It has been a will-he-or-won't-he? week for the Pikes Peak region and all of Colorado, keeping plenty of folks on the edge of their seats. Most of us, of course, were wondering whether Super Bowl- winning Denver Broncos Coach Mike Shanahan would depart for the University of Florida to take over its football program. Those of us who also like to follow local politics, meanwhile, were closely watching Springs City Hall as rumors swirled anew that City Manager Jim Mullen was on his way out.

As it turned out, the talented, skillful and yet recently maligned Shanahan will stay (for now, at least) while the talented, skillful and long-maligned Mullen announced Tuesday he will step down.

Mullen's departure comes after years under fire from various citizens groups as well as council members - more so, after new members came on board in last April's local elections - most of whom had clashed with him over his style and his vision.

His acumen as a public administrator was overshadowed by his reputation for being something less than the proverbial people person, including in his dealings with some of his nine bosses on the City Council (to say nothing of his relations with the media).

Whether that's attributable to an incapacity for indulging those he regarded as less insightful than himself or simply to a thin skin - perhaps to both? - is beyond our ken. Suffice it to say that after 25 years as a public servant, including five years at the helm in Colorado Springs, he has much yet to offer, but he might wish to consider a position with a lower public profile.

As for Mullen's hefty severance package - as The Gazette reported Wednesday, he was pressured out even if it officially was deemed a retirement - finger-pointing is sure to follow.

Some will wonder whether Mullen really had so much leverage as to get his now-former bosses to cover even extras like the cost of his legal representation in negotiating his exit. On the other hand, some may wonder, if Mullen truly is legally entitled to all he is getting, was it really worth it to make him leave now?

In other words, did the council blow it by buying Mullen a more costly goodbye than if his tenure simply had been allowed to peter out of its own accord? Or did those on the council who pushed hardest to oust Mullen do what had to be done, no matter the price?