of course being the DT Event Center. 😉 I have a question though concerning another city practice. City employees hired prior to 1997 get paid for unused sick leave and vacation time when they retire. Those hired after 1997 still get paid for unused sick leave but at a lowered cap of 280 hours for non union, 240 for union, and 312 for firemen. I’m fine with that. Rank and file should be rewarded financially for not abusing sick leave. In the private sector, most employees just lose it when they retire, IF they earn any at all. Small wonder employees suddenly become ill in their waning days of employment.
There is one element to this I do not agree with though. In a period of two and a half years, from ’04 to June of ’06, the city spent nearly 1.6 million on unused sick leave and vacation time to 68 employees for an average of $23,392 per employee. The largest chunk of that $1.6 million came in the form of payouts for unused sick-time. Those are some hard numbers to swallow in view of the fact 40% of the jobs in this town don’t even pay $23,392 a year. And short of having a government job, pensions checks are only the stuff of dreams. But still…I repeat, employees should be financially rewarded for not abusing sick leave, so I’m fine with that one time payout at retirement time. But applying that one time payout to your last years salary for figuring LIFETIME retirement monthly pension checks? Just a little bit too far IMHO. You have been quoted as saying this is a sacred benefit for city employees. At the same time you must know this is a practice that will break the backs of Sioux Falls taxpayers. From your blog I gather you will be a watchdog for frugal city spending, EC aside. 🙂 How do you square yourself with that kind of spending of Sioux Falls taxpayers dollars?
How, when, and why did this practice start in the first place?
I like the topics Jen writes about to, but she needs to link the stories she is referencing and put quotes in their own boxes.
As for sick time, I think it is a good thing to have when ‘you are working’ but it should not accumulate to be used as a retirement benefit. Silly.
Personally the city should just take a lesson from the private sector when it comes to benefits. Give them PTO rather than sick and vacation time, and then provide matching funds to a retirement system like a 401(k) instead of a unsustainable pension system that provides incentives to get promoted only to retire a short time later (which explains why a Fire Chief only seems to last about two years).
I’m all for providing solid benefits, but name any comperably sized private company in Sioux Falls that offers equal levels of pay, vacation time, sick time, health insurance, AND a pension system. I dare say you won’t find any.
Costner.
I have thought long and hard about your last post. You know I come from a union background and am recieving a monthly pension check. I feel I earned that pension and in fact believe it is a sacred right that cannot or should not be taken away. Anyway, that pension check costs you,the taxpayer, NOTHING.
There was a time when the private sector was a better option than working for the city. But that was a long time ago. Things have changed. The private sector now lags far behind the city in all aspects of pay and benefits. Most city employees get a pension that gets them 60 to 75% of their base pay per month. That pension is figured by the highest 3 year average of their last ten working years. Getting paid for unused sick leave is one thing. Applying that figure to lifetime monthly pension payouts is another. An example. Let’s say you averaged $120,000 for your high three years. Now throw in the $40,000 sick leave payout to your last years salary. Instead of getting 60 to 75% of $120,000 a year you’re now getting 60 to 75% of $133,000 a year. FOR life. Unused sick leave in the city is the gift that keeps on giving…at our expense. It has to end.
I agree with Costner, it should be PTO.
I have been missing you for several weeks. You always was my “wake up call” for the day. I hope family or yourself are all well. We need you filling us in on city government. Thanks.