On Monday the Pine Bluff City Council held a special meeting for the purpose of considering the termination of Assistant Police Chief Ivan Whitfield. Out of the council’s “deliberation” Whitfield was reinstated. At best, the process through which this end was achieved is a Machiavellian devil’s bargain.
As pretext to reinstatement, the council had to amend two existing ordinances that dealt with the authority of the police and fire chiefs to designate and remove an assistant police chief or deputy fire chief. The pre-amendment legislation stipulated that when an assistant chief is removed, they would return to their previous rank and pay, unless that removal is due to termination.
The new text of the ordinance reads, “Because the chiefs are authorized to appoint, remove and impose disciplinary actions, the intent of the ordinances is nullified, in that, the Assistant Chief/Deputy Fire Chief are exposed to the whims of the chiefs, without effective checks and balances (i.e., when the removal is associated with a disciplinary action, the appointee may not be adequately protected).” This much of the council’s business is reasonable. The system for promotion (at all levels, not just the assistant chief’s position) in both fire and police departments is largely a rigged game, where the points assignable by the respective chiefs can be made to essentially trump test scores and all other neutral assessments. In effect, the chiefs are largely free to promote whomever they deign to elevate. Moreover, this system is rife with potential for ex-officio sidebar agreements, running out the calendar and other techniques designed to manipulate “eligible” promotion candidates.
The revised ordinance goes on to provide that persons who serve as assistant chief will be permitted to appeal disciplinary action directly to the City Council, which may override the action by a two-thirds majority vote. The ordinance also provides that the assistant chief of police/deputy fire chief will not be permitted to appeal to the Review Committee unless the legislation is vetoed by the mayor and that veto is not overridden by the City Council. The ordinance was adopted 7-1, with Councilman Wayne Easterly casting the lone no vote. An emergency clause that made the legislation effective retroactive to Feb. 1 was also approved 7-1.
This is the point at which the train of governance leaves the rails, runs down Main Street and explodes into the side of City Hall. As councilman Easterly correctly pointed out, “We have an appeals process in place and that should be followed. This will open up the city to lawsuits from others who didn’t have special treatment.”
Independent reporting for Pine Bluff & Jefferson County since 1879.
Echoing Easterly’s rational assessment, Mayor Carl Redus Jr. observed, “This is going to create litigation issues for the municipality…. Making the law retroactive to Feb. 1, 2012? I’m not sure that’s the legal way to do things.”
We aren’t either. In fact, we’re pretty sure this is a fundamentally bad precedent that smells of favoritism, backdoor dealing, subterfuge and a basic lack of aptitude for managing public affairs.
Retroactive laws, tailored to remedy personal grievances are anathema to the foundational principles of our democracy. Indeed, capricious waves of the royal hand were among the central reasons for our War of Independence from Britain. Recreating lower case versions of that same tyranny puts the people in the very peril from which our founders fought to escape.
Even if we agreed with the outcome, that Whitfield was terminated in error and should be reinstated, this wasn’t the way to do it. Easterly said it best, “we have a process.”
It isn’t much of a process — at best it’s the illegitimate child of the former civil service commission, but it’s something. There are clear rules, predetermined steps and a mechanism for review.
Apparently, the city council thinks it knows better. Ah, but this is mostly the same bunch that got rid of the civil service commission in the first place.