Vella and Oddie: A case of hubris

The Merry-Go-Round wasn’t really surprised that Councilwoman Malia Vella and her faithful sidekick, Councilman Jim Oddie, didn’t take our advice and push for the selection of a woman or person of color as Alameda’s next fire chief.  After all, we didn’t promise them that such a move would produce votes or money for their next campaigns.

But it did strike us as a little, well, graceless that, after City Manager Jill Keimach announced that she had tapped Salinas fire chief Edmond Rodriguez for the top job in the Alameda fire department, neither Ms. Vella nor Mr. Oddie publicly congratulated Chief Rodriguez on his appointment or Ms. Keimach on her choice.  Both Council members sat mute on the dais as Ms. Keimach disclosed her decision at the October 3 Council meeting, and their Twitter accounts were silent as well.  (Earlier, Ms. Vella, the more frequent tweeter of the two, had posted a laudatory missive – even including a picture of his farewell cake – about retiring Fire Chief Doug Long.)

Instead, it was left to Mayor Trish Spencer to remark on the historic significance of Chief Rodriguez’s selection.  “I am pleased that our City Manager was able to find such a highly qualified candidate for the position,” the Mayor was quoted as saying in the City’s press release.  “I also think it’s notable that he will be our first person of color to serve in this leadership capacity.”

Now, thanks to Dan Borenstein of the East Bay Times, we have an explanation for Ms. Vella’s and Mr. Oddie’s apparent disinterest in diversity:  The two Council members were attempting to strong-arm Ms. Keimach into appointing the candidate designated by the Alameda firefighters’ union – former IAFF Local 689 president Domenick Weaver – as fire chief.  What’s more, Mr. Oddie threatened to get Ms. Keimach fired unless she gave the job to the union’s guy.

(Captain Weaver, we should note, matches exactly our previous description of a status quo candidate for fire chief:  “a current fire department employee [and a white male], backed by or at least acceptable to the firefighters’ union, who could get a significant bump in his pension by serving an additional couple of years in the role of fire chief, especially if he already has boosted his service credits by purchasing ‘air time’ attributable to a stint with a non-Alameda fire department.”)

We commend Mr. Borenstein’s piece to every Alamedan:  http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/12/borenstein-who-runs-alameda-city-manager-or-the-fire-union/.  (We also hope the Alameda Journal, a Bay Area News Group affiliate like the Times, will run it on the front page.)

But we wanted to highlight the report for our own readers because, unlike the flack for the firefighters’ union who tried to portray the selection of the next fire chief as raising questions about Ms. Keimach’s “competence,” Mr. Borenstein got his information from public documents and on-the-record interviews.

First, Mr. Borenstein quotes (and links to) a letter from Ms. Keimach to Council describing the extraordinary – and possibly illegal – pressure put on her to appoint the firefighters’ union’s candidate.  (We’ve provided our own link below.)  “Over the last several months,” Ms. Keimach writes, “I have been approached by elected and appointed officials in Alameda and even at the State level, requesting that I put aside the best interests of the City and select the Fire Chief that has been handpicked by the local IAFF union.”  She then goes on to list the tactics employed against her:

  • Continued delay of my evaluation since March 2017 in what appears to be an attempt to tie my quantitatively positive evaluation to my selection of a new Fire Chief;
  • Increase in requests by two Councilmembers directing untenable operations rather than setting policy to politically justify removal from office (e.g., a proposed requirement that I inform the Council, within an hour after dispatch is called, and before an investigation can verify, all potential hate incidents or crimes);
  • The repeat[ed] reference to my impending selection of a new Fire Chief as the basis of my evaluation (i.e., that my selection will determine my continued employment as City Manager);
  • Written correspondence urging the selection of REDACTED [presumably, Capt. Weaver] and a two-Councilmember meeting with me to suggest that the selection of their candidate would be in the interest of labor peace and would avoid an incident similar to the one involving Raymond Zack (this thinly veiled threat insults the very notion of good government);
  • Verbal threat communicated to others to the effect that if the City Manager does not select REDACTED as Fire Chief, there would be three votes to fire me (this suggests a violation of the Ralph B. Brown Act with a serial meeting);
  • Threats to potential candidates for the position in an effort to convince them to withdraw their applications.

But Mr. Borenstein’s piece doesn’t rest on Ms. Keimach’s testimony alone.

The article cites a letter from Mr. Oddie to Ms. Keimach, on official City letterhead, in which the Councilman “strongly” recommends that Ms. Keimach name Capt. Weaver as fire chief.  Mr. Borenstein then reports that, a day later, in a conversation with Police Chief Paul Rolleri, Mr. Oddie threatened Ms. Keimach’s job.  “He said, ‘well she better do the right thing,’” Chief Rolleri is quoted as saying. “‘There are already two council members who are ready to fire her if she doesn’t.’”

The police chief was stunned, Mr. Borenstein relates, when he realized “they’re actually thinking about canning her if she doesn’t pick the right guy.”

