Overdue posting on the appointed chief issues.

I was on the charter review committee in 2007 and this current committee. We covered the appointment options several times and in detail. Over at the Conchoinfo blog ( http://conchoinfo.blogspot.com/search?q=civil+service ), we have been covering the appointed chief and how state civil service law affects it since 2006. San Angelo is a Texas Civil Service city. It's been one since the voters decided on it in 1948. Local government code (http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/…/htm/LG.143.htm… ) spells out both the allowed selection procedures and the minimum qualifications for an appointed chief. We did a Q&A at conchoinfo before the 2007 charter election (http://conchoinfo.blogspot.com/2007/09/chief-concerns.html ). Nothing has really changed there except in the 2007 charter election, where we clarified the city managers authority as the CEO of the city, we copied from the U.S. Constitution the process that all city manager appointments of senior officials (assistant city managers, city attorneys, department heads, fire chiefs, etc.) would be with the advice and consent of city council. How that would be formally implemented was and is up to the city council but it is in the city charter ( http://z2codes.franklinlegal.net/franklin/DocViewer.jsp…...). That was put there to make sure the city council was kept in the loop (and hopefully the citizens of San Angelo) on all senior appointment. That is where the city councils authority to be involved in the appointment process of the police chief comes from. The city council can't appoint the police chief (or the fire chief, city attorney, finance director, etc..) They can advise the city manager not to hire, and withhold their consent (approval) but the appointment is by the authority of the city manager. Any firing decisions are also only those of the city manager. The city council gets no vote or input once a chief has been hired. If they want to fire a chief or department head, they have to replace the city manager with one that will do that for them. They can't do it directly. That's also what the city charter currently says, and that won't be changed. We've covered that at many of the charter review committee meetings. It was brought out during the forums. I wasn't there to personally state that at the last few council meetings but I didn't expect the ball to get dropped like it was. Hope this clears up some of the confusion.I was on the charter review committee in 2007 and this current committee. We covered the appointment options several times and in detail. Over at the Conchoinfo blog ( http://conchoinfo.blogspot.com/search?q=civil+service ), we have been covering the appointed chief and how state civil service law affects it since 2006. San Angelo is a Texas Civil Service city. It's been one since the voters decided on it in 1948. Local government code (http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/LG/htm/LG.143.htm#143.013 ) spells out both the allowed selection procedures and the minimum qualifications for an appointed chief. We did a Q&A at conchoinfo before the 2007 charter election (http://conchoinfo.blogspot.com/2007/09/chief-concerns.html ). Nothing has really changed there except in the 2007 charter election, where we clarified the city managers authority as the CEO of the city, we copied from the U.S. Constitution the process that all city manager appointments of senior officials (assistant city managers, city attorneys, department heads, fire chiefs, etc.) would be with the advice and consent of city council. How that would be formally implemented was and is up to the city council but it is in the city charter ( http://z2codes.franklinlegal.net/franklin/DocViewer.jsp?showset=sanangel...). That was put there to make sure the city council was kept in the loop (and hopefully the citizens of San Angelo) on all senior appointment. That is where the city councils authority to be involved in the appointment process of the police chief comes from. The city council can't appoint the police chief (or the fire chief, city attorney, finance director, etc..) They can advise the city manager not to hire, and withhold their consent (approval) but the appointment is by the authority of the city manager. Any firing decisions are also only those of the city manager. The city council gets no vote or input once a chief has been hired. If they want to fire a chief or department head, they have to replace the city manager with one that will do that for them. They can't do it directly. That's also what the city charter currently says, and that won't be changed. We've covered that at many of the charter review committee meetings. It was brought out during the forums. I wasn't there to personally state that at the last few council meetings but I didn't expect the ball to get dropped like it was. Hope this clears up some of the confusion.