EXHIBIT G
000201
CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE
City of Riverside
September 25, 2003, 5 p.m.
Mayor's Ceremonial Room
City Hall, 3900 Main Street
MINUTES
PRESENT: Vice Chair Ben Johnson and Members Dale McNair, Dorothy Bailey, Rusty Bailey, William Turpin, Ray Higgins, Connie Leach, Mike Teer, Barry Johnson, Art Garcia, Marjorie von Pohle, Marcia McQuer, and Stan Stosel
ABSENT: Chair Eric Haley (excused), Rose Mayes, Gar Brewton (excused), and Damon Castillo (excused)
STAFF PRESENT: Colleen Nicol, Janis Lowry, Gregory Priamos, Tricia Ruiz, and Sharon Cooley
ALSO PRESENT: Mayor Ronald Loveridge, Councilmember Laura Pearson, and Muriel and Abe Schwartz
Vice Chair Ben Johnson convened the Charter Review Committee at 5 p.m.
The Pledge of Allegiance was given to the Flag.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE
There were no comments presented at this time.
MINUTES
Following discussion, motion was made by Member Garcia and seconded by Member Rusty Bailey approving the minutes of September 11, 2003, correcting the final sentence under Interview with Mayor Pro Tempore Schiavone to read, "He does not support an increase in the number of Wards and favors evening City Council meetings." Motion carried unanimously.
VOTE ON PERMANENT CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
Following discussion, motion was made by Member Teer and seconded by Member Garcia reconfirming the appointment of Eric Haley as Chair and Ben Johnson as Vice-Chair of the Committee. Motion carried unanimously.
LEGAL ANALYSIS PREPARED BY CITY ATTORNEY
Following discussion, and without formal motion, the Committee unanimously received and ordered filed the City Attorney's report and approved the format for responding to future committee questions requiring legal analysis.
CRC-11
000202
FUTURE MEETING SCHEDULE AND INFORMATIONAL MATERIALS
Following discussion, the Committee, without formal motion, unanimously received and ordered filed the summary of upcoming agenda items, future meeting schedule, September 9, 2003, Press-Enterprise editorial, and the Community Forum promotion schedule.
INTERVIEW WITH MAYOR RONALD LOVERIDGE
Mayor Loveridge reviewed his credentials including 24 years of service as Councilmember and Mayor to the City of Riverside. He supports the Council-Manager form of government as outlined in the 8 'Model City Charter. Mayor Loveridge offered his personal position on the powers and duties of the Mayor as chief legislator and leader of the policy-making team. He supports the Mayor being a voting member of the City Council and having the power to appoint members of citizen advisory boards and commissions and City Council committees. He supports discussion of two City Council candidates being nominated by the Ward and then voted on by the entire City. Mayor Loveridge also answered questions regarding the number of Wards, Mayor's veto power, and the Mayor and Councilmembers as full-time vs part-time positions.
INTERVIEW WITH COUNCILMEMBER LAURA PEARSON
Councilmember Pearson thanked everyone for serving on the Charter Review Committee and stated the Charter works well for her as the City Council works well together and staff is very accommodating. She felt that working in the community while serving in public office kept her grounded in reality to the working person. If the Mayor receives voting powers, she feels the veto should be rescinded. She does not support at-large election of Councilmembers. She supports increasing the roles and responsibilities of the boards and commissions and a change in the method of setting salaries for the Mayor and Councilmembers.
COMMUNITY FORUM FORMAT
Communications Officer Sharon Cooley presented a Promotional Campaign/Timeline for educating the public about the activities of the Charter Review Committee. The Committee determined the format for the October 23, 2003, Community Forum:
(1) Ten minute overview of the Charter
(2) Charge of the Charter Review Committee
(3) Open to public
Further, the following meetings were scheduled for a presentation by Committee members to promote the activities of the Charter Review Committee:
(1) September 26* - Raincross Club meeting - Ben Johnson (2) October 23d - Downtown Chamber of Commerce meeting - Ray Higgins and Dale McNair
(3) October 3r° - Leadership Riverside - Ben Johnson and Stan Stosel (4) October 6** - La Sierra Chamber of Commerce meeting - Marjorie von Pohle and Barry Johnson
(5) October 17° - Magnolia Chamber of Commerce meeting - Ray Higgins and Connie Leach
(6) Friday Morning Group - Marjorie von Pohle
(7) Inland Valley Association of Realtors - Mike Teer
CRC-12
000203
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m.
