Home Rule Charters are the Constitution of the city. It is not a document that is created by the elected officials through ordinance, or a vote of the city council, but a document that the voters approve – word for word. It is the right of an elected body such as Beaumont’s City Council to ask the voters to amend the Charter; it is not their right to amend it themselves.
While administrators and legal counsel have been successful in finding ways to circumvent the rule of a city’s Charter, it is nothing more than that, a work-around; and, it is in direct opposition to the spirit of the words written in it.
When the 15th Amendment to the Constitution was enacted, those in Mississippi who believed that men of color should not be allowed to vote created laws to “work-around” the amendment with poll taxes and literacy tests. It worked for a while but was not right and, after far too many years, the federal government outlawed their “work-arounds.”
Beaumont’s founding leaders placed value on not being tied to a City Manager that the council wants to terminate. And all subsequent elected officials appear to agree, given the fact that none have made a move to change the Charter’s instructions on employee contracts in the last 70-plus years. However, it isn’t just for the ruling class to decide. Beaumont’s Charter can only be changed by voters.
The practice of at-will employment isn’t unreasonable: If it isn’t working out, it’s time to go. It may be warm and fuzzy to ponder the humanity of giving someone a golden parachute if things don’t go well. But, as this community should have learned from the leaking sieve that was the Beaumont Independent School District, elected leaders aren’t given carte blanche to invoke philanthropic payouts to people on the taxpayers’ dime.
The spirit of the Charter, as it expressly details in plainly written language, is “to vest all authority and fix all responsibility for such suspension or removal (of a City Manager, specifically) in the City Council.” That doesn’t mean after a set number of years, or with a set amount of money to cushion the separation.
Beaumont’s Charter is such that you get paid for what you work. The end. Should it have been the council’s pleasure to offer an incoming City Manager a severance package – or a binding contract to deliver a definite term or pay penalty – the elected body could have put it to a public vote at the last General Election. As shown with some propositions placed on the city ballot last year, though, there is no guarantee the voters would have supported the change.
And where is candidate Kenneth Williams on this? Maybe it isn’t a “bad guy” move to try to get whatever you can out of your employer. But, is it really a “good City Manager” move to work with a sitting City Council to sidestep the voter-approved City Charter?
Beaumont has problems – likely equal to tenfold that of a town one-tenth its size – and we don’t need to add another one. Beaumont deserves a City Manager who has experience running a city of comparable population. Williams’ claim to fame comes from his tenure as city manager in Diboll and Buda – towns with a combined population of approximately 20,000 people.
As always, The Examiner endorses change that will positively affect Beaumont – not just change for change’s sake, especially if “change” means hiring a new city manager who, at worst, is looking to circumvent the City Charter to ensure a handsome payday and, at best, is attempting to violate it in ignorance.