Tag Cloud
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Fong: Clean out development department
by Kathleen Haley, published on November 18, 2010 at 7:03 PM
Storyline: Sacramento City Hall / Politics
Loading images
Sacramento City Councilman Rob Fong said in an interview Thursday that further actions should be taken against city employees, including code division employee Dan Waters, who were involved in the recent scandals at the city’s Community Development Department.
Waters approved 35 building permits in a Natomas flood zone last year. Officials with the city and the Federal Emergency Management Agency say that Waters’ action to give the permits to K. Hovnanian Homes broke federal regulations. The City Council agreed earlier this week to pay up to $350,000 to correct its violations and comply with FEMA. The violations related to 38 permits – Waters approved 35 of them, according to city spokeswoman Amy Williams.
Waters, the son of outgoing City Councilman Robbie Waters, is still employed by the city. He is a customer service supervisor at the city’s code division with a base salary of roughly $62,278, according to Williams. Specifically, he works in the neighborhood code compliance section, she said.
In an interview, Fong commented on the FEMA violations and the department’s other major scandal: an audit that says the department failed to collect more than $2.3 million in fees from developers.
“If I were running that department, they wouldn’t be working for the city of Sacramento anymore,” Fong said.
He noted the City Council cannot fire city employees. Under the city’s charter, firing is conducted by the city manager’s office.
Fong said the department’s troubles need further investigation beyond the audit. The audit calculated the fee problems, but it did not name names.
Fong also said he thinks there are other people responsible for the department’s messes in addition to Waters.
“My strong suspicion is there was some other folks involved in the chain of command,” Fong said. “And I think we need to figure out how far that went.”
He declined to name any names himself, saying that the city does not have evidence to show who was responsible and how they were involved in the department’s problems. He said he recently directed city officials and the city attorney’s office to provide a framework for how the City Council can investigate the people who were involved in the incidents at the department.
In response to questions about Waters, city spokeswoman Williams said: “We cannot share details about personnel matters. The City Manager’s Office is aggressively reviewing the audit report with the Community Development Department and Labor Relations, and we are investigating to determine if disciplinary action or further investigation of any employee is warranted.
“All disciplinary action necessary will be taken when appropriate,” she said. “Disciplinary actions are the responsibility of the city manager.”
Williams noted that the city transferred Waters to a different position last year. “Under the previous administration, Dan Waters was reassigned to Code Enforcement last calendar year,” she said. “As part of the consolidation efforts to save money, Code and Community Development Departments merged, and code became a division where he now resides.”
The local media has reported that Waters was temporarily suspended last year.
Meanwhile, Waters’ work at the development department is also being investigated by the state Fair Political Practices Commission, according to reports in The Sacramento Bee.
Vina said at an Oct. 12 City Council meeting that the FPPC had concerns about the city’s development department, although he did not mention Waters’ name.
FPPC Executive Director Roman Porter was unavailable for comment Thursday.
Waters did not return three phone messages left by The Sacramento Press Thursday afternoon.
Photo by Brandon Darnell.
Kathleen Haley is a staff reporter for The Sacramento Press.
Flag Article As:
Conversation Express your views,
debate, and be heard with those in your area closest
to the issue.
Leave a Comment
Raising the issue a year after the fact, and in a SacPress interview (and not during a council session).
It's pretty amazing how low our standards have sunk if this is what passes for backbone.
Compare this to Fong's actions with respect to the much more substantial scandals of our dysfunctional Utilities Department.
When the grand jury reported in Jan. that city managers had illegally diverted between $21 and $35 million of ratepayer money in violation of Prop. 218 and then tried to cover-up their diversions, did Fong call for or vote for the appointment of an independent counsel to investigate their illegal conduct? No.
When the grand jury reported that the illegal diversions were still ongoing, did Fong demand that they stop? No.
Did he call for dismissal or even disciplinary action against any of the city managers responsible for the diversions? No.
