Jefferson Hills Business Manager Changes Don't Make Sense
Submitted by Starship_Trooper on April 23, 2008 - 2:30pm.
Tags:
Arndt back in JH after Shepherd resigns post
By STACY LEE Daily News Staff Writer
slee@dailynewsemail.com
The majority of Jefferson Hills council wants Doug Arndt back as borough manager after John Shepherd resigned the position. Council accepted Shepherd's voluntary resignation Monday night by a 5-2 vote, then voted to rehire Arndt by a 6-1 vote.
My question is if John Shepherd resigned why are we paying him $25,000 AND I understand he will be eligible for benefits and unemployment? The article claims council had to honor a contract established by a different council, but I don't get it. I have NEVER heard of a contract that if someone quits their job, the employer has to pay them $25,000. Further, you don't get unemployment if you quit your job, only if you are fired or laid off. I've been asking around about this and no one has given me a good explanation. My guess is I probably won't get any answers either because Shepherd probably had to sign a confidentiality clause. Does this bother anyone else? Does anyone else have more details? Thanks

____________________________________________________________________

John Shepard
Submitted by footballmom on April 24, 2008 - 5:51pm.
I really think Mr. Shepard was probably a standup guy, a hardworker and professional. I think he probably wouldn't play politics or games. That's why he's gone. Do I believe he resigned? Highly doubtful.

____________________________________________________________________
John Shepard
Submitted by informedresident on April 26, 2008 - 6:38pm.
I completely agree. There is more to this resignation than meets the eye. Who VOLUNTARILY resigns, gets paid $25K in severance, gets to collect employment, retains their hospitalization, and is forced to maintain confidentiality about the whole sorted affair. My guess is that Mr. Shepard, professional that he is, advised mommy dearest that she is not in charge of council and that she would be better served to stay on her side of the borough building and do her job. Who will be next?

____________________________________________________________________
Who Will Be Next?
Submitted by crusader12345 on April 26, 2008 - 9:31pm.
Could it be the last man standing-the police chief? My guess is-like Shepard- he cannot be controlled by mommy dearest or the new council - won't do their dirty work so "off with their heads!"
Oh, the spoils of nepotism. And to think that not only did JH elect sonny boy, but they almost elected daddy dearest too! Mommy Dearest rules and the '"King"dumb' is in grave danger!

____________________________________________________________________
Chief Next on the Chopping Block?
Submitted by Starship_Trooper on April 30, 2008 - 10:50am.
I have to admit Crusader, the same thought crossed my mind that council will now go after the chief of police. I hope I am wrong. He is a great guy and a stand up officer. The problem is he was not hand picked by the new council and he holds the only position left that council hasn't tried to go after despite the respectable people we already had in place. They got rid of the solicitor and hired their own, a lawyer who contributed to their election campaigns. A guy who charges $40 more every hour than our last solicitor, and as West Mifflin's solictor, charged twice as much as our previous solicitor, more than $100,000 more. Our business manager mysteriously quits, despite having done a commendable job and giving no explanation for leaving. This only cost us taxpayers an additional $25,000 for no apparent reason. They removed chairs of committees, members from commisions, residents from council meetings, the list goes on and on. It's a reasonable question to ask, what's next? Or better yet, whose next? I'm sure they will next try to get us removed from blogging on this site.

____________________________________________________________________
What is Next?$$$$?
Submitted by crusader12345 on April 28, 2008 - 10:34am.
Whatever they do, guess we shouldn't be surprised if its hidden in a "confidentiality" clause. Seems to be their style. I hear they don't want the press asking any questions about Shepard's VOLUNTARY resignation or any of their other housecleaning deals........ What do they have to hide? Why so defensive? And why so many "special" meetings????$$$$$$$$

____________________________________________________________________
Crusader - Good Questions!
Submitted by Pen Fanatic on April 30, 2008 - 11:31am.
What do they have to hide? Why so defensive? And why so many "special" meetings????
That's what I want to know. Council refuses to hear the concerns of the citizens and then everytime I turn around there are special executive sessions (aka, private, nonpublic meetings).
By Council President, Chris King's, own words he's paranoid that the mayor has something "personal" against him because the mayor vetoed council's changes to the Economic Development Committee. That's absurd. He vetoed it because it was the right thing to do, and he had the backbone to stand up against the council maffia.
King also claims it was of the utmost concern to remove Shauna D'Alesandro from her Economic Development Committee responsibilities because she might not voice her opinion if she is trying to get elected.
Talk about paranoid. Shauna just got reelected this year. She's the last person to be concerned with getting reelected. And anyone who knows Shauna knows that she will tell it like it is whether its popular or not.
That's what makes her a good leader. If the truth be known, that's what council is really worried about. They are not worried that she won't voice her opinion, but that she will voice her opinion (and it might not be theirs).

