The blog and QCTimes comments on this story are just depressing. People are talking like its already decided that Malin "stole" the money. For one, if he was trying to get away with something, why do it in plain sight? He probably has access to dozens of ways to steal money where it won't leave such an obvious paper trail, so if he was trying to steal money he wouldn't have just given himself a raise.
On one of the other blogs a public works employee who was supposedly fired for patching his driveway with city asphalt on city time is being frequently mentioned. Did this employee admit to doing this on his paperwork, or did he try to hide it? I suspect he didn't write down on his timesheet, "patched my own driveway." The difference between that guy and Malin is that that guy knew he was stealing, and Malin still believes that this is the way his contract reads.
Also, I can't find the old Times articles looking through their archives, but I remember stories about Malin turning down "cost of living allowances" in the past. If he didn't have a right to take these raise/allowances, why didn't the QCTimes question why he was declining them back then? How can he turn something down he isn't allowed to take?
All this comes down to is a difference in contract interpretation, not thievery. Either he's allowed to apply the non-bargaining employee COLA, (it seems like he's a non-bargaining employee) or he's not. If he's not, he should give the money back to the city. It was stupid of him to offer to donate it to charity, but I suppose it shows how strongly he believes that he had a legal right to this raise. If he were to give it back to the city that practically admits wrongdoing. What I think he should have done was say that if some sort of independent (IE, not only made up of people that have been trying to get him fired for years) group decides that he was in error, then he will give the money back to the city. If they find it was his right to take the raise, then he could still donate the money to charity if he wanted to.
I have still yet to see proof for either side's argument, and I don't know that I can decrypt the legalese in a contract to know proof even if I saw it. I still believe that 99% of the comments being made are similar to mine, in that we just don't know the facts yet. Except many of the other comments are written as though we do.
16 comments:
He has a contract that may need some more legal review or ruling.
Turning down previous COLA raises only suggests it was properly offered and possibly in a previous contract.
The charitable contribution seems to be frequent move of those wanting to prevent further inquiry into questionable income.
Conservative Demo here:
Not at all sure if Fly is thanking QCI for the original post or respoder No. 1, and if the thanks is to responder No. 1 then which paragraph or point of the three.
Also who is "most of us? and what is it that "most of us believe" and finally, what percentage are "most of us"?
Hey QCI, Where did you get your law degree? Preschool?
[Visual] QCI setting at his computor with all these wild theories, with his tin foil hat, cherry Kool-aid, and dish of safe-T-pop suckers.
Why do white collar professionls
always seem to get the benefit of the doubt?
And the common Joe always seem to get the "AX"...
My collar is blue I feel the blade
getting closer.
Will Malin?
How is my "theory" crazy when all I said is that we don't know the whole story yet?
If actions have anything to do with it, he is acting guilty.
And why is it that no one seems to believe two professional attorneys that felt so strongly about an issue they put their jobs on the line to make a call against their boss?
I've heard commentary that Malin is an attorney. I don't recall that on his resume. Not that his resume was completely truthful to begin with.
QCI if you think you'll ever know the full story, you are crazy. This is a personnel matter and not all of it will come out.
What is obvious though is his behavior in this matter - berating his staff for disagreeing with him and offering to give money to charity that he may not be entitled to. That doesn't say leadership material to me.
I agree with 10:35 , well said. Malin doth protest too much.
To 10:33 pm
Read todays QC Times.
Malin states: "There are questions about a contract, and I’m not an attorney,” Malin said. “He will assist me.”
This is how rumors start.
I like how no one commented on your call for an independent review of the contract (i think your wrods were "i.e. not by people that have been trying to fire him for years"). Seems very reasonable to me.
It seems to me that Malin has in incredibly difficult job, and there's no way he'll ever please everyone. If/when Malin leaves, I can't see how the people who are anti-Malin right now will like his successor any better. You've got to blame someone for our problems, and lord knows you can't blame an alderman running for re-election.
I agree there needs to be an independent review. Not just of the contract though but of items this administrator has approved over the years that may not be within his authority. Obviously he makes his own interpretations without asking first; he even admits that in this instance.
Conservative Demo here:
Yes and yes. Both.
The real question was for clarification of your thankee.
The rest?, well I'll stand by what I implied, which is that "what most of us believe" is taking quite a bit for granted.
Because I'm not very well-informed about the personalities of local politics, I'm generally careful to never appear to be speaking for anyone other than myself.
To sum this all up, The Trust In Our Davenport Leaders Is At An All Time Low! Shame on them.
And according to the Argus Malin has 'cleared his office for dusting'
hmmmm
And I thought the last Davenport City election had set a "ALL TIME" low for back stabbing,lies and half truths.Corruption,Special interest,
Lobbyest. You name it we got,it right here in River City.
It,s truth and honesty that our City leaders are so quick to avoid.
This Malin "THING" will show the people (voters) of Davenport what the Council they just elected is made of.
There may be 10+ new faces in 2007.
Post a Comment