When Peggy Averite left her job as a school official in Indianapolis, the Ivy League graduate had received nothing but glowing performance reviews, and was heavily recruited across the nation. After some consideration, she finally accepted the City of Cambridge's offer to serve as Principal of the Agassiz School, an elementary school in North Cambridge.

Within two years, though, Averite had started looking for a new job, alleging that the city, under the direction of City Manager Robert W. Healy, had been unwilling to promote her and treat her the same as her white coworkers.

Now Averite, along with seven other female minority Cambridge officials, is suing the city for discrimination.

The charges have added fuel to the fire of three city councillors, who have been trying to remove Healy since 1997.

Since city councillors have limited control over the hiring and firing of city employees, these three councillors--Kenneth E. Reeves '72, Timothy J. Toomey and Katherine Triantafillou--have exercised their power by trying to remove the city manager, who is responsible for personnel decisions.

The Lawsuits

As part of a 2,400-person Cambridge bureaucracy that included only 14 managers of color, the eight litigants claim their race was the reason they initially got their managerial jobs, and the reason why they faced discrimination once they accepted the positions.

Ellen Zucker, a lawyer at Dwyer and Collora who represents four of the litigants, claims that these women, often the lone minorities in their department, were patronized by their white coworkers and "were made to feel as if they were token minorities hired simply because of their race."

Some city councillors, like Reeves, back that claim. He says the women were all hired in the mid-1990s as a part of an affirmative action push.

"The city employment record of women of color is so poor that it is evident that they were just hired to fill minority seats," he said.

In their discrimination suits, Zucker's clients specifically complain of antagonistic superiors, difficulties obtaining recognition for their work and harsher disciplinary penalties than their coworkers.

Because the litigants' positions were managerial, they reported either to Healy directly or to his subordinate, Assistant City Manager Jill Herold.

That's where the city council comes in.

"My clients are suing the city for what the city manager did," Zucker said. "It's a natural reaction that the city council would respond by firing the city manager."

A Closer Look at Healy

Healy's position of city manager, which he has held for 20 years, entails the day-to-day running of the city, much like the CEO of a company.

And, like the board of directors of a company, the city council chooses--and has the power to remove--that CEO.

In the last two years, that power of removal has come into play as the discrimination charges have been levied.

Healy's three-year contract expires in June 2000, but for some councillors, his term needs to end sooner.

"When we have eight people suing the city for discrimination, we have to look at who hires these people and who is responsible for day-to-day contact with them," Reeves said.

Triantafillou claims the suits are reflective of larger problems with the city manager. "I don't think that he's much of a visionary, and he's not the man to lead us into the 21st century," she said. "I've voted against the renewal of his contract all three times that I've had the opportunity."

"These discrimination suits are not good for the city," she added. "If the city manager can't change things then it's best to remove him, because litigating all of these complaints just isn't fiscally prudent."

But Mayor Francis H. Duehay '55 defended Healy, saying the manager's "undeniably positive record demonstrates the benefit of continuity at the top."

"No city manager is perfect and there are indeed problems," Duehay said, "but there's a question of whether or not these suits constitute a pattern, and we ought to be able to solve our problems without firing our city manager."

But Healy's detractors say the eight lawsuits are part of a definite pattern.

"Even if you come from Mars, you should be able to see that there are serious concerns given the number of cases, the fact that they're all women of color, and the similarity of complaints," Reeves said.

"How many cases would you have to have before you think that there's a problem?" he asked.

A Political Scheme?

But Healy and his supporters argue that the councillors are motivated by politics, not righteous indignation.

"Reeves has wanted Healy out ever since [Reeves] lost his position as mayor back in 1995," said Robert Winters, a city council watcher and former council candidate who is also a Harvard math preceptor.

"He's just trying to play the race card and cast the manager as a racist so that he can hire his own manager," Winters said.

Healy also dismissed the councillors' attempts to remove him. "These are the same three councillors that voted against me in 1997. This is just city politics," he said.

Healy, who as a defendant in the pending cases is not allowed to comment further, said he would say more "when there are five councillors who want to fire me."

But Reeves defended the three councillors, saying the lawsuits--not politics--were their motivation.

"When you have eight people suing the city for the same problem, I find it preposterous to ridicule the people who try to bring it to light," Reeves said.