Reply With Quote
I have been on the sidelines watching this and I think I will finally tell it as I see it.
It's the same nonsense. Nothing changes.
The director of the conservancy is fighting for his $140,000 a year job (with $10,000 expense account). Thats where his "passion" comes from. In my mind he's as over paid as any political appointee Brown can come up with.(Why do you think Collins dumped it?) I give Brown credit for Refusing to go status quo on this one.
The conservancy is a cash cow for a choice few at the top, on the backs of low paid employees and clueless volunteers.
The dedicated voulenteers can still do so no matter who runs the show, and a city director will make about half what the current administrator makes, with out the expense account, and still assume the added task of running ALL the city parks, not just the Olmstead ones.
But because the current administrator sees his overpaid job in jeapordy he's raising the false assumption the city isn't being forthcoming in it's plans for his future.
I think they have been pretty clear. He has no future running the newly restructured city parks department. If the council ok's a director at ,say $75,000 a year, he could consider applying, provided he meets the residency requirement.
