Recently, Augustine received an invitation to participate in a national study regarding the effectiveness of local governments, with a specific focus on the council-manager form of government. The study is being run by the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee and Northern Michigan University, both of which offer a Master's degree in Public Administration.
From the perspective of a research subject, it seemed that the study was examining two things: First, how councils and managers conduct and implement strategic visioning for their communities; and second, how intra-council conflicts can lead to decisions that stray from that vision. For example, Augustine was asked to consider the following list of issues:
- Economic Development
- Public Private Cooperation and Partnerships
- Land Use/Zoning
- General Taxation
- Tax Increment Financing
- Recruiting New Businesses
- Transportation
- Public Works
- Education
- Government Administration
- Employee Relations
- Intergovernmental Relations
- Collective Bargaining
- Emergency Preparedness
- Energy Policy
- Eminent Domain
and provide an assessment of Council’s overall knowledge of each issue, interest in each issue, and effectiveness of policy-making with regards to each. She was then asked to describe the extent to which each of the following factors led to conflicts amongst Council that may have hindered decision-making:
- Different interpretations about mission
- Low trust among council members
- Low trust of Mayor
- Personality differences among council members
- Varying levels of confidence among council members
- Different expectations of the information needed to make decisions
- Different levels of commitment to the local government
- Different preferences for decision-making processes
- Pressure to raise taxes
- Varying levels of skill among council members
- Role conflicts between council and staff
- Low trust of City Manager
As you can see, the former City Council, under the direction of the former City Manager, could have served as a ‘case study’ for these researchers because there was conflict on each of these points. The election that was in full swing at this time last year was focused on getting council out from under the manager’s thumb, seating councilors who took their role seriously and could check their egos at the door and roll up their sleeves for the best interests of Geneva. Augustine’s answers to the questions reflected the improvement in governance that has been evident following the departure of the former manager. On one hand, she could speak to the broken system we navigated with him at the helm, but she could also communicate the renewed sense of possibilities now.
While some of these ‘pressure points’ still exist with the current council, those related to the City Manager, the Mayor, and city staff are no longer present. Now, the question remains if the new council will find the will, and a way, to address each of those issues above (from Economic Development to Eminent Domain) in a way that puts pursuit of a strategic community vision at the forefront of the decision-making.
2 comments:
Frankly, I am glad that this meeting did not have an audience. Everyone was able to sit down and speak their minds without cameras, microphones, or people wanting to interrupt. It gave them a chance to sit talk to each other about the City and where it is headed. This meeting has been a long time coming and I hope that it is not the last.
One suggestion I would make is that each member of the Council have their own group to meet with. Rather than Ward meetings each member of the Council would contact a half dozen people in their Ward and they would have an informal meeting periodically. To keep things and ideas fresh, people would cycle in and out of these groups every few months.
Perhaps you're right that more public presence would have changed the discussion, but we hope not. What are folks afraid of?
While it does seem that people can get long-winded when the camera is on, it is also essential that the public takes an active interest in the budding policies of the Council. After all, is it more instructive to see the end product, all packaged up as a ready-to-go resolution, or the bubbling up of ideas that leads to that point? Our point of the post was that council did something new, something really good for Geneva, and its too bad that it wasn't seen by more people (because the stumblings of council in the past have certainly been watched).
In any event, you're right that this kind of discussion was "a long time coming" and hopefully only the first of many. We are optimistic about that.
Your idea about soliciting constituent feedback is very interesting. Engaging the public is, of course, a fundamental obligation of city government and each councilor approaches that differently. Sometimes councilors forget that, and just wait for the public to come to them. Your idea would not only bring information out to people, but it might also make people who are new to the process feel more comfortable contacting their councilor later on. We'll pass this idea on....Thanks again for writing.
Post a Comment