By John Nalbandian

To: Local Government Governing Body Members and Staff

From: John Nalbandian

Re: The Work of the High-Performance Local Governing Body

I want to share my ideas on elements that can contribute to a high performance governing body and have organized the ideas into these sections:

Roles and responsibilities.

Structures.

Processes and engagement.

Each section concludes with a question for readers to ponder and perhaps use at a retreat for elected officials.

Roles and Responsibilities

Under this heading, you might expect a discussion of the governing body’s responsibility for policy making and big picture thinking, while deferring to staff for administration and management. While this consideration is important, I want to point you in another direction.

In some ways, the most basic issue regarding roles and responsibilities for councilmembers is whether—or maybe when—they will act in their role as representatives of constituencies—customer service representatives—in contrast to acting as “trustees” of the community.

A trustee has a significantly different role than a customer service representative—sometimes acting in ways contrary to customers’ and residents’ wishes. The interesting challenge is that councilmembers are charged with fulfilling both roles and, unfortunately, there is no common guidance as to when a councilmember should act in one role as opposed to the other.

The failure of governing body members to acknowledge and discuss the differences in these roles can easily lead to confusion and conflict. Without an appreciation for the two roles, the conflict can be misinterpreted and inappropriate motives ascribed to those with whom one disagrees.

Fulfilling one role as opposed to the other has implications for both council dynamics and council-staff relations. My experience as an elected official and adviser with many jurisdictions suggests that while staff acknowledge and accommodate council’s representative role, they are inclined to show more respect for council as trustee.

The trustee council role is more consistent with the orientation that staff has toward its own work. Thus, the discussion of representative versus trustee role is not only important among council, it can be fruitful in engaging council-staff discussion.

Question: Do the council and the staff respect the trustee as well as the representative role? What triggers one role versus the other?

Structures

In both urban and rural areas, collaboration between governments is becoming an imperative. This is not just a fad; it is the result of an understanding that today’s challenges do not respect jurisdictional boundaries often established years ago. The nature and scope of problems change, and the structures designed to deal with the problems must change as well.

This proposition is based on an understanding that problems should drive structures—roles, relationships, and processes—rather than vice versa. In an urban area, for example, it makes little sense for each jurisdiction to have a separate transportation policy. But the same idea holds in rural areas where perhaps a hospital for every rural jurisdiction is not sustainable.

The proposition that function should drive structure is not only applicable in obvious arenas like transportation and environment, but it also challenges our approach to economic development when every jurisdiction in a metro area acts as if it has its own economy.

Furthermore, it is just as applicable when looking at an organization’s internal structure as it is when considering interjurisdictional relationships. If starting anew, would a contemporary analysis of 911 calls lead to police, fire, and EMT delivery systems we currently and commonly employ?

Question: Do you foster an organizational and community culture that focuses first on the problems to be solved, and then adapts the structures of service delivery, or do the service delivery protocols have a life of their own?

Processes and Engagement

While our acceptance of more resident engagement is widespread and acknowledged as needed, I think its dimensions are not well understood.

I want to go beyond providing more avenues for residents to express their views. I think those opportunities are plentiful. Missing, I think, are forums where advocates or naysayers are encouraged to consider the consequences of their views.

One of the most effective expressions of a deliberative view is a budget exercise that forces participants to allocate X amount of money between Y services with the acknowledgement and full understanding that allocating more for one service will reduce resources available for the others.

Further, just as in the previous section where I argue that problems to be solved should determine structures to solve them, the same can be said about engagement. Is the goal to inform residents? Consult with them? Empower them? The goal should determine the technique or methods.

Question: Do you have forums where citizens are encouraged to consider the consequences of their views, or are your efforts mostly aimed at providing additional outlets to express those views?