Thompson = Good but not great
Hamilton County Administrator Patrick Thompson (pictured) got high marks in his job evaluation today – but he didn’t get all of the bonus money possible.
Republican Commissioners Pat DeWine and Phil Heimlich gave Thompson high marks for his first year in the $210,000-per-year job.
They also cast the two votes last fall that resulted in Thompson getting the job.
Thompson, 47, of White Oak, came to Hamilton County from Jefferson County, Colo., just outside Denver.
He was brought in to rein in government spending and address Hamilton County’s uneasy financial picture.
In addition to his base salary, Thompson’s two-year contract includes two incentive clauses that could have resulted in him earning an additional $14,000 this year.
He earned one incentive – and the $7,000 bonus that came with it – by submitting a proposed 2007 budget that wasn’t higher than the current budget.
Commissioners approved Monday a temporary budget that eventually will result in a $255 million 2007 budget -- $1.5 million less than the 2006 budget.
Thompson also could have received another $7,000 bonus by submitting plans to save at least $10 million in county spending through managed competition.
Thompson presented ideas that resulted in $5 million in savings, but has laid such a strong framework for the other savings, commissioners believed, that they gave half of that bonus.
In all, Thompson received $10,500 in bonuses.
Commissioner Todd Portune, who cast the lone vote opposing Thompson’s hiring last year, couldn’t be reached to comment on his review of Thompson.
3 Comments:
Mr. THompson should be fired "for cause" and should not be given any bonuses for doing a good job.
Mr. Thompson engaged in political manuevering ( something Krings didn't do) to disengage a member of the BOCC, the media and the public. He assisted in deceiving and concealing information, per direction of DeWhiner and Heimlich, and should be fired - immediately.
Personally, I do not see the point in Portune and Pepper giving him another chance. What he did was prove that he was willing to work in an under-handed manner, on a partisan level and subjourned corruption.
He should have to pay a very high price for the shennagans (sic) that he pulled onthe public.
He needs to go!!!!
We deserve better.
Yes, He deserves to go. And yes, we deserve better. However, I'm sure the fine print in his contract, similar to Kring's, would give him a huge "golden parachute" were he to be dismissed anytime soon. His conduct could have been anticipated by anyone who looked into his previous ties before coming to Cincinnati. That's the reason he was brought here.
One must ask yourself: Did Mr. Krings advance the county for the better in his 10-year reign? What organizational improvements did he initiate? Did he position the county for the future (i.e., today)? Why was it that the commissioners (regardless of party) were asking the tuff questions on management and policy issues? Talk about asleep at the wheel and management at its meekest!
* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.
By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site.
<< Home