____________________________________________________________________
Pen Fanatic RIGHT ON THE MONEY!!!!
Submitted by informedresident on April 30, 2008 - 2:43pm.
Rich Beam and Ms. Dalesandro aren't the only residents they have targeted. Look what they did to Judy Macosko after 20 years of service to the borough. And look at what they tried to do to Mr. Housely. And let's not forget the borough manager - and how much that cost all of us!
You are absolutely correct about this council. Unless you share their opinion, you will be minimized by the passing of new ordinances to get rid of you OR you will be gaveled to silence by Mr. King OR you will heckled by Mommy dearest and Daddy dearest and kicked out of the public meeting. I find Mr. King's message in the Jefferson newsletter to be very self-serving and hypocritical. He writes that he encourages "all residents to be as active as they can in local government activities by attending meetings and being involved on commissions and boards." Yet he kicks those off commissions and boards who don't agree with him and his co-horts by changing the ordinances. He fails to encourage open, honest dialogue and is afraid of debate. I guess the moral of the story continues to be.... If your opinion is not their opinion you're history!

____________________________________________________________________
Police Chief
Submitted by footballmom on April 30, 2008 - 8:38pm.
All I can say is that if they remove the police chief the residents need to stand up at that point and say no more. I wouldn't blame the Chief for leaving. He's probably beaten down by all the insanity. I just hope he realizes he's made a huge difference in this community. Especially with the children and teens. He's out and about, shows he cares. I know many people who will be very sad if he goes.

____________________________________________________________________
News Article from South Section of Post Gazette South - 5/1/08
Submitted by crusader12345 on May 1, 2008 - 11:16am.
Jefferson Hills' manager's ouster explained
Thursday, May 01, 2008
By Margaret Smykla

Alleged political maneuvers in Jefferson Hills will cost taxpayers $25,000 and a game of musical chairs with borough managers. There are conflicting versions of how it all came to pass.
After an April 23 special meeting of council in which members voted 5 to 1 to enter into an employment agreement with new borough Manager Douglas Arndt, council President Christopher King was asked how he learned that the manager, John Shepherd, planned to resign.
Mr. King said he and Solicitor Mike Adams paid Mr. Shepherd an office visit for no particular reason, at which time Mr. Shepherd informed them of his resignation plans.

Councilman Dominic Serapiglia, the dissenter in the vote, said it didn't happen that way.

Mr. Serapiglia said Mr. King and Mr. Adams met with Mr. Shepherd on March 28 to inform him he no longer had the majority support of council, and that his employment was going to be terminated. Mr. Shepherd could either resign or be terminated and he was offered a settlement agreement if he resigned.

When told about that version of events, Mr. King's response was "no comment."

Mr. Shepherd has signed a settlement agreement that contains a confidentiality clause.

According to the terms of the Oct. 10, 2007, employment contract with Mr. Shepherd, who was hired by the previous council, a termination -- the definition of which includes resigning following an offer from a majority of council -- makes him eligible for a severance package. That package includes a cash payment equal to four months of his $75,000 salary, or $25,000, four months of health benefits and not contesting his filing for unemployment benefits, which he is receiving. He has no new job at this point.
To simply terminate his employment without grounds at a public meeting would have revealed the political nature of the firing and put the onus on council for the settlement agreement, Mr. Serapiglia said.

"I still cannot get a performance reason," he said.
"He is a man who should not be without a manager's job because of his high level of performance. Any task he was given he did. Anything that was grant-related he wrote; he was just an outstanding municipal manager,"Mr. Serapiglia added.
Mr. Shepherd was formerly manager of North Huntingdon Township in Westmoreland County.

On April 14, council accepted Mr. Shepherd's resignation and voted to hire Mr. Arndt. Mr. Arndt was the manager for Edgeworth for 10 years, followed by O'Hara Township for 15 years. He served as interim borough manager for Jefferson Hills from October, 2006, until Sept. 7, 2007.

Mr. King cited the leadership, organization, communication skills, and experience exhibited by Mr. Arndt during his interim period as the reason for his hiring.

His contractual severance package includes eight weeks of salary, plus one week for each year of service to a maximum of 16 weeks. But, unlike Mr. Shepherd's contract, there is no provision for receiving the package upon resignation following an offer from a majority of council.

"We're happy to have Doug back," said Mr. King. "He will provide leadership for a long time to come."
Margaret Smykla is a freelance writer.
First published on May 1, 2008 at 6:07 am