HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.a. David Bechtold Grievance F
Y •._. n . . � � . �. . . .
CITY OF ROSE�O'ONT
` LXECIITIVE S'UN�2ARY FOR ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 6, 1994
AGENDA ITEbl: DAVID BECHTOLD GRIEVANCE AGENDA SFsCTION:
OLD BUSINESS
PREPARED BY: THOMA.S D. BUR.T AGENDA ��� � / A
CITY ADMINISTRATOR a
ATTACF�iENTS: RESOLUTION APPROVED BY:
..
...�
Attached is the findings of fact regarding the grievance of David Bechtold
as prepared by city attorney, Charlie LeFevere.
RECObIl�tENDE:D ACTION: Motion to adopt RESOLUTION MAItING FINDINGS OF FACT,
CONCLUSIONS, AND DECISION IN THE GRIEVANCE OF DAVID BECHTOLD.
COUNCIL ACTION:
n
r . _ ,
RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS AND
DECISION IN THE GRIEVANCE OF DAVID BECHTOLD
WHEREAS, a grievance proceeding requested by former city employee, David Bechtold
was held befare the city council on August 1, 1994 and continued to its regular meeting of
August 9, 1994; and
WHEREAS, at the grievance proceedings of August l, David Bechtold and his attorney
stated the basis for Mr. Bechtold's grievance and presented testimony and argument in support
of his position; and
�
WHEREAS, the city administrator presented testimony and evidence in support of the
ciry's decision to lay-off Mr. Bechtold and not to rehire him for another position.
NOW, THEREFORE, on the basis of a11 records available to the city council and
arguments and evidence presented at the grievance proceeding on August l, 1994, the City
Council of the City of Rosemount hereby makes the following Findings of Fact,Conclusions and
Decision.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The grieving party, Mr. David Bechtold was employed by the City of Rosemount
from September 5, 1983 until June 19, 1994.
2. Prior to the time of his lay-off, Bechtold was employed as the park and recreation
director. -
3. On June 6, 1994, Mr. Bechtold was given notice by the ciry administrator that he
would be laid off and that his last day of work would be June 11, 1994.
4. On June 7, 1994, af an open public meeting, the city council eliminated the
position of park and recreation director in an administrative reorganization of the city and laid
off Mr. Bechtold. The council also awarded Mr. Bechtold two months severance pay in the
amount of$9,101.60. As a part of the reorganization the council also eliminated the position of
Community Center Manager. After eliminating these positions there were no other employees
serving in the same class of positions as the position from which Mr. Bechtold was laid off. A
new position, Park and Recrearion/Communiry Center Director, was created to oversee the work '
CLL75237
RS215-12 1
�
o , .
of both of these former departments. Mr. Jim Topitzhofer, the former Community Center
Manager was appointed to this newly created position.
5. The notice given to Mr. Bechtold was that of two working weeks, counting both
the day of notice and the last day of employment, from notice on June 6 to the last day of
employment of June 17. This method of calculating notice was consistent with past city practice.
6. Following notice of his lay-off, Bechtold requested a grievance proceedings,
pursuant to city code, with the city administrator and later to the city counciL
7. City code section 2-2-4 defines the duties of the city's park and recreation
committee as follows:
2-2-4: POWERS AND DUTIES:
A. Advice and Recommendations: The Committee shall have the duty to
advise the City Council in the acquisition and maintenance of parks,
playgrounds and other public lands. It sha11 also have the duty of making
recommendations and supervising the City recreation system. ,The
Committee shall recommend to the Ciry Council expansion and plans far
the development of the City park and recreation system. The Committee
sha11 further make recommendations as to desired regulatory ordinances
and make recommendations as to any matters relating to the park and
recreation system of the City.
B. Investigate Needs of System: The Committee shall have no power to
'� make coniracts, levy taxes, bonow money or condernn property, but shall
have the full power and responsibility to invesrigate requirements and
needs of the City park and recreation system and to assist the Council in
formulating the terms of the procedure for accomplishing that goa1. (Ord.
VIII-1, 10-5-71)
8. The city council did not consult with the park and recreation committee in
connecrion with the city's reorganization including the elimination of the position of parks and
recreation director, nor did it consult with the committee about the hiring of Mr. 7irn Topitzhofer
to fill the newly created department head position of community center/pazks and recreation
director. The city council has not consulted with the committee on such administrative or
personnel matters in the past
9. Prior to the action by the city council on June 7, 1994 to eliminate the position
of park and recreation director, the Mayor and each of the city council members had separately
discussed the reorganization with city administrator Thomas Burt. However, during these
discussions, Administrator Burt did not share with any of the councilmembers the views of the
athers and did not attempt to forge a consensus or arrange for a predetermined result at the later
open public meeting. Action was taken by the ciry council to eliminate the position at the open
public meeting of the city council on June 7, 1994.
