Upon reflection, I ran a little hot last week in criticizing how four members of the Avon Town Council handled the sacking of their town manager.

I still believe they acted rashly and violated state sunshine law by discussing the situation in a way in which everyone knew what everyone else was thinking the weekend before an official session to evaluate their manager's job performance.

And I'm still pretty sure this was a fait accompli before that session began. I do think the die was well cast even if the official vote hadn't happened yet.

Yes, I certainly intended to bark loudly in disapproval of what we press types view as abuses of the law and politicians (along with their attorneys) often consider just part of effective communications.

Alas, the state attorney general's office and local prosecutors tend to side with the politicians.

Prosecutions are exceedingly rare, and this case would fly at best with the district attorney at the level of jaywalking.

What's left? Well, to holler foul! These guys bent the rules pretty good, even if the authorities would let them dodge the strict language of the law by keeping individual discussions below quorums while the result adds up to what I'd call plainly a work session.

But no one voted before they were supposed to, and Town Councilman Buz Reynolds insists that even though he has had professional concerns about Town Manager Larry Brooks' direction for some time, he had not fully made up his mind until voting after the official session reviewing Brooks' job performance got under way.

Reynolds thought it proper to reach out to everyone the prior weekend to avoid blindsiding anyone at the session coming up that week, and I can see how he had the best intentions to put everyone in the loop. He didn't want this to come across as a palace coup, and said much of the vagueness in publicly discussing the circumstances has come from unwillingness to embarrass Brooks.

I don't think I'm the only one who would observe that Larry Brooks has nothing to be embarrassed about.

He didn't do anything wrong. And he retained the support of nearly half the council. Nearly.

Every town, city and county manager understands that right, wrong or indifferent, the gig's up once they have lost a majority of their governing body.

I don't criticize the council for deciding it was time for a change.

That simply is part of their responsibility, and a majority of the Town Council came to the conclusion this was necessary. Period.

I'm not concerned so much here with who is employed by whom, their occupations in the building industry or critics' speculations about personal interests. We all struggle with our balance of experience, biases and personal interests as well as professional ones. In private and public enterprises.

I have noticed that the reaction to my column last week has been binary. That is, anyone connected to construction or development has applauded the move and shrugged at piffle like sunshine laws. Everyone else who contacted me has ranged from outrage to concern that this council will work from here to relax rules about development and construction to a questionable state.

Still, everyone on the Avon council was properly elected by their citizenry and empowered to oversee their town government. Whether construction or other rules and their enforcement are too strong or weak is a matter for the leaders and ultimately constituents of the town.

It's right and appropriate that if a majority loses confidence in their town manager, they do what they must.

I have to add that there is a strange “now what?” aspect in the wake of the council's 4-3 decision, however. You'd think that once your majority had decided on a change, they would be able to express a clear idea of what that new direction should be.

There's a hint of a Monty Python skit in this, the one in which the troupe declares they are facing a monumental crisis that requires quick, decisive action.

Right then, let's a hire a consultant.

So while I can understand if concerns about the town manager's focus may have simmered for a long time, the conclusion came quickly, and yes, clumsily.

A council that was split on the town manager now is more deeply divided. The town will pay more dearly than is ideal with taxpayer dollars. I'm not sure that constitutes an improvement in governance.

I do believe that some councilmen should feel at least a little embarrassed, even if they truly believe they only were acting in the best interests of their town and regard for their fellow council members.

Is it unfair to expect a little higher standard?

And yes, I realize this is not actually the end of the world, either.

I wonder, though, how Avon citizens answer a variant of the Reagan question: Is the town a better place today?

And do you have more or less confidence in your Town Council now?

Editor and Publisher Don Rogers can be reached at drogers@vaildaily.com or 970-748-2920.