Would You Hire Your Mayor to Run a $50 Million Business? — We scrutinize the qualifications of people we hire to manage a business, but do we apply the same standards to the people responsible for running our communities?
Every four years, people throughout our communities begin the process of gaining support to run for local office. They attend community events, knock on doors, put signs in yards and ask residents for their votes. Before long, we’re deciding who should serve as mayor and who should represent us as aldermen. For the purpose of this article, I will use the terms mayor and alderman, recognizing that municipalities operate under different forms of government.
Now, before anyone gets caught up on the $50 million, I’m using that number for illustration. Municipal budgets vary, but the point is that we’re talking about managing millions of dollars, hundreds of employees and responsibilities that affect an entire community.
Now, let’s be honest. If my aunt or cousin decided to run for office, I would probably think they were the best person for the job. That’s family, right? But that’s also exactly what bias looks like.
And that’s where I think we, as a community, need to take a step back.
When deciding who should lead our municipalities, how much consideration are we really giving to qualifications and experience? Are we looking at what candidates have actually managed, what decisions they’ve had to make and whether they understand the complexities of municipal government? Or are we voting based on who we know, who we like and who has the most support?
Think about it this way. If you were hiring someone to manage your household, oversee your finances or even care for your children, would you simply give them the position because they’re a friend or family member? Probably not. You would want to see a resume. You would ask about their experience, review their qualifications and probably contact a few references.
So why should the process of selecting someone to oversee a multi-million-dollar municipal organization be any different?
Now, I’m not suggesting that someone who has never served as mayor should never have the opportunity to become one. Everyone deserves an opportunity to serve. But an opportunity to serve should not eliminate the expectation that someone has the knowledge, experience and ability to handle the responsibilities of the position.
Have you ever managed a budget? If so, how much? Have you supervised hundreds of employees? Have you negotiated contracts, managed organizational challenges or made decisions that affect the financial stability of an organization? Do you understand the basics of municipal government, including pensions, infrastructure, collective bargaining, procurement and economic development?
And if you don’t have that experience, do you understand the importance of hiring qualified professionals who do?
This brings me to something I feel strongly about: professional municipal management.
Having served as both a Chief of Staff and City Administrator, I can tell you that running a municipality is a lot more complicated than people think. There is always something happening behind the scenes that residents may never know about. Budgets, pensions, union contracts, employee issues, infrastructure, grants, economic development… and a whole bunch of acronyms you have to remember. That’s just scratching the surface.
This is why I’ve always been a supporter of the council-manager form of government. I know, I know, I’m a little biased because I’ve been a manager. But hear me out.
A municipality is a business in many ways. It has employees, bills to pay, contracts to negotiate, buildings to maintain and a budget that has to stretch to meet the needs of the community. Somebody has to understand how all of those pieces fit together.
Under a council-manager form of government, the mayor and aldermen are responsible for setting the direction and priorities of the community, while a professional manager handles the day-to-day operations. Think of it this way: you wouldn’t necessarily expect the owner of a company to know how to do everyone’s job. But you would expect them to hire someone who knows how to run the operation.
And that’s the point. You hire people who know what they’re doing.
One of my biggest concerns with municipal government is how often professional qualifications can take a back seat to political relationships. A new mayor comes in, and suddenly there is a need to clean house. Sometimes that means removing experienced, qualified employees to make room for friends, supporters or people who helped get them elected.
But let me ask you something: If you had an employee who knew the organization, understood its finances and had years of experience doing the job, would you get rid of them simply because they didn’t support your last campaign?
Probably not. So why does this happen in government?
And it doesn’t stop there. I’ve seen how employees can become afraid to speak up, offer a different opinion or tell leadership something they don’t want to hear because they are worried about their jobs. That’s a problem. The people responsible for managing a municipality should be able to give honest advice, even when that advice isn’t popular.
Now, before anyone thinks I’m suggesting that a council-manager form of government magically solves everything, it doesn’t. You can have the best manager in the world, with the education, experience and a plan to move the community forward, but if the elected officials can’t get along, that manager may spend more time navigating politics than actually managing.
The mayor doesn’t like the aldermen. The aldermen don’t like the mayor. And somewhere in the middle, the business of running the municipality gets lost.
Sound familiar?
At some point, we have to decide what is more important: winning the next political battle or making sure our communities are in a better position five, ten and twenty years from now.
And residents have a part to play in this, too. We can’t complain about the direction of our communities and then continue to make voting decisions based solely on friendships, popularity or who has the most campaign signs in the yard. We have to ask questions. We have to look at qualifications. We have to understand what we’re asking someone to take responsibility for.
A municipality is not a small operation. It has millions of dollars in financial obligations, hundreds of employees and responsibilities that affect the everyday lives of residents.
So I’ll ask again: Would you hire your mayor to run a $50 million corporation? Would you look at their experience, ask about their qualifications and check their references?
If we would do all of that before hiring someone to manage a company, why wouldn’t we expect the same level of consideration when choosing someone to lead our community?
Winning an election gets you the position. But what happens after the election is what determines whether the community actually benefits.
Would You Hire Your Mayor to Run a $50 Million Business?
