Norwich bulletin., 1921-05-28
DEFECTS OF THE CITY MANAGER PLAN

In 1910 movement arose in Indian apolis similar to the present agitation for charter change in which 1t was urg- ed that Indiana cities should adopt com mission government. At that time it was successfully argued that commission gov ernment had two vital defects which should prevent its adoption in Indiana, writes Augustus L. Mason in the Indian apolis News. The first defect was the division of executive authority among a number of commissioners, instead of concentrating it in responsible mayor, as at present. The second defect was the consolidation of the legislative or taxing power with the administrative or spending power in the hands of single body of commissioners, with no check Ion their action, even in the case of bond issues and debt increase
 These arguments, largely theoretical when made in 1910. have received com piete demonstration of their soundness. Commission governed cities themselves found them to be true To avoid these weaknesses, charter reformers now advo- cate the manager plan. The question Is, does the election of an executive officer by the council or comniSsioners avoid these weaknesses? While the manager plan is an improvement over commits
 
 writer's judgment, overcome the weak nesses of the commission. Since the commissioners elect and discharge the city manager. they will be responsible for his acts. They will have the real power while the manager will have only i the appearance of power. The fiction l of a single executive will not bear ex- | animation, for under the manager plan 1 the real executive power will stiT be l divided among the five, seven or nine | commissioners. We would still have a plural executive It would be really a i board of five or more mayors. probably belonging to different parties, having diff
 ferent opinions, to say nothing of jeal- | ousies or political ambitions.
 School Board as an Example.
 i Charter reformers also urge that the l manager plan does away with the con l solidation of executives and legislative
 powers fin the hands of the same men | without check upon their action. Again i I submit this confuseS ficti6n with
 reality. The city manager appointed and l subject to discharge by the commission l CTS Is not an independent executive, with
 the power of veto on the action of com
 missioners. On the contrary he is theil
 dependent subordinate, so that the com l missioners are just as really unchecked
  discredited commission plan. Citizens o 1 Indianapelis are just now in a posi-
 tion to form and express judgment o 1 peculiar value on the question under discussion. The Indianapolis schoo
 board Is organized absolutely on tht l commission manager plan and I may sa, l was in existence long before the so 1 called Dayton plan of city governmen 1 was ever heard of. Our school board l ala nn i non-partisan ballot, the candidates names being placed on the ballots by pc I tition and not by party nomination. Tn
 schoo! commissioners thus chosen elect manager for the schools called super 1 intendent This is the manager plan pur and simnle, the only difference from cit! manager government being that ou school board conducts the public schools
 instead of the genecal city government: i On November 23, 1910. the writer mad the following statement on th1s suc1ect
 The Indianapolis News:
 "The school board does indeed exer
 else both the taxing power, mciu6 ing the sale of bonds. and spendinl
 mower. The prhlic approval which | has earned is due to the ga
 has earned is due not to the safe ! e7Iards of law; but the safeguards o . Character. It is the high grade c men chosen for the school boar
 which has protected US from wrong doing, That the school board law , i not an example to be followed In ou city charter is shown by what 1 tn civ of Boston found when it recent
 considered and rejected the plaH | commission government. -oo
 The Boston charter revEers, m @ lsu ! fTndianapolis News November 24' 1slu ' considering the analogy of thelr Scho' hoard pointed out that it had pee , found necessary to deprive the scho' hoard "of the power to buy land, an |. construct, repair and furnish scno' | buildings I submit that the recoF of the present Indianapolis school boar furnishes convincing proof ot the dai . C ger of vesting the power to levy taxt | end create debt in the same body of of
 Icials, possessing the power to e4pen } the funds so raised. We dare not re 5, exclusively on safeguards of character e The object of charter legislation is : provide safeguards of law. The n1ani d ger form of city government does n l. do this. The federal plan does,
 . Analogy Misleading.
 V Advocates of manager governmei l. urge that it Is a copy of the form Of u e ihusiness corporation, as indeed it is, al :. that ll1S Glly Is III ie1SI OAA+J l. tion for the transaction of public bu Id mess. This argument Is deceptive al h will not bear critical examination T! es city does indeed have a great deal m business, pure and simple. The improv 2 ments of streets, the building of sewer 10 engine houses, markets and the like is 1- deed business. But important as the bu 70 mess side of a municipality Is. it is f Id less important than the political sic Id The city government requires and pc " sesses the power to levy taxes on {
 people and to take their money aw
 from them, by force of law, and spe te it for public purposes. Has any privs ;s business corporation such 8 power? te .e course not. The taxing power is one 1e the greatest attributes of political SC s s ereignty It does not belong to busint 'T corporations and could not constitute ;.' ally be transferred to them. The city " its larger aspect is fundamentally 8 ,h litical corporation.
 tv But, even more important than 1 re taxing power, is the power which O. city government possesses of detecti If crime, arresting criminals. placing tn If in prison and bringing them to trial es fore a competent court The tax nm power merely deprives the citizen of gh money but the police may deprive him rel his liberty. Can any business eorpo ,s- tion do this? Surely it is shallow $ ,e- deceptive reasoning to argue that g II ve nicipality Is merely business corpo -h tiOn and, therefore may safely hA