Special Reports

Why should Tacoma reward poor performance?

Re: "Graceful departure for Corpuz key to ending paralysis" (editorial, 6-22).

I can't help but wonder at the reasoning behind the continuous appeals to the citizenry of Tacoma on behalf of "fair" treatment for Tacoma City Manager Ray Corpuz.

I especially wonder about the statement that the decision to terminate Corpuz's employment is "based on hindsight."

What decision concerning a city employee's past actions is not? Corpuz failed to do his homework in promoting Brame, and the city will be paying for his poor judgment for some time to come. He is being allowed to retire, an action that will doubtless serve to shield him from future legal actions.

He was given an opportunity to upgrade his retirement benefits, so he will be in a very good financial position as a result. I fail to see how additional payments as a severance package will benefit the city, unless it's intended to highlight the concept of rewarding poor performance.

I know that that's often been a hallmark of public service in Tacoma, but it's never too late to advocate change.