Who hires and fires?
This post by former city council candidate Bill Knight has been getting attention around the local blogsphere. (Publius / Guarino / GSO Politics)
From the post:
A new city attorney must be hired; I do not believe our current city manager is the appropriate person to make that decision. The new attorney selection should be made at the direction and discretion of the City Council.I urge the current City Council to inform Mitchell Johnson that his contract as city manager will not be renewed and to take steps to provide a severance package that is fair and appropriate in the circumstances.
The post and subsequent comments elsewhere stirred up the very edges of a couple memories of conversations I had with folks back when I covered the council full time. If I'm not mistaken, the city manager is the only person the council can hire or fire, which differs from Guilford County or even, say, High Point, where more decisions are directly in the hands of the elected board.
A quick check of the City Charter, seems to confirm that memory. It says:
(More after the jump.)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
- The Council shall appoint the city manager, who shall be the administrative head of the city government. He shall be responsible for the administration of all city offices, positions, departments, boards, commissions and agencies created by or under this charter. He shall be appointed with regard to merit only and he need not be a resident of the city when appointed. He shall hold office during the pleasure of the Council, and shall receive such compensation as it may fix.
Although there are a few other positions mentioned in the charter (police chief, city attorney, clerk, etc...) only the manager is mentioned as being appointed by the council. And the charter goes on to say:
- The city manager, except as otherwise provided in this charter, shall appoint and may suspend and remove all city employees, and heads of departments, and, in his discretion, may employ consultants of any kind when needed. The manager shall report to the City Council every appointment and removal of a department head at the next Council meeting following the appointment or removal.
And a bit later:
- (e) Neither the council nor any of its members shall take any part in the appointment or removal of department heads and employees in the administrative service of the city. Except for the purpose of inquiry, or for consultation with the city attorney, the council and its members shall deal with the administrative service solely through the manager, and neither the council nor any member thereof shall give specific orders to any subordinates of the city manager, be it publicly or privately. This section shall not apply to action taken by a member of the council while servicing temporarily as manager, or as manager ex officio.
So a couple of points:
- * While whoever is manager holds the post, they and not the council have the ability and responsibility to hire and fire the city attorney. In general, this sort of arrangement is meant to buffer department heads from political interference.
- * To change that arrangement would require the City Council going to the state legislature and getting them to change the charter, which is essentially a state law.
- * Strictly speaking, according to the charter, the council could dismiss Johnson at any time. The question would be the cost of doing so under the terms of his employment agreement if the dismissal weren't for cause.
There has been discussion about Johnson elsewhere, but you're welcome to continue that here. You might also want to talk over whether the city should change the lines of authority and have more department heads report directly to the council.
Comments (4)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Mr. Binker, I have read the City Charter and therefore know what the law is. I personally feel too much power has been placed in the hands of one person whom no one has elected. As things stand there really is no need for a City Council in Greensboro because they are superfluous. It is never good to place too much power in the hands of one person without some balance to that power. We have seen a scandal lasting two years now that was created by an incompetent vastly under qualified city manager, who destroyed the department in charge of the most important function of a city, the safety of it's residents. Then in manuvering to cover this mistake he has cost the tax payers several million dollars for useless studies and inquiries that he then manipulated or hide from the public. And, due to his blundering he has brought about a huge number of law suits against the city that will cost millions to settle thus rendering impossible projects necessary to keep Greensboro vibrant and competitive to attracting new business and new residents.
As they say, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The City Manager of Greensboro has absolute power, but it is the residents who will pay the price for this corruption.
It is time for the City Council to take the steps needed to make the necessary corrections to this ill concieved situation. BB
Posted on January 2, 2008 10:26 AM
Mr. Blinker, I appreciate the information you provided relative to the vested power placed in the city manager to appoint and dismiss city employees. I do not disagree with the city charter; my objection would be in placing reliance on the current city manager in making a new attorney selection. I think it will be interesting to see how this matter plays out in the coming weeks and months.
The council/manager form of government has served Greensboro well for many years, unfortunately its effectiveness seems to have been subverted in recent years due to a combination of ineffective leadership and poor decision making. We have a new City Council in place and time will tell if it assumes its proper role of leadership and decision making. As I have said on numerous occasions I think it would be in the best interests of the city if we found a new experienced city manager capable of serving the needs of a city that is similar to ours in size and character. A fresh start would give the City Council an opportunity to define its relationship with the manager and the respective roles each will play.
I do not favor tinkering with our council/manager form of governing. It worked for a long time and given the correct infrastructure will continue to work for many years to come.
Posted on January 4, 2008 8:29 PM
Oops! Larry Binker, I spelled your name wrong in my comment. My apology.
Posted on January 4, 2008 8:31 PM
All good points...but will you folks stop calling me "Mr. Binker" please? I keep looking around for my dad when you do that!
Posted on January 4, 2008 9:24 PM