MAYOR WANTS RAISES FOR MANAGERS.

Byline: Patrick McGreevy Daily News Staff Writer

Mayor Richard Riordan, who called last year for a merit pay program to keep top city bureaucrats accountable, has proposed giving raises of up to 12 percent to a select handful of city managers even though their merit reviews are not completed.

Riordan, who recently recanted his 1993 campaign remark about all bureaucrats being ``brain dead,'' did not offer a rationale for the generous raises beyond his spokeswoman Noelia Rodriguez saying the hikes would keep other cities from hiring away the officials by keeping their salaries competitive.

The proposal - which would increase Department of Water and Power general manager William McCarley's $170,000 annual salary by about $20,000 - was presented to the City Council in closed session Wednesday, sources said. But the council delayed action for 45 days to gather more information.

Councilman Joel Wachs blasted the proposal, which would give raises to eight general managers and bureau chiefs, saying it would undermine a newly established process to grant raises based on merit.

``I'm adamantly opposed to it,'' Wachs said. ``It's to raise the salaries of a selected group of general managers by substantial amounts. I oppose it completely because it's being taken out of the context of the merit pay plan, which we've been working on for a year.''

Another council member, who spoke on condition of anonymity, voiced concern that the mayor was showing political favoritism by acting outside a merit system he helped establish.

``It just doesn't seem fair to other general managers who are not on the list,'' the council member said.

Riordan appointed a task force of public and private sector leaders last year to come up with a merit pay system for general managers that sets performance goals and evaluates the managers' effectiveness.

That system is in place, but officials have not yet completed their evaluation of the managers' performance, which means the executives tagged for the new raises could receive even more money based on their performance reviews.

``I was surprised because the mayor has been the chief advocate around here of merit-based pay,'' Councilwoman Jackie Goldberg said of Riordan's proposal. ``They very well may be justified, but I would have preferred to see them raised or not raised based on some criteria of how the department is running.''

Wachs complained that even though the council delayed action on the raises, the pay hikes still will be considered before the agreed-upon process of merit evaluations is completed.

``If the council goes ahead and gives big raises before the merit pay plan, then you just cut the heart out of it and it's business as usual - you just give it to the ones you want to give it to,'' Wachs complained.

The pay raises were presented to the full City Council under an agenda item that read ``Mayor's recommended general manager salary equity adjustments.''

According to City Hall sources, the raises had been endorsed in closed session last week by the Executive Employee Relations Committee chaired by Riordan and composed of four of the 15 council members.

Committee members told the council the raises are needed to keep the managers' salaries above those of subordinates who recently received raises, and to keep the managers on equal footing with their peers in other government agencies, the sources said.

Mayoral spokeswoman Rodriguez defended the proposal for raises as necessary to keep the city competitive as an employer.

``These increases reflect the market value of these managers,'' Rodriguez said Wednesday. ``We want to keep quality managers, and we need to be able to make sure they are not recruited by other cities who offer higher compensation packages.''

Rodriguez said the raises proposed Wednesday do not negate the need for merit increases based on performance evaluations.

Riordan's office refused to disclose the names of those being recommended for special raises. But sources said the list includes Transportation Department general manager Bob Yates, Airports Department general manager Jack Driscoll, Personnel Department general manager Jurutha Brown, Street Maintenance bureau chief Pat Howard and Pensions Department general manager Gary Mattingly, as well as McCarley.

Driscoll currently receives $157,000 a year, Yates receives $124,820, Brown receives $119,266 and Howard makes $113,461.

The Daily News reported July 12 that McCarley had asked the City Council to raise his $170,000 a year salary by at least $28,000, noting that average pay for heads of private electrical utilities exceeds $900,000 annually.

McCarley, the mayor's former chief of staff, said at the time that he was exploring other options, including retirement.

McCarley's request followed the City Council's decision to boost the pay of Chief Legislative Analyst Ron Deaton by $20,000 a year to $175,000 to keep him from leaving the city to become Los Angeles County's chief administrative officer.

That decision also was made outside the merit pay evaluation process.

Sources said that the Executive Employees Relations Committee recommended that McCarley receive a raise of about $20,000 - a 12 percent increase, and that all the recommended raises averaged 10 percent. Per capita income in Los Angeles County rose 12.2 percent - from $20,745 to $23,285 - from 1990 to 1995, according to the state Department of Finance.

The committee's vote was 3-2 last week to recommend the special raises to the council, with Riordan in support, sources said. Council members John Ferraro and Richard Alatorre - also members of the committee - also voted for the pay hike, while Goldberg and Wachs voted against the proposal, sources said.

``To have a meaningful merit pay plan, raises should be tied to performance,'' Wachs said. ``But if you go ahead and give raises to the people you like without having the merit pay plan, then you make a mockery of the merit pay system, unless you just use it for a chance for a double raise, which would be unconscionable.''

Because of concerns by Wachs, Goldberg and others, the council delayed approval of the raises and directed the committees that oversee the departments headed by the targeted managers to evaluate the proposed salary increases before returning with recommendations in 45 days.