City of Progress --
II Ethics
Moment May 2007
Feeling confident that you have the trust, loyalty, and respect of your mayor and colleagues, you decide to quietly let them know about your forthcoming gender reassignment. Privately, your inform your colleagues, including the mayor, that you will go public with your intentions to become a woman four months from now when your 13 year old son is away from the community. The circle of trust you have created involves about 15 people and, as it widens, you are increasingly concerned that you may not be able to keep your intentions out of the public eye until June. Alas, you discover that the circle is broken when a local newspaper reporter confronts you with the rumor that you intend to become a woman.
“Yes,” you reply, “ I will undergo gender reassignment and will begin dressing as a woman in a month or so. I will change my name from Steven to Susan.” The story becomes headline news. Letters and emails pour into the mayor’s office with many calling for your removal from office. One local newspaper prints a full page tabloid picture of you with the sub-text “a boy named Sue.”
City commissioners decide to schedule a public meeting to hear from citizens. Before the meeting takes place, the mayor defends you as does city manager colleagues in neighboring communities. Your supporters claim that merit not personal issues should matter the most. The city charter stipulates that you can be dismissed without cause but only by a super majority vote (five of the seven of the city commissioners).
Sixty persons speak at the four hour marathon meeting while nearly 500 more flood the city hall chambers and corridors. One resident contends, “The issue is not the gender change here. It’s the fact he deceived people. He wasn’t honest with us.” Another angry citizen exclaims, “His brain is the same today as it was last week . . . he may be even able to be a better city manager. But I sense that he’s lost his standing as a leader among the employees of the city.” Other speakers were demeaning in their language and accusations.
Humiliated by the spectacle, you decide to leave the meeting. A reporter corners you and asks: “How do you feel about what you heard?” You respond, “It’s just real painful to know that seven days ago I was a good guy and now I have no integrity, I have no trust and most painful, I have no followers.”
The city commission votes 5-2 to put you on paid administrative leave while your departure is made final. Your contract calls for 12 months severance pay ($140,234) and other benefits during this period.
The lead editorial in the local newspaper exclaims: “Officials bow to mob, prejudice . . . the community and most elected officials turned on the city manager and kicked him to the curb.”
Questions:
1. Did you exercise moral courage? In hindsight, is there anything you should have done differently?
2. Was it realistic of you to believe you could keep your job and everything would be just fine? Were you naïve?
3. Did the city commission treat you fairly? Was the community’s best interest served by your dismissal?
4. Should you sue the city for a human rights violation?
5. Is your professional code of ethics of any assistance?
6. Is your career as a city manager ended?
7. Does your dismissal fly in the face of the city’s
motto—City of
8. Was the newspaper sensationalism fair to you? The community?
Source: Based on a real case, see St. Petersburg Times,