Wednesday, December 09, 2009

Once Again, Secrecy Trumps Transparency In Finding New Chief

 
According to today's D&C: "Kathryn Firkins said six candidates eligible to be considered for the position via the current Monroe County Civil Service list have said they're interested, and five other candidates from outside Monroe County have submitted resumes ... Firkins would not disclose the names of those who have applied for the position ..."

SCATS ~~ Not surprisingly, Greece's dysfunction continues despite our track record of multiple scandals. The sheeple reelected the same problemmatic "leaders" so the future holds promise for more of the same.

After the number of candidates for chief is whittled down from the current 11 interested parties to the "top three" by a committee, our Town Board will decide who gets the job. The community will have no insight into who any of the other contenders were. Even the BOE has a better track record than this when they chose our past and present Superintendents. Achramovitch was one of three contenders who were each introduced to the community at their own open forum.

Mr. Auberger, you need to do better than this! We no longer trust you!

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Any way you slice or dice it, this search process is a joke. The choice was made months ago. Get used to it and stop speculating. Unless he backs out, Capt. Michael Ceretto of the State Police will become Chief Ceretto.

The reasons are many, but some of your references to the execellent candidate from Irondequoit as being a man of integrity who is not political is the very reason he will be rejected.

Ceretto, on the other hand, has strong political ties in Monroe County and can be counted on to "play ball." He is Auberger's kind of guy.

Anonymous said...

I am not understanding this business of not putting out the names of all who appied.
I am not understanding this business of having a committee (unelected people) eliminating 8 of the eleven candidates "before" being considered by the board.
I'm sorry but that smells.

Anonymous said...

I think if you FOIA the town they would have to provide the names of all applicants

SCATS said...

To 12:34PM ~~ I suspect that even if they were supposed which I'm not convinced they are required to do, they would stonewall providing that response until AFTER the new chief was hired. With the holidays coming up, and the announcement that the new chief will be hired by end of January, it certainly wouldn't be difficult for them to get their response hung-up for 6 weeks or so.

To 11:30AM ~~ Clearly then, you do not understand dysfunctional systems. The need to exert excessive control (Auberger) which results in secrecy and closed-door decision-making (entire Town Board who enable him) are the hallmarks of such a group. Dr. Phil, where are you??

Charlie Hubbard said...

11:30 brings up a very good point.
Elected officials decided they wanted a new police chief. It is up to those same elected officials to be responsible for chosing the replacement. If those officials have a criteria for reducing the 11 to 3 fine - then do it - don't let some committee make up something as 'they' go along. That committee is accountable to no-one, certainly no one in the community.
Been there-done that-it does not work.
As far as holding secret the names of those who have applied - well - THAT makes no sence. Perhaps someone in the community may have some info on one of these applicants - they are now disconnected and shut out from bringing that info forward thanks to the secrecy. NOT GOOD

Anonymous said...

Have any of you considered that applicants wish to remain anonymous unless and until they are selected for an interview or named as a finalist? They DO have other jobs, they DO have other bosses you know. These bosses may not look kindly on them applying out - and there is no reason to share that with the whole community, as I said, unless and until they are considered as a viable candidate by the committee, person responsible for hiring, etc. Just because you all want to "try them publicly" before they even open their mouths, does NOT mean you have an exclusive right to do so.

SCATS said...

To 2:08PM ~~ Once they are down to three candidates, I think it is imperative that the three be made known to the public.

Anonymous said...

2;08 I think your making stuff up as you go along. When did Firkins or anyone from town hall indicate at anytime "that" was a reason for not giving out the names.

Anonymous said...

SCATS, agreed. When it's narrowed to three then those are considered "finalists" as the final selection will be made from these groups. I was responding to 11:30 who said "I am not understanding this business of not putting out the names of all who applied." NOT putting out names of all who applied is a typical (and ethical) human resource practice. I'm sure 11:30 would want his/her name blabbed all over the community if he/she simply APPLIED for another position. What's important is who is really in contention - which is your point, SCATS about the final three.

Anonymous said...

2:08 - are you asking SCATS and her people to actually apply logic to this? Prepare to be disappointed. Remember, it serves SCATS' and the Greece Democrat party's purpose to attack every single thing the town does no matter what it is. This used to be a good site where you could come and actually discuss issues. Now it's pure attack. SCATS doesn't even allow us to comment to each other anymore. Now she determines how the discussion will go and what we are allowed to have posted. So much for having this be about the people. It's all politics now. :(