Special Bd. of Aldermen — 11/26/2018 Page 3
problem with that is that the CFO’s primary responsibility is to manage the finances of the City; to do the budget,
to manage the annual audit that takes place, to do the so-called CAFA which is the Annual Financial Report, to
generate all the financial reports, to pay the bills, to do all of the financial functions that a City of this sizes
requires. And when these extra responsibilities beyond really what a CFO should be doing were transferred to
Mr. Griffin, the CFO, | think it was intended as a kind of a temporary fix, but it became permanent. | know he
wasn’t particularly looking for this and it put him in a position where he could not give sufficient time and
attention to these additional functions that were placed under his responsibility because still his primary job is all
the financial work and the budget and the other things that I’ve mentioned.
| think as you have seen him come before you over the years on the budget issues and financial issues that
often come to the Board of Aldermen, you understand that he is very capable as a financial manager and as a
financial planner. But think putting all of this under the CFO was in retrospect a mistake and really the
Administrative Services Director is a position and responsibility that we should return to. So the two personnel
recommendations that the audit recommends is the elimination of the one job and the creation of the other
which is a basically cost neutral transition because the salary for an Administrative Services Director might be
slightly higher but is approximately equivalent to what the Assessing Manager made which is more than
$100,000.00.
Now you could ask, well how would the City function without an Assessing Manager? Well first of all, the
Administrative Services Director would now take much more direct responsibility and involvement in the
Assessing function. Number two, there is a supervisor assessor, certified as a supervisor in the Assessing
Office who can serve as sort of a working supervisor. And number three, as we all move forward on this project
together, if we think that we need more fire power, more expertise in the Assessing Office, we can contract with
an outside firm to provide some degree of assessing oversight. Now this is not actually a new idea; when Brian
McCarthy was still with us and when he was president we, on several occasions, talked about the possibility,
and this is before the revaluation was certainly over and maybe even before it began. We talked about the
possibility of phasing this position out and bringing in a contract manager. The fact is that the last time this
position went open, there was only one meaningful applicant and really the City, if we were going to fill the job,
had really no choice on who to hire.
So | think if we monitor the management carefully, if the new Administrative Services Director does that and
implements the recommendations in detail that are going to be discussed by the other two people, we can
quickly, with reasonable dispatch improve and strengthen the assessing function of the City.
Now another thing, another big recommendation that is being made is that we undertake a full measure and list
assessment. That means go out and inspect all the properties internally, seek to inspect all the properties
internally. That is an expensive proposition, but | believe we should undertake it. It costs between $1 million
and a million and a half, but probably closer to $1.5 million but this could be done over several years in
preparation for the next revaluation. A problem that we have both in terms of the property records but also just
in terms of perception is that the City has done no full measure and list since the revaluation of 1992. But this
revaluation began in 1990 or 1991, the last full measure and list when believe it or not, | was the Mayor. So the
last time a full measure and list was done, | was basically responsible or in charge of the City while it was being
undertaken it was not actually implemented or did not go into effect until 92, it took quite some time, | think 18
months to accomplish it. It was a bonded project and it went into effect in 1992 but that was the last time it was
done. Other community, no question about it, have done this more frequently; Manchester has done it a couple
of times since that time.
So that is a recommendation that we should undertake and in my view is worth doing. So if we create the new
position of Administrative Services Director to make sure that all of these functions are working together
effectively, if we remove the Assessing Director, we monitor it, we retain the flexibility to bring in by contract
more assessing management if that is necessary and implement all of the other recommendations which | think
you are going to hear about; | think we can make great progress in terms of the function and in terms of
restoring any loss of public confidence in the function. But | would return to the point that the revaluation itself
