Two months before Monroe's first city administrator began working at City Hall, a Times "Our View" said "it will be interesting to see how giving the city administrator the human resources functions will work."
Unfortunately, it turned out to be interesting, indeed. Apparently, for Mark Vahlsing it didn't work so well.
Vahlsing's tenure came to an abrupt and messy end Tuesday when the Monroe City Council voted 8-2 to end his employment. The city in a news release and aldermen during interviews with the Times insist Vahlsing's departure is not due to a discrimination complaint filed against him May 1 by a former employee. Instead, they said, Vahlsing no longer works for the city because he left undone some of his responsibilities as human resources director. No one would give details on the record.
It is interesting to note that the council did not perform its own human resources function in regard to Vahlsing. Aldermen and the mayor were supposed to review Vahlsing's performance annually. The council apparently didn't know of its role until Tuesday.
Frankly, that's hard to believe, given the council created and approved the position's job description. It reminds us of when the Monroe school board claimed ignorance about the financial shell game played by former Superintendent Ed Van Ravenstein and former Business Manager Mike McArdle that helped the district dig a bigger hole that eventually needed filling with a referendum. This should be a learning lesson for the council, which must pay closer attention to the work of the next administrator.
Aldermen also should reconsider having the administrator perform the HR functions, something Alderman Mark Coplien hinted at Wednesday when he said the council hasn't decided whether the positions will continue to be combined. The council eliminated the safety and HR position in February 2006. While cutting the job saved the city about $65,000 in salary and benefits, it added responsibilities to a city administrator position already full of duties. And, as we said in "Our View" then, "dealing with personnel issues can be both time-consuming and a legal minefield. ... Hopefully, the responsibilities aren't a weight that prevents the person hired from devoting time to moving the city forward."
By all accounts, Vahlsing was doing the work of "moving the city forward" as administrator. It was the human resources part that was the problem. The council ought to think long and hard about whether it wants the next administrator to try to do both.
Unfortunately, it turned out to be interesting, indeed. Apparently, for Mark Vahlsing it didn't work so well.
Vahlsing's tenure came to an abrupt and messy end Tuesday when the Monroe City Council voted 8-2 to end his employment. The city in a news release and aldermen during interviews with the Times insist Vahlsing's departure is not due to a discrimination complaint filed against him May 1 by a former employee. Instead, they said, Vahlsing no longer works for the city because he left undone some of his responsibilities as human resources director. No one would give details on the record.
It is interesting to note that the council did not perform its own human resources function in regard to Vahlsing. Aldermen and the mayor were supposed to review Vahlsing's performance annually. The council apparently didn't know of its role until Tuesday.
Frankly, that's hard to believe, given the council created and approved the position's job description. It reminds us of when the Monroe school board claimed ignorance about the financial shell game played by former Superintendent Ed Van Ravenstein and former Business Manager Mike McArdle that helped the district dig a bigger hole that eventually needed filling with a referendum. This should be a learning lesson for the council, which must pay closer attention to the work of the next administrator.
Aldermen also should reconsider having the administrator perform the HR functions, something Alderman Mark Coplien hinted at Wednesday when he said the council hasn't decided whether the positions will continue to be combined. The council eliminated the safety and HR position in February 2006. While cutting the job saved the city about $65,000 in salary and benefits, it added responsibilities to a city administrator position already full of duties. And, as we said in "Our View" then, "dealing with personnel issues can be both time-consuming and a legal minefield. ... Hopefully, the responsibilities aren't a weight that prevents the person hired from devoting time to moving the city forward."
By all accounts, Vahlsing was doing the work of "moving the city forward" as administrator. It was the human resources part that was the problem. The council ought to think long and hard about whether it wants the next administrator to try to do both.
