The Bumpback provision passed Tuesday night, with the help of the Mayor (he broke a tie vote 5-4). If a city director is terminated and replaced with a new appointment, the terminated director WILL not be allowed to ‘bumpback’ to a previous position.
They are simply ‘Done’. I actually agree with the provision.
Below is the current list of city employees that could be affected.
Is the mayor planning another axe job?
I can tell you, there are quite a few employees below that have not always seen eye to eye with the mayor, and it shows in their minimal raises they have received over the past 5 years compared to other directors.
(Click on image to enlarge)
A look at this chart shows the Mayor actually in in charge of all these jobs. The crappy way our Home Rule Charter is written he can claim to be a member of the Council. In this capacity he had Debra Owen removed so what is to stop him from removing anyone on this list he is not happy with?
It has appeared and confirmed by people in the know, Rex put this change into action for him and the Mayor was not happy to to be forced to vote Tuesday night to break the tie. Now his fingerprints are all over this action. What will be the cause to permanently remove someone here?
See http://www.argusleader.com/story/news/city/2015/12/01/council-bumps-back-decision-appointee-perks/76622100/ – “The measure, which would grandfather in the nine current department heads that left lower-level positions in city government, made it through an informational meeting in October and a first reading before the entire council in November.”
The rule as passed “grandfathers in” existing appointees, so they *can* “bump back” if they lose their current appointments.
What determines if someone is eligible for bumpback?