03/10/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

indication of prejudice and might discourage others from seeking the position. Assistant Manager agreed with that opinion and said he thought there were other ways of dealing with a pro tem appointment without affecting the city's operation. Neither could Councilman Murray see the need for a process different that that initially suggested by the Manager. Councilman Bradley asked then whether Assistant Manager Martin in actuality would be "runnil}g the show" if a department head was appointed manager pro tem. Also, whether a pro tem appointee would receive the same salary now paid to the Manager. The Mayor;; explained that one of the duties of assistant manager was to act in place of the manager so in actuality he would be serving as manager. He said he would appoint someone who obviously was not a candidate for the position and who would return to his departmental position upon a permanent manager appointment. He added that the pro tem appointee would receive his same salary in the pro tem period, not that of the manager. Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Williams to authorize the Mayor to proceed with appointment of a pro tem manager and to carry out the procedure outlined for selection of a permanent manager. Mr. Williams suggested inclusion in the motion of the Council's intent that the assistant city manager would in fact be performing the duties of the city manager during the time the position was filled by a pro tem appointee. Mr. Murray had no objection and it was made a part of the motion. Councilman Haws questioned the legality of the motion in that the position was not yet vacant. Mayor Anderson said pro tem appointment wouldn't be made until the .position had been vacant two weeks, but the motion would serve to outline the procedure to be followed. Councilman Bradley asked whether the Council should be involved in the Mayor's selection of the pro tem appointee. Mr. Keller felt the majority of the Council had confidence in the Mayor's ability to make a proper selection in view of his close relationship with department heads. He also noted the Charter specifically stated that as the Mayor's responsibility. Mayor Anderson said it was his intent to notify Council members of his choice prior to announcement so that if there were any strong objections there could be a retraction. Assistant Manager suggested following city attorney's suggestion of adopting a resolution which would spell out the pro tem manager responsibilities as desired by the Council. He referred in particular to the hiring and firing of city per- sonnel, suggesting that authority be delegated to the pro tem manager except as it applied to department heads. In further discussion, Mr. Long explained that that authority would have to be delegated since the permanent appointee has it under the Charter, the pro tem manager would not have that authority. In response to Councilman Bradley's question whether such a resolution would effectively amend the Charter in that respect, Mr. Long at the suggestion of Mayor Anderson said he would research the question and bring a response back with a draft of the resolution. Councilman Murray withdrew the original motion"with consent of the second and substituted a motion seconded by Councilman Keller that the city attorney prepare and bring back a resolution specifying Council intent to have the assistant city manager carry out the duties and functions n~rmally assigned to him in the absence of the manager, and that further the resolution give hiring and firing authority to the assistant city manager in .that period during which the city is without a permanent manager and that hiring and firing except as it applies to department heads can be carried out by the pro tem manager wi thout Council, approval,. Motion carried, all Council members present votlng aye, except Councilman Bradley voting no. 3/10/75 - 10 / 14 e e Comm 2/26/75 Approve A, .W