The following was a letter that I sent to the Springfield News-Leader. Since they used part of the letter as a basis for a news article, I will post the entire letter here on “Framing the Question.”

Our City Charter wisely provides for personnel decisions to be made in an atmosphere of evaluation and merit, not of politics. 

The on-going flap about the police chief hiring process is a perfect example of why the Charter forbids Council interference in the hiring and firing of City employees.  Section 2.8 of the Charter states, “Neither the council nor any of its members shall direct or request the appointment of any person to, or his removal from office by the city manager. . . .”

Mr. Chiles has said in the News-Leader that “it wouldn’t bother me for Council to be asked to make the choice.”  Asked by whom?  Someone with an ax to grind? Someone with a vested interest in the outcome? 

He goes on to say that, “that’s what City Council does—we make high-profile, tough decisions.” Of course we do—when we have high-profile, tough decisions to make.  I’m not sure that urban gardens, chickens in the city, and changing the City seal fall into that category.

Furthermore, a few Council members have publicly denounced the process for selecting Springfield’s next police chief and, in so doing, I feel some of their comments are an attempt to influence the hiring of a City employee and therefore perilously close to a Charter violation.

As a matter of fact, all Council members received a memo in January from Collin Quigley that spelled out the process and timeline for recruiting the new police chief.  If my colleagues had a problem with the selection process, they should have said something at that time.  By criticizing the outcome of that process now, I think they are actually trying to influence the hiring decision.

Ms. Rushefsky was quoted as saying, “The idea that you’re going to make this public . . . and then do your background checks is just absurd.”  Unfortunately, she needs to take that up with the federal judiciary since there is case law that requires hiring organizations to make a conditional job offer first and THEN conduct the background and medical checks necessary.  Combine that federal case law with the requirement to be transparent in the public sector and you get the system and process that Springfield is using.

I certainly agree with Ms. Rushefsky that we don’t need any more drama.  We council members also need not be creating drama where none should exist.