Think about it. In order to trim a $4 million deficit, the City would have to shed 80 workers. This is on top of the 69 workers that former Mayor John Callahan already eliminated between 2010 and 2012. So it's idiotic to think that a Council-imposed hiring freeze would do anything other than depress morale.
Council would have more luck waving a wand. But they imposed the freeze anyway, knowing it is worthless. Why'd they do it? Because each one of them would like to be Mayor, and a hiring freeze would look good in a campaign ad. other than that, there was no point to what is actually a non-binding resolution that Mayor Bob Donchez could ignore.
Only one member of Council, Eric Evans, made any sense at all. He pointed out that a hiring freeze is "not our role." He criticized Council for making a "power grab." He pointed to the hypocrisy in the Michael Recchiuti argument that Council would grant every position sought by the Administration. "Then why have it?" asked Evans.
But all the mayor wannabes voted for the freeze that they know they have no power to enforce. They might as well have adopted a resolution banishing the $4 million deficit or declaring me the most handsome person in the world.
Brong, who has spoken strongly against this hiring freeze in previous meetings, said he'd prefer to discuss strategies like a five-year spending plan over a tactic like a nuisance hiring freeze. But because he did not get up and start jumping around like a baboon, Karen Dolan concluded it must be OK, completely ignoring arguments made in previous meetings.