Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Residents can help effort to clarify Largo's charter

Tuesday night, a majority of the Largo City Commission presumably averted the threatened departure of City Manager Steven Stanton by agreeing to raise his salary by 4 percent.

The issue of Stanton's raise and his employment status has roiled the local government for several weeks. Mayor Bob Jackson has complained that Stanton won't follow his directions, and his withdrawal of support of the manager has been echoed in the comments of another Stanton critic, Commissioner Mary Black.

However, the city manager recently was evaluated by commissioners and generally got good or excellent reviews. Five of the seven Largo commissioners clearly believe that he does a better-than-adequate job. So why was Stanton threatening to leave?

A provision of Stanton's employment contract notes that if the commission approves a pay increase for him that is less than that of other executive management employees, he can consider the move to be termination without cause. Stanton had announced he would leave the city if the 4 percent raise others received was not approved for him.

Last month, the City Commission approved a 4 percent raise for Stanton by a 4-3 vote, but amid questions about whether a supermajority vote of 5-2 was required to approve the raise. A city resolution states that every year the commission will evaluate the city manager and fix his salary by a vote of five of the seven members.

However, provisions of the city charter and the commission's legislative policies are unclear or in conflict on the issue. Using the words of Commissioner Gay Gentry from Tuesday's meeting, the city has a "mishmash" of conflicting instructions and directions on how the commission will evaluate and compensate the city manager.

To get an objective opinion on whether the August vote to raise Stanton's pay was legal, the city hired an outside attorney, John Hubbard, to make a ruling. Hubbard ruled that the 4-3 vote was legal, but noted that Largo really needed to clean up those conflicts.

Amen to that. If anyone wanted an example of why cities need good attorneys, regular charter reviews, and exhaustive study of the meaning of words and phrases in proposed city ordinances and policies, Largo is providing one.

Layer on top of those legal questions and inconsistencies a City Commission that is embroiled in personality and political conflicts, and you have a recipe for dysfunction - not to mention plenty of work for lawyers.

A citizens charter review committee is at work now to review and propose revisions to the Largo city charter, a document that provides the legal framework for the operation of city government. Largo's charter is full of conflicting or confusing provisions and terms, as well as provisions that are outdated or superseded by state law, yet it can be changed only by city residents in a referendum. A referendum on expected charter changes already is planned for March.

The charter review committee meets regularly, and those meetings can be attended by interested residents. The committee also has formally invited residents to attend two town hall meetings to express their views on the charter and what kind of guiding principles it should contain. One of those town hall meetings was Wednesday night; another is scheduled for Oct. 26. Residents can find meeting details on the city Web site at www.largo.com

If Largo residents are tired of the disagreements at City Hall, one way to reduce them is to create a charter that provides clear, unambiguous instructions for city officials to follow.

[Last modified September 8, 2005, 01:49:23]