First, the difference between McManus and anyone else just isn’t that great, certainly not enough to justify a big fight. R.T.’s decision does not present us with the difference between “qualified” and “not qualified” – McManus is clearly well-qualified. It’s not as if R.T. were trying to re-appoint Olson, for example (a decision which would have justified a big fight). I say this as someone who would have preferred an internal candidate, and Lubinski was my first choice.
Second, when he runs for re-election R.T. will be judged in large part on how he has handled crime and public safety. If we’re going to hold R.T. accountable, R.T. should have a police chief that reflects his values and who will act in accord with his policy goals. (For the same reason all department heads ought to serve at the pleasure of the mayor, after their appointments are confirmed by the council, but that’s for another post).
The idea that McManus will be R.T.’s “lapdog” is, IMHO, insulting to McManus, whose career demonstrates professionalism and independent action. McManus’ resume is such that he would be an excellent candidate for any chief position – if R.T. tried to use him as a mere puppet I’m sure McManus could easily find another city where his professional skills were respected.
Also, the alternative is far less appealing. Suppose, for example, that the Council rejects McManus in an effort to force R.T. to pick a different chief. Without a doubt, the new chief would realize she was not accountable to the Mayor, but instead to the Council. How can any employee be accountable to 13 different bosses? She couldn’t – which leads us right back to the problems with Chief Olson, who was able to avoid accountability by playing both ends against the middle.
Third, the Park Board superintendent search should provide a lesson here. A divisive political fight at this stage of the process will likely deter other qualified candidates from applying for or accepting the position. No qualified candidate is going to apply for or accept a job when it’s unclear what the criteria are for successful job performance.
In short, rejecting McManus hurts the city far more than it might gain by finding a “better” candidate. Doing so scares away other qualified applicants and highlights the lack of accountability inherent in management by committee.
It’s the also the wrong fight to have when police-community relations are so strained.
Yes, it may have been a political mistake for R.T. to pick a well-qualified white man over a well-qualified GLBT woman. No doubt it is tempting for supporters of Lubinski to exploit this mistake in an effort to block McManus. But given the stakes, I hope supporters of Lubinski do not give into temptation. In my judgment, in this matter especially, discretion truly is the better part of valor.
Greg Abbott
------------------------------------
Sent from the computer of:
Greg Abbott Linden Hills 13th Ward
------------------------------------ REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
