If Austin Police Chief Brian Manley won't resign, he needs a new job title

In Austin, city legal staff has told City Manager Spencer Cronk that the state civil service code won't allow him to fire Chief Brian Manley, only demote him to chief of staff. This is due to Sec. 143.013(c) of the Texas Local Government Code which mandates that:

if a person is removed from the position of department head, the person shall be reinstated in the department and placed in a position with a rank not lower than that held by the person immediately before appointment as department head. The person retains all rights of seniority in the department.

The statute does not prevent firing someone brought in from the outside, but if the city promotes from within, they can only demote. Manley was chief of staff to former Chief Art Acevedo before being elevated to chief, so the City Manager is being told he could only be demoted to chief of staff, not fired. And since no new chief would want the job if they couldn't select their own leadership team, this is seen as a non-starter.

Still, Grits doesn't see this news as insurmountable, though it's being portrayed that way at city hall.

Your correspondent has been attempting to reform provisions in the Texas civil service code for more than two decades, but I must admit this was a new one to me. Considering its implications raises a few thoughts:

First, this is an excellent argument why no civil service city in Texas should ever promote a police chief from within if it means they cannot fire them. The Legislature should consider revising that provision when it meets next year.

Second, the City Manager could and should ask Chief Manley for his resignation. If he resigns, this provision becomes moot.

Third, Grits can envision more creative options besides putting Manley back as chief of staff. The statute doesn't require he get his old job back, but instead says he must be placed in a "position with a rank not lower than that held by the person immediately before appointment as department head."

So, Grits proposes that, if Manley won't resign, the city should create a new position on the organizational chart that's parallel with the chief of staff but doesn't supervise any other staff. It could have the same pay and rank but none of the power.

You could label the position something like "Asshole Who Wouldn't Resign," or, if you prefer a catchy acronym, simply "Person In Government."

Let him work from home or office him in a storage closet where they keep the toilet paper and cleaning supplies.

Yes, the city would still have to pay him, but that's the price the City Manager would have to pay for the poor management decision of hiring someone who could not be removed. It's worth mentioning that advocates have suggested city legal staff advising him on public safety issues should all be re-assigned because they routinely give bad advice. City Manager Cronk, who came here from Minneapolis, needed to know that a statute might limit his ability to fire Manley before he hired him. Their failure to tell him is another strong datapoint arguing for those lawyers to be re-assigned.

Maybe Manley would stay on under such circumstances, or, since he's fully vested and already put in more than 30 years at the department, maybe he'd just retire. In the end, Grits wouldn't particularly care. He just needs to not be Chief anymore.