Arizona republican., 1915-03-12
Duties of the City Manager

We printing communication elsewhere this morning reasons. One is that every reader c The Republican has a right to the decent eX- presson of his views in these columns, however widely they may diverge from the opinions of this paper We print it also because it affords an op- portuntN to reply the three principal objections to the city manager system of municipal govern nient.
 our correspondent asserts that the charter is defective that it does not lcearly prescribe or limit the duties of the city manager which, being without limitation, autocratic Reference is made evidently more especially to the appointment and dismissal by the city manager of such em- iIoyes of the city as are not expressly placed by the charter under the control of the commission such as the auditor and the city magistrate
 Our correspondent evil in the arbitrary power of the city manager. the exercise of favor ltism or political influence. He would have hear ing of charges against employees, that they might have opportunity to defend themselves
 It was designed by the voters of Phoenix when they adopted the charter that the business of the city should be conducted like large and well-ma aged private enterprise in which the highest eff ,en,.y is sought at the possible cost In such establishments there is a manager superintendent who is responsible for the success of the business He is allowed to employ and dismiss all employees or 0 delegate that power to the heads of the de- partment under him. It is to his interest as well as to the heads of the departments that these em- ployes should be of the highest efficiency. lf for any reason. it is judged by the head of depart ment the superintendent or manager, that the employe is below standard. his case is already de- cided. It would be foolish arrangemnt if he could carry his case to the board the stock holders of the enterprise by whom the manager or superintendent alone is held responsible.
 We may admit that sometimes the manager or the head of a department might be in error as to the capablity of empoye. but it would certainly be admitted that they ought to be more competent judges than the directors or the stockholders with whom the employees not brought into contact
 The 'citv manager is likely to appoint an .mploye because of a personal liking for him. Nor is he likely to yield to political influence of an employe because he himself cannot escape re- sponsibility for the incompetence of the men. ap- pointed by him. It directly upon him. On the other hand when appointments are made by bodies of divided responsibility there is apt to be appointment of personal political favorites We all remember how these things were done under the old council system.
 In a private establishment like a railroad where in direct control are responsible to stockhold- CTS and boards O directors there is seldom show If favortism, The manager cannot afford it. It is true that wealth ana influence may give a young man chance show his fitness but if he fails to show it. he is promptly dropped. The railroad sys- tenn cannot afford be cogged by incompetence.
 Of all the heads of railroad systems today. few have been fed with golden spoons. Nearly all have up from the ranks from the section, the tele- graph key. clerks desk, or from some other ob- position.