Ten Lessons Learned by a Former Elected Official
by
Gregory S. Mathews
I not only have the pleasure of being an Ancel Glink attorney, but also the former Village President of Glen Ellyn. I also served as Village Trustee before my term of Village President. Set out below are ten things I learned through my experiences as an elected official. Ah, if I only knew then what I know now. Most of these items can be used both by a Village President or Mayor, or a Trustee or Alderman. Since this pamphlet will be made available to governmental officials of all types, I believe that many of my lessons learned are usable in non-municipal contexts. As in other life experiences, it may help if you understand the goals and aspirations of other elected officials as well as your own.
1. There is a Big Difference Between the Public's Perception of the Mayor's Power and Reality. The Only Real Power is in the Power to Persuade
The mayor's power, or rather lack of power, to implement his or her own vision
of the proper course on which to steer the community generated the most discussion. Not infrequently, the new mayor will find that he or she lacks the unbending support of all board members when the mayor's first board meeting takes place. Getting elected is one thing, but accomplishing the goals that influenced a mayor to run for office requires a majority of the board to share in those goals. The ability to persuade the majority of other elected officials to join in, whether by reason, compromise, personality or sheer force of will is where the mayor will find the power and authority to move forward. A successful new mayor may persuade board members to join in his or her vision for community issues by drawing them into the process and seeking their input before making pronouncements to the press and public. Board members generally want and need to feel they make a contribution, and listening to their opinion is the best way to meet this need.
2. Reporters Often Do Not Realize You Are an Underpaid Volunteer, Not a Career Politician
Often, when a quote on a controversial topic appears in the paper the next day, it
can seem negative and out of context. Emotions carrying over from last night's difficult decision do not help one's perception that the reporter (or headline writer, usually a different person) only writes critical stories. Just as often, reading the story a year later sheds a different, less offensive light. It is best for the mayor to be accessible to the local reporter because the tenor of a news article can be influenced by a reporter who does not hear or understand the context of a decision. This may result when most discussion takes place at an earlier workshop meeting rather than at the regular meeting. Additionally, the only other news source might be a readily available opponent on the board or in the
audience. It may be helpful to ask a reporter to read back a quote and make sure it came
out right. Occasionally talk to your reporter about something other than the meeting, like "Cubs or Sox?" In extraordinary circumstances, if a mayor has previously demonstrated accessibility to a newspaper's reporters, but one reporter's stories are consistently biased,
it is possible to meet with the reporter and his or her editor to clear the air. A pattern of negativity can best be shown to the editor through a series of news clippings.
3. Advisory Boards Have Feelings Too
One circumstance to avoid is the advisory board which often reaches a decision based on the statement, "it does not matter what we decide because the council will decide, ultimately, regardless of our vote." This situation causes two problems. One, it tends to make petitioners feel they are being shuttled through meaningless, time consuming meetings. Two, the council or board lacks important input and is forced to recreate the wheel in its deliberations. The situation also has two causes. One, municipal board members have repeatedly demonstrated that they want to recreate the wheel whether they receive good input from the advisory board or not. Two, the advisory board members may not appreciate that their recommendation is one part of a larger process in which the municipal board must weigh opinions from a number of boards and commissions that reflect different issues. It is best for the municipal board to explain the basis for its final decisions and convey that information to the advisory boards, while at
the same time offering appreciation and open discourse. A well conceived advisory board decision will relieve the municipal board of rehashing every bit of earlier discussion. I believe that these same rules apply as well to formal and informal advisory boards to other governmental bodies.
4. Mediating Disputes Between Neighbors is Like Being Mired in
Quicksand: the Harder You Struggle to Help, the Deeper You Sink
Newly elected officials tend to spread themselves thin acting on the belief that they can enter the fray in a dispute between neighbors and, given their position, work out
an agreement that makes everyone happy. Stormwater runoff disputes, for example, where the municipality may have no legal authority or control based on existing codes,
and staff has been unable to satisfy one or both parties to the dispute, can lead to endless, unsatisfying involvement that accomplishes nothing. Elected officials' involvement can also create a false impression with the residents that the town can force a resolution. Business at regular board meetings may then be interrupted or prolonged with frequent visits by disgruntled residents.
5. Intergovernmental Cooperation Can Really Work
Political speeches about the benefits of intergovernmental cooperation draw praise from all sides but accomplish little without real effort to bring government leaders together. Certainly, for a defined goal which can be accomplished between two public bodies, cooperation is a must. Regular unstructured conversations, however, over informal dinners, among political and administrative heads from local school, park,
library and municipal governments, promote the exchange of ideas and perspectives on local issues. One good question, "Is anyone thinking about a referendum?" can avert two taxing bodies from heading to a controversial vote in the same election. Perhaps more mundane but nevertheless good questions are, "Can we share snow removal equipment and operations in a cost effective way?" or, "Can we share land resources for storm water control, or work together on a bond issue?" Even if no dramatic agreement comes from any single dinner meeting, simply getting to know other community leaders
on a personal basis fosters the spirit and trust necessary to true intergovernmental cooperation.