CLL75237 2
RS215-12
.
� . �
10. As a department head Mr. Bechtold was subject to minimum supervision. He
reported to the city administrator, but since Mr. Bechtold was a department head, he was
responsible for running his depaztment, and daily made independent and autonomous decisions.
Mr. Bechtold was responsible for the overall planning, coordination, management af personnel,
budgeting and finances of the department. The two divisions of the pazks and recreation
department were recreation and park maintenance, the supervisors of which reported to Mr.
Bechtold.
11. Mr. Bechtold was responsible for determining the types of recreational programs
and activities that would best serve the needs and interests of residents, a�d he was uitimately
responsible for the operation, staffing, budgeting of all city recreation programs. Mr. Bechtold
was responsible for long range planning of pazk needs and served as the staff liaisan to the
master parks plan committee. He was responsit�le for establishing city recreation programs which
included the responsibiliry of setting softball user fees, tiny tot fees, park user fees, park shelter
fees and other miscellaneous fees. With regards to park maintenance, David Bechtold was
ultimately responsible for the maantenance and upkeep of a11 the city parks and city bikeways and
walkway trails which also included parks facilities, athletic fields, cominunity parks,
neighborhood parks and park shelters. The park maintenance supervisor reported directly to Mr.
Bechtold usually on a daily basis.
12. Mr. Bechtold was responsible for the overall development of parks in the city, and
he was responsible for short and long range planning of pazk needs. He annually recommendeti
to the Parks &Recreation Committee and to the ciry council the amount for park dedication fees
for new subdivisions.
13. In his role as a department head, Mr. Bechtald represented the city at meetings at
the county level and served as coordinator between the city and local youth associations such as
Rosemount Area Athletic Association and Rosemount Area Hockey Association. Mr. Bechtold
also attended meetings with representatives from School District 196 and served as staff liaison
to RAP.
14. In 1994; Mr. Bechtold had the responsibility for formulating and managing a
general operaring budget in the amount of$559,551, a revenue producing budget for the various
recreation programs in the amount of$63,100, and also recommended expenditures from the ciry
capital improvements budget in the amount of $25,000.
15. David Bechtold's job description as parks and recreation director required
minimally a college degree with eight to ten years of experience in pazks and recreation ar a
related field.
16. Mr. Bechtold, as parks and recreation director, performed administrative and
professional duties of his department in his role as a department head. One of his administrative
duties was exercising supervision over the entire parks and recreation depart�nent. Furthermore,
as the department head, Mr. Bechtold managed the department with practically complete freedom
and relatively infrequent reference to the ciry administrator for advice and instructions,'even when
unusual problems arose.
CLL75237
Rsz�s-�z 3
�
Y f i
17. Mr. Bechtold made recommendations to the city council for hiring of employees
within his department and these recommendations were based upon Mr. Bechtold interviewing
candidates, working with the administrative assistant to put together job descriptions for positions
in his department and for screening applicants for interviews. In conjunction with these
responsibilities, Mr. Bechtold provided input on salaries for positions within his depart�nent
18. Mr. Bechtold provided supervision and direction over the entire parks and
recreation department. At the rime of Mr. Bechtold's layoff, he provided immediate supervision
to the parks maintenance supervisor, two prograrnmers and the secretary for the department. He
also performed written evaluations of the employees he had immediate supervision over, and
these evaluations were not approved by the ciry administrator even though sometimes Mr.
Bechtold would provide the evaluations to the administrator. Mr.Bechtold reviewed and signed
performance evaluations that supervisors within his department prepared on other employees.
As an example, he would review, make additional comments and sign the evaluation for
employees in the park maintenance department.
19. Since the parks and recreation director position is the highest level position within
the department, it is critical that the employee posses a thorough knowledge of the parks and
recreation field and also have considerable experience in the application of principles and
techniques in solving unusual and difficult problems. The employee's management and
professional abilities must be of the highest level.
20. At the time of Mr. Bechtold's layoff the park maintenance supervisor, two
programmers and a secretary were under his direct supervision. Mr. Bechtold also provided
overall direction to four pazk maintenance employees and vaziaus seasonal employees hired
throughout the year for recreational programs and park maintenance.
