Two weeks ago to the hour, one-quarter into the richest contract City Hall ever has given, City Manager Mark Scott abruptly announced his resignation — effective who knows when?
Flippant as the phrase sounds, this is precisely where Mr. Scott’s bosses, the five gentlemen of the City Council, still stand this morning.
In the regular 90-minute closed-door session preceding tonight’s virtually business-free 7 o’clock meeting, the Councilmen will wrestle in the dirt over the thorniest conundrum likely to confront them during their term:
With Mr. Scott already scheduled to start at his next posting, as Fresno City Manager, on Thursday, April 15, how long should he be retained by Culver City?
“As long as you need me or want me,” Mr. Scott told the Council, including the length of the hugely complicated budget process, which will not conclude until the end of June.
Since cashiering a departing employee at the earliest date, like immediately, is regarded, rudimentarily, as sound business, what is a Councilman to do?
If this were September or July or December — any time of the year that is not budget season — the Council’s call would be cleaner and quicker.
Not only is Mr. Scott’s timing wretched because budget season is at hand, City Hall looks as if it is suffering from severe scoliosis, bent beneath a $6 million budget burden.
Before reaching a conclusion, not anticipated this evening, the City Council has at least a half-dozen considerations to ponder. Since the state’s Brown Act or public disclosure laws prohibit deep consultation, five strongwilled persons with sternly competing theories will enter the back room this evening.
• There is no obvious interim/emergency replacement within the confines of City Hall, although several persons have been mentioned.
• Since Mr. Scott has been doing double-duty following the resignation of the Chief Financial Officer last year, there is no obvious fallback person.
• Can the five of them can agree that it would be unwise to accelerate a recruiting process, vet and hire a stranger, and then acquaint him with the complicated inner workings of the city all within seven weeks — Mr. Scott’s start date?
• Since perhaps the most critical assignment for the City Manager will be to negotiate pay reductions with each of the city’s six unions, does anyone believe a rushed-through new City Manager could summon sufficient credibility or leverage? Does anyone believe an out-the-door City Manager would possess an ounce more of leverage or credibility?
• In view of the boast by Fresno’s Mayor for the past 13 months that she made eight separate overtures to lure Mr. Scott back to his hometown, will it — should it — color the Council’s decision?
• Does anyone believe Mr. Scott, or any other normal employee, could serve two masters beyond April 15 — or even much beyond Feb. 22 — with his body and his heart in separate locations?
Around City Hall this morning, sources shrugged, reluctant to speculate about whether the Council should adopt a fire-engine solution and rush through a new manager.
Or would it be more sensible to promote, say, Asst. City Manager Martin Cole, with the shelf life of perhaps one year, and go through the delicate budget process with relaxed, familiar personnel?
