City Manager Search and Selection Process; Part 2

Opinion

I posted City Manager Points of Reference on August 9, following is my personal analysis of the meaning of those references:

Springfield City Charter

Article III. The City Manager

Section 3.1. Qualifications; Term of office

"The city manager shall be chosen by the council on the basis of executive and administrative qualifications with special reference to his experience in, and his knowledge of municipal administrations...."*

The City Charter, indicates the council shall choose the city manager "on the basis of executive and administrative qualifications," which Greg Burris has, but also indicates the Council shall do so with special attention "to his experience in, and his knowledge of municipal administrations."

Shall: b —used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory

It's my opinion, and I'm not a lawyer, that if the Charter had not meant the council shall choose a city manager who actually had experience in and knowledge of municipal administrations that the charter wouldn't have advised the council to choose the city manager with special attention given "to his experience in...municipal administrations" and there would have been a period between "qualifications" and "with," and it might have read something like this, for example, my additions in red:

The city manager shall be chosen by the council on the basis of executive and administrative qualifications.

(The city council should, could, can, or might make) special reference to his experience in, and his knowledge of municipal administrations.

Because there is no separation, again, in my lay opinion, the sentence appears, in legal terms, to state:

The city manager shall be chosen by the council on the basis of executive and administrative qualifications (and shall make) special reference to his experience in, and his knowledge of municipal administrations.

Further indication that the intended, mandatory qualification was the city manager position be filled by an applicant who actually had experience in municipal administrations, is the fact that the city, in their job description, which was posted by the search firm Arcus Public, identified what that experience in municipal administration was to be when applied to the "ideal candidate:"

Arcus Public

City Manager - Springfield, MO

"Interested candidates should possess a Bachelor’s degree in Public Administration, Business Administration or related discipline from an accredited college or university. Possession of an MBA or Master’s Degree in Public Administration, or related field is preferred. Ten years of municipal experience, with prior service as a City Manager, Assistant/Deputy City Manager or the equivalent in a comparable or larger community. Certification as an ICMA Credentialed Manager within 12 months of appointment is preferred." (page 5)*

Note: "Interested candidates..."

1. "SHOULD possess a Bachelor's degree in Public Administration, Business Administration or related discipline from an accredited college or university."

2. "Possession of an MBA or Master's Degree in Public Administration, or related field IS PREFERRED."

3. "Ten years of municipal experience, with prior service as a City Manager, Assistant/Deputy City Manager or equivalent in a comparable or larger community."

4. "Certification as an ICMA Credentialed Manager within 12 months of appointment IS PREFERRED."

There is no SHOULD, there is no indication that the Council would PREFER the candidate to have actual city manager, assistant or deputy city manager or equivalent experience in a comparable or larger community in the job description. The job description therefore, indicates that there was an acceptance on the part of the city and/or the Council that the "ideal candidate" would have municipal administrations experience and that they thought the "ideal candidate" would have "Ten years of municipal experience, with prior service as a City Manager, Assistant/Deputy City Manager or equivalent in a comparable or larger community," this was relayed in the job description by the simple omission of the terms "should" or "preferred."


Therefore, I believe it is a legitimate complaint that since Greg Burris has not had prior service as a City Manager, Assistant/Deputy City Manager or equivalent in a comparable or larger community, and that according to the spirit of the City Charter, special reference to his experience in municipal administrations was to be paid by the Council, and their job description further defined what that experience was to be, the Council did not follow the mandate of the City Charter which they are bound to observe.

In fairness, I believe the Council considers Greg Burris' experience at MSU to be "comparable" experience "in a comparable or larger community," however, it is not experience in a municipal administration.

So, in my opinion, for what it's worth:

Legitimate Complaint 2: The City Council did not follow the mandate of the City Charter that, "The city manager shall be chosen by the council...with special reference to his experience in...municipal administrations," even though it appears they accepted that mandate by further defining it in the city manager job description.

*emphasis mine