Friday, December 02, 2011

Firing the Cambridge, MA, USA City Manager because of Monteiro: A small window

1. Introduction.
2. Details.

1. Introduction.

A few caveats.

First of All, Decades of experience have given me the very strong opinion that it is difficult to UNDERestimate the Cambridge Pols.

Secondly, as I have repeatedly gone into, if Cambridge, MA had a responsible City Council, the Cambridge City Manager would have been fired long ago.

Notwithstanding that, there are two factors which place time crunch on the actions of the next few weeks, assuming, and a very silly assumption, that the Cambridge City Council fulfills very basic levels of responsibility. I keep dreaming on decency from this group. I keep getting proven wrong.

But, assuming decency, the key issues are:

Very quickly, the Cambridge City Council has to give the Cambridge City Manager six months notice as to whether they will hire or fire him.

Secondly, the most responsible choice for acting city manager, should the Cambridge City Council do the right thing, is rumored on the verge of retiring, probably at the end of January. The city clerk, Margaret Drury, is competent and highly respected. She not only has no interest in being a permanent city manager, she probably would have to be talked into taking the position rather than retiring.

But, the appointment would be a great honor and a culmination of her honorable and achieving career, and, although I know nothing about the legalities, I would assume that the much higher pay during the temporary appointment could significantly increase her retirement figures.

But both factors are time limiting.

Most definitely, the city manager can and should be fired for malfeasance in office as determined by Superior Court judge and jury and by the Appeals Court panel, but it would be quite a bit more awkward to do so after the Cambridge City Council has told the Cambridge City Manager it is going to rehire him. Additionally, certainly other people could be acting city manager during the process, but there is no possible alternative with the very great qualities of City Clerk Margaret Drury.

2. Details.

I really do not know how many more details I should go into. I have beat this case to death.

The fact that the city manager is still in office after being found guilty of severe malfeasance in office as stated in the strong, clear key opinion of the Trial Judge, and the informal comments of the Appeals Court, is an indictment of the Cambridge City Council and of the truly rotten Cambridge Pol organization which keep the Cambridge City Council from being thrown out of office.

Once again, the key court opinions may be read at: (appeals court), and at (trial judge).

And I have done a lot of analyses of this particular outrage.

Civil Rights Retaliation Case information still secret from Cambridge City Council

Cambridge city council order number 4 for this coming Monday, December 5, at, says way too much about the situation on the Cambridge City Council.

This order indicates that the Cambridge City Manager is still keeping key information secret from the Cambridge City Council on the case of Malvina Monteiro v. City of Cambridge.

This is the case in which judge, jury, and appeals court are in agreement that the Cambridge City Manager destroyed the life of Malvina Monteiro in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint. The appeals court panel showed its disgust at Cambridge’s appeal by refusing to issue a formal opinion, and said “ample evidence [of] outrageous action.” The trial judge called Cambridge’s behavior “reprehensible.” The jury awarded $1.1 million for destroying her life and $3.5 million penal damages to show its disgust. The city manager has announced, without explanation, the city solicitor’s retirement.

The key court opinions may be read at: (appeals court), and at (trial judge).

There is nothing complicated about this situation. Jury, judge and appeals court are in agreement that the Cambridge City Manager committed gross malfeasance in office. That translates into ample cause to fire him without golden parachute and probably without pension.

The refusal of the Cambridge City Manager to provide the Cambridge City Council with key information on the case rather reminds me of the treatment of the Cambridge City Council by the predecessor to the Sullivan / Healy regime. He was fired for a lot less than findings of Superior Court judge and Jury and Appeals Court Panel of gross malfeasance in office.

The Cambridge City Manager is treating the Cambridge City Council with the lack of respect that the Cambridge City Council amply deserves.