21. As director of parks and recreation, Mr. Bechtold's duties were completely
different from other employees with regazds to managing the recreadon progra.ms, park `
maintenance, park development and staff liaison to various pazks and recreation committees.
22. Since city of Rosemount is a P1an A Statutory City, the Rosemount City Council
ultimately ratifies the recommendations made by a department head for hiring and terminating
employees. However, Mr. Bechtold had the authority to hire and terminate seasonal and
temporary employees and to'set wage rates for these position: Many times employees wauld be `
working before the wage sheets would be signed for payroll. The wage sheets are not
authorization for hiring employees but rather a way ta inform payroll of a new employee and the
wage the employee was hired at. These part-time employees were not taken to the ciry council
for approval and were taken to the city administrator only for the purpose of approving wage '
rates which were already set. '
23. When the city administrator was hired, it was suggested that he take a look at the
organizational structure of the city. To accomplish this, he asked each department head to make
available to their employees the existing organizational structure and to ask their employees to
provide input and recommend changes. City Aciministrator Burt advised that he received a
number of organizational charts from the employees and all but two were exactly the same with
regards to a single parks and recreation department. City Administrator Burt felt this wasn't
CLL75237 4
RS215-12
� +.�► .
much of a surprise when surrounding metropolitan area cities and other departments around the
state have a single department; and Rosemount was unique with two. It was felt that many
employees were doing too many duplicating ta.sks. Additionally, City Administrator Burt felt that
the money saved by combining the depaztments could be put back into programs.
24. The posirion held by Mr. Bechtold was truly abolished and a new position was
created, and Mr. Bechtold's position does not exist as it once did.
25. City Administrator Burt advised and the council finds that the decision to hire Jim
Topitzhofer for the new position was based on credentials of Jim Topitzhofer and David Bechtold
and a good faith determination that Jim Topitzhofer was the best and most qualif'ied person for
the position. Ciry Administrator Burt stated he realized his recommendation might not be the
most popular one, but he based his recommendation on what was best for the city. Burt went
an to state that Mr. Bechtold's time in the position was considered, but 7im Topitzhofer was
more well rounded in his experience in recreation and his ability to run a multi-million dollar
community center. Mr. Burt sta.ted that he and Mr. Bechtold had a meeting in March to discuss
the parks and recreation deparmient and Mr. Bechtold freely discussed his experience with him
about community education, his experience with school districts and his former employment. Mr.
Burt felt Mr. Bechtold freely discussed his background because he was quite proud of it. David
Bechtold's background and experience, including his length of service with the City, were
considered.
26. The city administrator's recommendation to hire Mr:Topitzhofer was based in part
on a determination that Mr. Bechtold had a management sryle that was very autocratic which
stifled the growth of his employees' creativity and ultimately the development of his department
and the programs provided to residents. Mr. Burt advised that many of Mr. Bechtold's
employees came to Mr. Burt unsolicited and expressed cancerns about Mr. Bechtold's past
performance, management style and past practices. Mr. Burt stated these were all taken into
cansideration. Mr. Burt stated that he did not look in Mr. Bechtold's personnel file because he
had been told by an employee that there were comments made about Mr. Bechtold's past
performance in the file, and Mr. Burt stated that he did not want his opinions to be tainted by
evaluations performed by the former city administrator. Therefore, Mr. Burt stated that he
observed Mr. Bechtold on a daily basis which was easy to do since their offices were close, and
Mr. Bechtold did not move to the communiry center unril the end of his employmen� with the
city. City Administrator Burt stated that he and Mr. Bechtald had ongoing communicatians on
current,past and future issues. Mr.Burt advised that one of Mr. Bechtold's supervisors informed
him that this person could no longer work with Mr. Bechtold, and if Mr. Bechtold got the new
position, this persan would qui� Mr. Burt also learned from department heads of their concerns
about Mr. Bechtold's management style and his inability to perform. Mr. Burt stated this
information was provided to him unsolicited. City Administrator Burt told of one instance when
another department head informed him that David Bechtold was discussing with other employees
reorganizational discussions which staff who attended the department head meetings were
requested to keep confidential. City Administrator Burt advised he had to talk to Mr. Bechtold
about passing on information from the department head meetings.
27. With regards to age discriminatian, City Administrator Burt thought that David
Bechtold and Jim Topitzhofer were about the same age since he never looked in their personnel
CLL75237
RS215-12 S
. �►~ ,
files and didn't consider age an issue. Mr. Burt explained that he took into consideration each
of their abilities to perform their jobs. Although David Bechtold was excellent in park
development, Mr. Burt felt 7im Topitzhofer was also go� at it and more capable than David
Bechtold when it came to running a community center and recreational programs.
