A couple more comments from readers:
It will be interesting to see how much Striplin is paid. As I recall, Pulskamp's salary was above the average of all City Manager salaries in California at $279,916 per year (as of 2010, and incidentally, that was lower than his 2009 salary).
This, of course, is a touchy subject in the wake of the City of Bell scandals.
Another reader doesn't like my characterization of Saugus' selection (in italics) of a new executive and the City's:
-----------------
Ken Striplin is the new Mr. City Manager ctd
A point I'd like to raise, (and correct me if i'm wrong) but the hasty appointment of Striplin to the CM's position was done completely out of order. In essence the Council has tipped their hand in saying "we want you, and only you." Well guess what, as much as they'd like to think that its a done deal, the CM's job is a contracted position with terms needing to be worked out. The appointment before negotiation basically put all the power into Striplin's hands for the negotiation and left the Council holding the bag.
If he was truly being courted by another city, then I'd expect that he can garner a rather significant pay increase over what Pulskamp was making, only because the City committed to him without having the terms done. So either Striplin gets his payday, or he walks and the Council has egg all over its face (not like that has ever happened).
I don't bemoan the choice of Striplin without the national search... if you've got the talent, why waste time and money, but once again, the hastiness of the Council has left them unprepared, even if the end result is the right thing (see Libraries).
It will be interesting to see how much Striplin is paid. As I recall, Pulskamp's salary was above the average of all City Manager salaries in California at $279,916 per year (as of 2010, and incidentally, that was lower than his 2009 salary).
This, of course, is a touchy subject in the wake of the City of Bell scandals.
Another reader doesn't like my characterization of Saugus' selection (in italics) of a new executive and the City's:
Another way of saying this is that the Saugus USD board knew who it was going to hire as Superintendent but went through the motions and expense anyway just to get the buy-in from constituent parties like parents, teachers, and administration. The Saugus board, in other words, cared that the process was open and transparent.
Where is the transparency in just going through motions because the decision has already been made? How can a process be open if the decision has already been made? That sounds more like a back room deal to me. If it was open and transparent, they wouldn’t have gone through such a charade (if, as alleged, that is what happened).
Perhaps openness and transparency were the wrong words. If it happened like the reader said it did, then Saugus went to the trouble just to get buy-in from its constituents and perhaps to de-claw any potential critics.
-----------------