Did Fong vote in favor of either one the two proposals to engage an outside productivity auditor to examine the city's operations, including the Utilities Department? No.
When the former director of the Utilities Department was canned for refusing to keep his mouth shut about the illegal diversions, did Fong call for action to protect the whistle blower? No.
When the former director handed Fong and other council members copies of an outside study that disclosed the extent of the illegal diversions, did Fong demand action by the city manager? No.
Where is the moral outrage, Mr. Fong, over a rip off that has cost city residents tens of millions of dollars in higher utility bills and has reduced investment in our city's infrastructure? Where is the oversight? Where is the accountability?
We are waiting, Mr. Fong.
And maybe Mr Backbone should stop being coy and name some names.
Fong should focus on making sure that RK & BBT are thoroughly investigated.
Dear Mayor, City Council:
We would like to point out to Sacramento’s City Council, and to others should the need arises, that the quality of the building inspections that being done today by the city’s building department are beyond shameful, and if things do not change legal action will follow. Our city inspectors are given close to twenty inspections a day, and there is no way any building inspector, no matter how experienced, could properly handle that kind of work load. Because of these unreasonable expectations, inspectors are forced to sacrifice quality in favor of quantity, potentially leaving several building problems unnoted.
The inspectors are complaining that Intern City Manager Gus Vina and the Sacramento’s City Council have failed to fire the building department’s dishonest managers and associates who gave away millions of dollars by overlooking laws, permits, regulations, and inspections. This as you know caused the laying off of the frontline workforce that had nothing to do with violating laws, procedures, regulations, etc. We would all hope that these employees will someday get their day in court because this seems to be somewhat illegal, pink-slipping innocent employees because of management’s criminal activity. All of us agree if you would fire these managers and associates the department would have the funds to bring back inspectors to help out with the daily workload. Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council, you need to find a city manager with a successful track record, not someone who is tied to the “good-old-boy” system.
Let us consider this “good-old-boy” system. City managers and assistant city managers have always engaged in meetings, whether mandatory or not, to keep everyone on the same page as far as policies and procedures are concerns. Assistant City Manager Mr. John Dangburg, whose job it was to supervise Mr. Bill Thomas and the Community Development Department, was well aware of the corruption that existed there, as did then his fellow assistant city manager Gus Vina, who happens to be one of his best friends. One should ask Mr. Vina why he seems to be in a big rush for the city council to acknowledge him as a certified city manager. There must be some dots that need to be connected, and yet perhaps, something that has been overlooked that would disqualifies Mr. Vina from this position of city manager.
Recently Mr. Gus Vina, as interim city manager, placed a heaver work load on inspectors by pink-slipping many of their colleges, adding fuel to his false claim that he has right size the city. Most of us were led to believe that Mr. Vina intention was to right-size the city by the firing of management personnel in order to bring back many needed building inspectors. Not only did this not happen, but it reveled a true message to all of us that the corrupt management is still in control of the city, and one of their members presides over the most important set of the city, that of city manager. It appears that Mr. Vina knows if one destroys the front line work force, one also eliminates the necessary checks and balances maintained between management and personnel.
I sincerely hope that the City Council understands what happens as results of cutting corners and promoting an unqualified and egotistic candidate to the position of city manager. The City Council will yet again bear the brunt of a huge problem when it blows up into their face, as this one surly will. Once again, the Council will be shamed by the public when their homes and business places begin to deteriorate and fall apart because of rushed inspections.
Mr. Mayor and Council Members please due your diligence and find a city manager who can solve problems without creating new ones. The City of Sacramento needs, and deserves, someone with solid experience, who is not only productive, but ethical. Mr. Gus Vina is the antithesis of such person.
January 1 of 2011 the new Cal-green building laws come into effect and we have a Mayor that's claiming to be a green mayor. One could only wonder how can one achieve that when the building inspectors are only inspection life/safety issues, for the building Inspectors are overwhelmed with work of up to 20 inspections or plus a day and one would have to say you Mayor has failed and should restructure the building department.
January
Sincerely,