Finally, Mr. Borenstein correctly points out that the City Charter vests the City Manager with the sole authority to hire the fire chief (and other subordinate staff) and prohibits Council members from interfering with her execution of her duties.  Indeed, the Charter states that any “attempt by a Councilmember to influence the City Manager in the making of any appointment . . . shall subject such Councilmember to removal from office for malfeasance.”

Following up on this Charter provision, Mr. Borenstein spoke with City Attorney Janet Kern, who stated that “she will hire an outside law firm to investigate.”  Since Ms. Kern is known for her cautious approach to the law, and for her circumspect attitude toward the press, her comments themselves are significant.

And what do Ms. Vella and Mr. Oddie have to say for themselves?  The two Council members did not respond to Mr. Borenstein’s requests to discuss the matter.  But in an email to Mr. Borenstein, Mr. Oddie denied improperly influencing the selection process.  “As elected officials we have a duty to express our views on matters of concern to our constituents,” he was quoted as saying.  “As Americans that is our Constitutional right.”

As a good straight-news journalist, Mr. Borenstein refrained from commenting on the Councilman’s statement.  But we won’t:  It’s sanctimonious bullshit.

We hope that Ms. Kern and her outside counsel will complete their investigation in time to report their findings to the voters, and, if warranted, to the relevant legal authorities, before next November’s election.  And it’s entirely possible that other stories may emerge in the meantime about interference by Ms. Vella or Mr. Oddie in municipal affairs with the intent not of serving their constituents but of benefiting their benefactors.  We won’t be surprised if Ms. Keimach turns out not to be the only City staff member to have felt their heavy hands.

Ashcraft: A test of character

At this Tuesday’s Council meeting, the Alameda voters who will elect our next mayor will get a sterling opportunity to gauge the extent to which Councilwoman (and likely mayoral candidate) Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft’s decisions on the dais display principled consistency – or just political expediency.

The occasion is the third attempt by Mayor Trish Spencer to fill two vacancies on the Planning Board.  Of the four persons previously nominated by Ms. Spencer, Ms. Ashcraft voted to approve one of them – Alan Teague – and he was the only one to get a seat.  Ms. Ashcraft didn’t offer any explanation for her vote against Patricia Lamborn, whose nomination was considered at the same time as Mr. Teague’s, but she delivered lengthy remarks at Council’s July 17 meeting justifying her opposition to the two previous nominees, Steven Gortler and Ruben Tilos.

Messrs. Gortler and Tilos were “fine, upstanding gentlemen,” Ms. Ashcraft said, but they lacked the “experience and background” she believed a Planning Board member should possess.  “We have a very talented population of residents in Alameda,” she stated.  “We had applicants [for the Board position] with engineering backgrounds, architecture, planning professionals.  We have a wealth of knowledge and experience [in these areas].”

It was from this group, Ms. Ashcraft suggested, that new Planning Board members should be drawn.  Since Messrs. Gortler and Tilos weren’t part of that group – their expertise was in finance – Ms. Ashcraft declared she would vote no on both nominees.

On Tuesday, Ms. Spencer will present her latest selection:  Penny Cozad.  According to her application, Ms. Cozad has a bachelor’s degree from U.C.L.A. and a master’s degree in architecture from the Southern California Institute of Architecture.  Moreover, she is employed by the State of California as a construction inspector.

Architect?  Construction inspector?  Seems like Ms. Cozad fits Ms. Ashcraft’s desired profile to a ‘t.’

The nominee’s major failing, of course, is that she is not John Knox White, the Inner Ringleader and Spencer detractor now hanging onto his seat on the Board as a holdover until the Mayor can find someone whom Ms. Ashcraft will support to replace him.  Already, the gang of mudslingers who idolize Mr. Knox White has begun a smear campaign against Ms. Cozad.  (If you can stomach more along the same lines, we’ll bet you’ll be able to find it on Twitter in the next couple of days.)

But if Ms. Ashcraft truly means what she says in public, such tactics will backfire with her.  “We should never attack people,” Ms. Ashcraft told the audience on July 17.  “There is a way you can disagree, you can state your positions – we have a lot of positions in this room, in this city; they are all valid.  So you don’t need to demean and attack someone with an opposing position to strengthen yours; it actually has the opposite effect.  So let’s try to disagree with someone’s political position but do it with civility. . . .”

The Merry-Go-Round is quite certain that Council members Vella and Oddie will vote against Ms. Cozad’s nomination simply because they deem it to be in their political interest to do so.  But we’ve still not given up – totally – on Ms. Ashcraft.  From time to time, she’s proven willing to deviate from the script handed her by the unions and the local Democratic party.  Who knows?  Maybe she’ll do it again.

Sources:

October 2, 2017 Keimach letter to Council: 2017-10-02 Keimach letter to Council re fire chief

Cozad application: Cozad_Redacted

 

About Robert Sullwold

Partner, Sullwold & Hughes Specializes in investment litigation
This entry was posted in City Council, Firefighters and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Vella and Oddie: A case of hubris

  1. reyla graber says:

    Ms Ashcraft may vote for the Mayoral nominee if she believes it will help her retain or obtain the respect of Alameda voters.