6. Strong Monetary Reserves Will Prove Their Importance
Prior to market downturns it may seem less important to ensure that reserves to operating and capital funds always meet policies established by prior boards. When the economy is good, revenues from all sources appear adequate to fund the upcoming fiscal year without resorting to significant increases in taxes. When the economy suffers a downturn, revenues from sales taxes, interest income, motor fuel taxes, utility taxes, and state funding all drop while salary, benefits and insurance costs generally do not. Construction projects such as street improvements invariably turn up underlying infrastructure problems which should be repaired or replaced at the same time. Paving a street and then tearing it up shortly thereafter to make needed repairs is not cost effective
and generates public dissatisfaction. The effort to establish a conservative fund reserve policy and the discipline to maintain those reserves when revenues are strong provides a welcome safety net when costs exceed revenues in any fund. In our community the most recent market decline came during a major five year road and sewer program which unearthed conditions that caused costs to exceed projections. Having strong capital reserves created over an extended time frame made possible the completion of the program, including extras, without an impact on the taxpayers.
7. Ordinary Citizens Have Never Read the Tort Immunity Act
A gap exists between what a community's residents assume their government is doing to shelter their lives and what their government is capable of or obligated to do under the law. Many assume that no rainstorm should ever cause flooding on their property and no car should ever leave the roadway and cause injury or damage unless the town has failed to intervene, and so must be at fault. This assumption tends to foster lawsuits. The protections afforded to municipalities under the Tort Immunity Act are based in legislative acknowledgment that most municipalities lack the financial and physical ability to anticipate and remedy all ills. This is why the municipality is immune from suit for failing to enact or enforce a building code ordinance, for issuing a building
or grading permit, for negligently conducting an inspection on private property or for failing to erect a new traffic sign. Unfortunately, this knowledge gap usually closes only after a judge issues a dismissal order. A mayor must learn something about these issues because otherwise he or she may falsely assure residents that all their losses will be covered.
8. The Mayor Need Not be a Vocal Proponent of Every Decision
After an initial "breaking-in" period where every issue before the board seems to consume substantial mayoral energy, newly-elected officials may come across a subject
or question that he or she finds of marginal interest. Fortunately, some board member usually will take up the slack in vocalizing a position and the mayor and other board members will serve well if they simply help bring the issue to a final conclusion as a guide rather than champion of the cause. One benefit of this approach is that the less frequently an elected official actively promotes a position, the more likely that when he
or she does choose to speak out, people will sit up and pay attention.
9. Penny-Wise May be Consultant Foolish
Occasionally, in order to save costs, governmental staffs will take on tasks previously performed by an expert, such as an engineer or a lawyer. There is logic to the idea that staff has dealt with many of these issues in the past, has seen all the documents
and notice requirements, and therefore if the paperwork from a prior agreement is simply recast to fit the current situation, more will be saved. The tempting aspect of this practice
is that it may work, and the consultant fees which are avoided provide a short term, but limited, benefit. In fact, negatives to the practice may not appear during the time in which the current board or administration serves. Legal defects in improperly noticed meetings, drafted agreements, or engineering plans, however, create significant costs down the road when a fix is needed. Sometimes, the initial savings will result in litigation. Beyond legal costs, the municipality may suffer the loss of engineering and construction costs and may lose out on revenue opportunities from user fees and taxes in amounts which far outweigh the original presumed benefit of going it alone. Don't overuse your consultants, but cut their duties with care.
10. Time Spent on an Issue is Often Inversely Proportional to its
Importance to the Entire Community
If the impact or benefit to the entire community constitutes the measuring stick
for evaluating the time devoted to the issue, one learns that many board deliberations which involve the most time actually have little or no impact on the majority of residents
in town. One example I remember involved the decision whether to install sidewalks as part of major street reconstruction in an area of town with a rural feel. Engineering plans included sidewalks but residents on two blocks strenuously opposed their installation. Ninety-five percent of the town had sidewalks already. During the course of a year the board created and implemented a set of criteria to evaluate resident objections to inclusion of sidewalks in street improvement plans. Ultimately, the board decided to install the sidewalks which started the discussion because of nearby parks and a school. Some of the objectors later decided they liked the new sidewalks after all. The primary value of the time spent by the board ended up coming from the good will and credibility expressed by many residents due to the board's effort to listen and respond to their concerns.
All chapters:
Ten Steps to Help Keep Your Employees From Suing You (Or To Help Defend You If They Do), by
Margaret Kostopulos
Ten Lessons Learned by a Former Elected Official, by
Gregory S. Mathews
Ten Rules to Live by for Public Management Labor Negotiators
, by
Gregory S. Mathews
Donald W. Anderson
Moving Ten (Giga) Steps to the Digital Future
, by
Adam B. Simon
Ten Things Governmental Officials Should Know About
The Illinois Governmental Tort Immunity Act
, by
Darcy L. Proctor
How Governments Can Win in Cases Before Appellate Courts – 10 Examples
, by
Ellen K. Emery
Ten Rules About Running for Local Government Office, by
Keri-Lyn J. Krafthefer
Top Ten Tools for Your Construction Project, by
Derke J. Price
Ten Steps to Creating a TIF District, by
Paul N. Keller
Ten Things Governmental Officials Don't Know About
Workers' Compensation, by
Gerald A. Granada and W. Britt Isaly
Ten Things Municipal Officials Should Know About
Local Prosecution and Ordinance Enforcement, by
Scott Puma and John Christensen
The Zoning Game in Ten Easy Lessons , by
David S. Silverman
Ten Ways Municipalities and Park Districts Can
Intergovernmentally Cooperate, by
Scott A. Puma
Ten Steps to a Closer Relationship Between Municipalities
and School Districts, by
Margaret Kostopulos
|
