On top of that, criticizing her for "her abrasive management style" is an obvious application of the sexist double standard where tough male managers are respected for their aggressiveness but female managers who do the same are considered bitchy
I wouldn't be too sure about that. It was one of the reasons she was let go from her last job, and one of the publicly stated reasons that Berkeley (hardly a hotbed of misogyny) didn't hire her. And I've seen her interviewed and she does come off as abrasive, and I doubt it would be a positive work environment if her interview style is anything close to her management style. That management style might work at a Taco Bell where most of the employees are barely HS grads, but it tends to fail when most of your workers are college grads, and people who have been in grad school - which is a huge percentage of the people under the City Manager.
"Tough" male city managers often get in trouble too, (we let one go here last year for pretty much the same reasons), and the 'real' reason tends to be more along the lines of "you were hired to be the manager, so manage - we're (mayor/city council) hired to make the decisions and be the boss, so back off." Other than misuse of money, the most common reason city manager types are fired (or their contracts not renewed) is that they forget that they are only hired employees whose job merely to implement decisions, not to make them.
And though it seems she might have been singled out, her hiring process was very public too.
I hope that the voters there insist on the same for their City Commissioners in the interest of equity and fairness the
Actually, such people have the most public of all evaluations, they are called 'elections.' And, FTR, I support public evaluations of all top muni officials, from the Manager on down.