  2. nyborn2013 says:

    Wait! It’s Friday and I’m receiving a Merry-Go-Round?! Hmmm. I suspect that Robert is heading off for the weekend?? 🙂 Nice blog here. I certainly can’t argue with the City Manager’s choice for Fire Chief. I just hope he is treated fairly by the greedy free union members. He will have an uphill battle. Mr. Oddie should pick his battles careful going forward. Not everyone wants Alameda to be a Sanctuary City, or are willing to write a blank check for the fire department.

  3. Steve Gerstle says:

    There is a disturbing pattern here that does not benefit the community.
    http://thealamedan.org/news/special-report-how-grant-was-lost

  4. ketzel says:

    Chief Rodriguez doesn’t look like a person of color to me. Identity politics has jumped the shark if anyone whose ancestors spoke a Romance language is now a person of color. I saw a pic of him, he looks Irish! I don’t care anyway, as long as he’s good at his job, which I assume he will be.

    • B. Hayton says:

      So, th’ Maya is happy with a “PERSON OF COLOR” for the “new” Fire Chief. Now that is a RACIST statement if I have ever heard one! Why does “color” even matter? So many of the current prominent persons of color in Alameda City and County, and California seem very “Racist” oriented while claiming “Racism” throughout the genereal population. Of course, we understand that this is policy for the Marxist “Rules For Radicals” playbook.

  5. Hannibal Hamlin says:

    When Ms. Keimach says she was approached by elected officials at the State level who asked her to disregard the best interests of the City of Alameda and sell-out to the union, she is undoubtedly referring to Rob Bonta, who coincidentally happens to be Jim Oddie’s boss. The three of them, Oddie, Bonta and Vella should share a jail cell together.

    • Schuyler Colfax says:

      Bonta, Oddie and Vella are only symptoms of the problem. In all likelihood, if any of them actually refused to do the union’s bidding, they’d be unemployed come Election Day, and a new stooge would be sitting in their chairs.

      • Elbridge Gerry says:

        That’s too cynical even for me. I say let’s throw the bums out and find someone better. Bonta, Oddie and Vella may be as corrupt as the day is long, but that doesn’t mean everyone is a crook. There are bound to be honest, competent alternatives out there who would do a better job.

      • Henry Wilson says:

        Personally, I much prefer corrupt politicians over the honest ones. They’re more flexible, they don’t muck things up for everyone else by standing on principle, and for the right price they’ll do virtually anything you want. Give me Vella, Oddie and Bonta any day of the week and you can keep Honest Abe and his ilk.

      • John Tyler says:

        the problem with corrupt politicians is that typically they’re not very bright. take Oddie for example — if he had any brains he wouldn’t actually threaten the City Manager’s job in writing on City Letterhead. hubris on one thing but sheer stupidity is something else altogether.

      • N..B.: The Borenstein piece reports that Mr. Oddie made his threat orally to Chief Rolleri in a conversation rather than in writing in his letter to Ms. Keimach.

      • Thomas Marshall says:

        The Alameda City Manager is fighting a losing battle. The firefighters union is all-powerful. They have friends at every level of state and local government in California, and even their friends fear them. Personally, I think we should disband the City Council altogether, and just let the firefighters union run the City. They already do anyway.

      • Henry Wallace says:

        sadly, mr. marshall is probably right, not only is ms. keimach likely to lose her job, but now it’s imperative that she be fired just to send a message to all the other city managers in California who might be tempted to stand-up to Mr. Bonta and his henchmen. in fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if she’s drawn and quartered, too.

      • Levi Morton says:

        it seems the only remaining question is whether Mr. Oddie and Ms. Vella, with a helping hand from Mr. Bonta can persuade Ms. Ashcraft to join them in deposing the City Manager. It’s a tough call for Ms. Ashcraft as it’s hard to imagine she could ever become mayor if she sides with soon-to-be-former Council Members Oddie and Vella. On the other hand, delivering for the union at this critical juncture will win her their undying gratitude, which could make the difference in a close election; we shall see.

    • John Tyler says:

      the problem with corrupt politicians is that typically they’re not very bright. take Oddie for example — if he had any brains he wouldn’t actually threaten the City Manager’s job in writing on City Letterhead. hubris is one thing but sheer stupidity is something else altogether.

  6. gretchen Lipow says:

    Alameda deserves better than this scenario. This sounds like Trump, :”you’re fired”.

  7. Editor’s Note:

    Over the last few days comments have been submitted under the names of various historical political figures, especially vice presidents (Hannibal Hamlin, VP under Lincoln; Henry Wallace, VP under FDR). Since none of these comments violated our rather lax comment policy — no ad hominem insults — we’ve posted all of them. But our readers should be aware they may be witnessing what amounts to an interior dialogue.

  8. carol says:

    So, 8 posts so far by the same person obsessed with veeps. Nice history lesson, but now the jig is up, Spiro Agnew. Mind telling the rest of us what your point is? Or is it just comic relief?

  9. B. Hayton says:

    Just found out ’bout Alameda Merry-Go-Round, what’a nice pressure relief valve. Went into the pharmacy the other day to refill my tranquilizer prescription, the Demoncrats are driving me crazy, and Doc gave me a copy of “Merry-Go-Round”. Outstanding!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s