South Gate Council Scraps Predecessors’ Job Security Plan : Politics: Two veteran council members join three newcomers in killing a proposal for better job protection for top officials.

Two veteran councilmen and three newly elected members moved quickly Monday to undo some decisions of the departed City Council majority.

The council, which Monday held its first full meeting since the April 10 election, scrapped a plan--approved on the eve of the election--to give top appointive officials, including the city administrator and city attorney, more job protection and an improved severance package.

City Atty. Bruce Boogaard, in particular, had increasingly been criticized by some council members, with some candidates suggesting during the campaign that administrators would be fired if the balance of power changed on the five-member council.

The balance did change when voters elected three newcomers. One incumbent, Mayor Herbert W. Cranton, was defeated. Two other incumbents did not seek reelection.

Council members Monday also voted to remove two advisory measures from the June 5 election ballot and hired a special attorney--at $150 an hour--to provide advice on the legality of such an effort and other legal matters.

The new council majority was more comfortable calling on another attorney for advice on some matters and wanted to avoid creating a possible conflict of interest for the city attorney, Mayor Robert A. Philipp said.

Councilman Larry Leonard said Boogaard played a major role in writing the ballot measures and the job-security resolution, and so stood to benefit from the resolution.

Leonard emphasized, however, that no administrator has been fired. “We haven’t terminated anybody,” he said. “The city attorney has not been relieved of any of his duties.”

The council hired attorney William Rudell as a special legal counsel at $150 an hour but limited the total contract to $25,000.

Council veterans Philipp and Gregory Slaughter joined new council members Johnny Ramirez, Mary Ann Buckles and Leonard in the voting to rescind the job-protection measure and to try to remove the ballot measures.

Philipp and Slaughter voted for the election-eve resolution. Philipp said he reversed his position after examining the former council’s action more carefully.

“It’s a bad measure,” he said. “This should be part of negotiations.”

Under the resolution, administrators could have been fired only for work-related causes or for committing a felony. Administrators would have been given 60 days’ notice of termination, plus paid leaves of up to six months to search for another job.

Then-council members Cranton, Odell L. Snavely and William H. DeWitt also voted for the resolution. Snavely and DeWitt did not seek reelection.

Former Mayor Cranton criticized the council’s decision to hire a special attorney: “It is stupid for them to hire a legal counsel for that price when we already have a city attorney.” The former mayor said Philipp has a “personal vendetta” against the city attorney and other top administrators.

Philipp declined to discuss the issue, saying it is a “personnel matter.” And neither Boogaard nor city administrator Bruce Spragg would comment.

In an earlier interview, Boogaard said he thought his job was secure.

Philipp and Slaughter had split with the old council majority over the issue of placing two advisory measures on the June ballot.

One measure asks voters whether they would approve of developing 7.14 acres of vacant city land into an auto sales lot. The other measure asks voters whether they would favor providing loans to local metal-fabricating companies.

The former council majority approved the ballot measures, even though both issues were moot.

Automobile dealer Pete Ellis had withdrawn plans to develop an auto sales lot on the vacant land after residents of a nearby mobile home park protested. Shultz Steel officials had sought a $2-million loan from the city to pay for plant construction but withdrew the request.

New council member Buckles, in voting to remove the ballot measures, said: “Pete Ellis pulled out of the deal. Why put something on the ballot that no one wants any more?”

The special attorney has been asked to determine whether it is too late for the measures to be removed from the ballot by the county registrar of voters.