The requirement for a two-thirds vote in order to remove a COO means that it will take a 5-2 council vote to dump a COO -- even at the end of his four-year term, which essentially makes the term meaningless.
It's especially protective of the COO in that it doesn't even allow a 4-2 vote to remove the person since absent votes are also taken into account. As anyone familiar with politics knows, that eliminates one trick that might make it easier for someone to dump the COO through a well-timed illness or trip.
All a COO has to do to keep his job is to ensure at least three council members are happy and re-elected. I've seen places where managers do just that, by funneling projects to a particular district to make its politicians and residents content even if the rest of the town is deeply troubled by the manager's actions.
About Me
- Steve Collins
- Steve Collins has covered government and politics for The Bristol Press since 1994. Before that, he was a reporter and columnist for six years for The Citizen, in Auburn, New York. He is co-founder of The Tattoo teen newspaper, online at www.ReadTheTattoo.com, and Youth Journalism International, a 501(c)(3) public educational charity serving young people across the globe. He has a B.A. in history from the University of Virginia. He is married and has two school-age children.
No comments:
Post a Comment