Thank you for your article discussing issues at the Lompoc City Council (“A house divided,” Sept. 14). Other background that might have helped readers is that when the budget was first introduced, both City Manager Patrick Wiemiller and Mayor Bob Lingl said that the budget needed to include three proposed tax increases to avoid city bankruptcy. Council members Jim Mosby, Dirk Starbuck, and Victor Vega opposed tax increases and have spent four months asking questions and searching for information to balance the budget.
On Sept. 5, Mosby, Starbuck, and Vega passed a budget, which the city manager said had a surplus, with no new taxes, continuing full funding for nonprofits, and the 30-year-old school crossing guard program. On the other hand, Mayor Lingl, at numerous budget hearings, offered a motion to pass the staff-proposed budget and tax increases, which Councilmember Osborne sometimes seconded.
Another point in your article that needs clarification is the discussion between Wiemiller and Vega at the Aug. 22 council budget meeting. Here is a transcript of the exchange, and contrary to how others have characterized the discussion, both Mr. Wiemiller and Mr. Vega used a professional business voice the whole time. (Prior to this discussion, City Attorney Joe Pannone had stated that the council set policy on adding or deleting staff positions.) To watch the video yourself, go to the Lompoc city website, City Council tab, meetings tab, and then select the video of the Aug. 22 meeting and scroll to the 2 hour and 26 minute point.
Wiemiller: “When we start to getting anywhere close to start discussing individual positions and personnel issues and doing that in this setting here, it is simply not going to happen and it can’t happen and so I’m going to hold all of us to the contractual responsibilities that the six of us have. Thanks.” (Mr. Wiemiller is referring to his employment contract, which states he has day-to-day supervision of city employees.)
Vega: “I understand sir, I also ah, as a rebuttal here, Mr. Pannone that said we were within our responsibilities as oversight and policy makers as long as we’re [at the council meeting]. I think, so the question that needs to be asked you as city manager, do you recognize the council as being policy makers and providing direction. So if we were to place this as a directive, would you follow it?”
A long pause follows.
Vega: “Sounds like you are telling me you wouldn’t.”
Wiemiller: “I am not telling you. I am not answering the question.”
Vega: “Well, it’s a direct question, and I would like an answer for it, sir.”
Wiemiller: “I am sure you would.”
Vega: “I want the other council members to note, OK, we are not here to play games, it’s not a power struggle, but I expect you guys to get together here on this and give a clear direction.”
As a result of city attorney’s advice at the end of the Sept. 5 meeting, council members Mosby and Vega offered a motion for a special meeting to discuss discipline or termination of the city manager, which failed as it did not receive a third as required by council procedure.
To understand city policy, on your browser, enter “city of Lompoc personnel ordinance and rules,” and go to page 6, abolition of positions.
It reads, “Whenever in the judgment of the City Council it becomes necessary, the City Council may abolish any position of employment in the competitive service [city staff].” The section provides details of how a displaced worker is accommodated.
John Linn is a former mayor of Lompoc. Send your thoughts to letters@santamariasun.com.
This article appears in Sep 28 – Oct 5, 2017.