28. City Administrator Burt stated that although the position was not advertised or
posted nor was a job description written, David Bechtold had a very good opportunity to be
considered for the position. There were only two candidates for the position,David Bechtold and
Jim Topitzhofer, and both were aware that only one of them would fill the position. Burt stated
that if the city would have advertised, he's not sure the outcome would be the same. Both
candidates had appro�mately three months to prove themselves and to meet with him. Burt
sta.ted that in fact David Bechtold provided him with a memorandum during the reorganization
process which provided recommendations for placement of him in other positions if he was not
hired for the department head position. Burt also described input he received from other staff
members about David Bechtold that he first found shocking. Later after reviewing Bechtold's
personnel file, Mr. Burt found that some of the comments made by city staff were similar to
comments written by the former city administrator. Burt talked about his meeting with Mr.
Bechtold when Mr. Bechtold provided him with a copy of the parks master plan, talked about
this association with RAHA and RAAA and attended school district and RAP meetings with Mr.
Bechtold. City Administrator Burt concluded that Mr. Bechtold was given extensive
consideration for the position, but Mr. Topitzhofer was the best and most qualified.
CONCLUSIONS
l. City Code, Secrion 2-2-4 does not provide or require that the city council should
seek advice or comment from the park and recreation committee on personnel matters or on the
administrative organization or reorganization of city departments. The council does not interpret
the term "recreation system" as used in Section 2-2-4 to include such administrative matters.
2. The city council did not violate Minnesota Statutes, § 471.705, the state Open
Meeting Law, with respect to its decision to eliminate the positions of park and recreation
director and Cornmunity Center Manager and to create the position of Park and
Recreation/Community Center D'uector, or its decision to lay off Mr. Bechtold, its decision to
hire Mr. Topitzhofer for the newly created position.
3. Mr. Bechtold's former position of park and recreation director was a department
head position within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, § 197.46.
4. Mr. Bechtold was not discharged for disciplinary reasons. He was laid off when
the position of park and recrearion director was eliminated in a bona fide administrative
reorganization of city administrarion. The eliminated position no longer exists.
5. Mr. Topitzhofer was appointed to the new positian of Park ' and
Recreation/Community Center Director,rather than Mr. Bechtold,because of the good faith belief
that Mr. Topitzhofer was better qualified to fill the position. The decision was made on the basis
of legitimate, non-discriminatory, management concerns and not on the basis of age. The city
did not violate state or federal age discrimination laws in the-selection of Mr.Topitzhofer.
CLL75237 L
RS215-12 V
. i ..�� ' . � � . � . .
6. The city did not violate section 1 of the city personnel policy in the selection of
Mr. Topitzhofer.
7. Mr. Bechtold was given full and fair consideration as a candidate for the newly
created position of Park and Recreation/Community Center Director. The decision to hire Mr.
Topitzhofer was made on the basis of inerit and fitness and without unlawful discrimination. The
selection of Mr. Topitzhofer did not violate city personnel policy section 4.
8. In hiring Mr. Topitzhofer, rather than Mr. Bechtold, the ciry gave full and fair
considerarion to Mr. Bechtold length of service. After the layoff of Mr. Bechtold, there were no
other employees serving in the same class of position since both the park and recreation director
and the Community Center Manager positions were eliminated. Therefore, the ciry did not
violate City Personnel Policy Section 21 which requires that length of service be considered in
certain layoff positions and that no permanent employee may be laid off when there aze
temporary,provisional or probationary employees serving in the same class of position for which
the permanent employee is qualified.
9. The length of notice of layoff which was given to Mr. Bechtold was consistent
with past practices in interpreting how time is computed under the Ciry's Personnel Policy. In
any case, however, if the two week's notice provision af City Personnel Policy Section 21 were
interpreted so as to require more days of notice than was actually given in this case, Mr.
Bechtold was more than adequately compensated by the two-months' severance pay which was
awazded to him by they city. Therefore, the council concludes that there was no violations of
the twa weeks' notice provision of section 21.
DECISION
The city's decisions to reorganize the city's administrative structure by eliminating the
position of park and recrearion director and community center manager and creating the new
position of park and recreation/community center director, to lay off Mr. Bechtold and to appoint
Mr. Topitzhafer to the newly created position are conf'umed,ratified and approved in aIl respects.
war c enomy, ayor
usan s , ity er ,
CLL75237
R5215-12 7