Webster City freeman. [volume] (Webster City, Hamilton County, Iowa) 1884-1946, 1915-07-13

could put q man in charge IN whom
they had confidence and one who
knew the workings of the plant in
it's minutest detail. Now / do not
say Mr. Long was not competent.
but the council evidently thought
he was not.
Personally, I think Mr.. Long a
very fine gentleman, but as we have
one of the finest electric light plants
| in the stated want to ask the Free
man-Tribune if it would be good
Judgment to leave it in the hands of
person in whom we were not quite
sure about?.
With kindness and good will to
all, l beg the Indulgence of those
who do not see this matter as I do.
Yours respectfully,
H. B. Hummel.
Elsewhere in today's paper ap-
pears review of the city manager
law from the pen of Attorney o. J.
Henderson. If Mr.. Hummel can stop
asking questions long enough to
read it he will find answers to some
of his queries.
The Freeman-Tribune cannot SUBJ
scribe to the theory that the coun-
Gil opposed Mr.. Long merely because
it doubted his ability. Did not the
council, that is some of the members
who took part in the peculiar pro-
ceedings by which it was undertake
en- to deny the mayor the privileges
granted him and exercised by his
predecessors, recommend Mr.. Long
to other communities as an electric
ian of ability and as a gentleman of
integrity? Didn't they know he had
graduated from the electrical de-
partment at Ames college and had
had much experience since leaving
|school? In fairness and justice to
the mayor, whose duty it was to
make the selection, and to give Mr..
Long the right of a chance, the
council should have accepted the sit
uation. Then if Mr.. Long had prov
en- unworthy of the trust the mayor
|could have been appealed to to make
a change and there is no doubt but
that he would have done it.
The manner in which the council
|rrncon1a1 c,1crioiNp ho%
it was not considering the interests
of the city in opposing Mr.. Long. At
first it insisted that the bond of 3d.
600, which Mr.. Mullins had furnish
ed, was not sufficient, and after the
appointment of MIR. Long and before
his bond was approved, the council
increased the bond to $1,000, which
Mr.. Long furnished. Then the coun-
Gil proceeded to abolish the Office
and to put Mr. Mikel in charge with
out bonds. If anything now goes
wrong and the city suffers damage
who is responsible unless it is Mr..
Longs bondsmen?
If the Office of city superintendent
is useless appendage of the city
government why was it not dispens-
ed with before the bond had been
increased to $1,000 by action of the
council and why was Mr.. Mullins
retained in the position year after
year at a salary of $500?
However. this has nothing to do
with the merits of the city manager
plan and should not be lugged into
the discussion Of that system, but
Mr.. Hummel's questions could not
be answered without reference to
these things.
Whether three councilmen can
serve the public better than seven
can only be determined by a trial
and if Mr.. Hummel really wants
that problem solved he should be-
come a booster for the new plan. The
council used to have ten members
and the cutting to seven caused no
friction. The school board is COM
posed of five members and the bust
ness of the school district is con-
Quoted quite satisfactorily. The
board employs a manager for the
schools and he is responsible to the
board and the board is responsible
to the people. |.
The Freeman-Tribune believes the
public interest will be subserved by !
centralizing esponsibility-by Gre
ating a head who is charged with
certain duties and who cannot shirk
them by trying to place the blame
upon others. However, the whole
matter is up to the citizens of Web
ster City themselves and should not
be decided because Of any favoritism
or petty local issues, but solely upon