ACCOMPLISHMENTS:
1. Interviewed Mayor and Councilmember Pearson
2. Determined Community Forum format
3. Service club visitations assigned
4. Voted on permanent Chair and Vice Chair
5. Approved future meeting schedule
TO DO:
1. Interview remaining Councilmembers
2. Schedule future Community Forums
Respectfully submitted,
JANIS LOWRY
Deputy City Clerk
CRC-13
000204
CRC Meeting Date: 9/25/2003
Item No.: 4
CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE
City of Riverside
September 11, 2003, 5 p.m.
Mayor's Ceremonial Room
City Hall, 3900 Main Street
MINUTES
PRESENT: Chair Eric Haley and Members Rose Mayes, Dale McNair, Dorothy Bailey, Rusty Bailey, William Turpin, Ray Higgins, Connie Leach, Gar Brewton, Mike Teer, Vice Chair Ben Johnson, Barry Johnson, Art Garcia, Marjorie von Pohle, and Damon Castillo
ABSENT: Member Marcia McQuern (excused) and Stan Stosel STAFF PRESENT: Colleen Nicol, Janis Lowry, Gregory Priamos, Tricia Ruiz, Sharon Cooley, and George Caravalho
ALSO PRESENT: Mayor Pro Tempore Frank Schiavone, Barbara Purvis and Sylvia Marten- James representing the League of Women Voters, Dan Hantman, and others
Vice Chair Ben Johnson convened the Charter Review Committee at 5:05 p.m.
The Pledge of Allegiance was given to the Flag.
MINUTES
Motion was made by Member Barry Johnson and seconded by Member von Pohle approving the minutes of August 5, 14, and 28, 2003, as presented. Motion carried unanimously.
INTERVIEW WITH CITY MANAGER GEORGE CARAVALHO
City Manager George Caravalho reviewed Charter and General Law City forms of government, the four forms of government (Strong Mayor, Mayor-Council, Commission, and Council- Manager), the City Council and City Manager roles and responsibilities, the City's Organizational Chart, and the Emergency Management System. The Committee questioned and commented on various issues including the City Manager's roles and responsibilities, the Mayor's voting and veto power, the Ward system, and City Manager form of government.
INTERVIEW WITH MAYOR PRO TEMPORE FRANK SCHIAVONE
Mayor Pro Tempore Frank Schiavone encouraged the Committee to focus on the City's needs 20-30 years in the future. Further, he offered comments and answered questions regarding full-time versus part-time Councilmembers, Mayor and Councilmembers salary, election of Councilmembers at a June primary from the Ward followed by a Citywide election held in November, elimination of mail in ballot elections, election of the Mayor in even-numbered years or requiring Councilmembers from Wards 1, 3, 5, and 7 to relinquish their seats in order to run for Mayor, the Council-Manager form of government versus a strong Mayor, an increase in the powers and duties of City Boards and Commissions, Code Compliance, and increased City CRC-9
4. 000205
Council staffing. He does not support an increase in the member of Wards and favors evening City Council meetings.
SELECTION OF COMMITTEE LOGO
Following review of the submitted Committee logos, motion was made by Member Castillo and seconded by Member Barry Johnson to approve the orange and blue logo as submitted by staff. Motion carried unanimously.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE
There were no comments presented at this time.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m.
ACCOMPLISHMENTS:
1. Interviewed City Manager and Mayor Pro Tempore
2. Selected Committee logo
TO DO
1. Interview Mayor and remaining Councilmembers
2. Vote on permanent Chair and Vice Chair
Respectfully submitted,
baris Poury
ANIS LOWRY
/Deputy City Clerk
-
CRC2°
000206
9.25-3053
#6
Comments to the City Charter Review Committee
September 25, 2003
Mayor Ronald O. Loveridge
l. Introduction:
Thank you for participating on the Charter Review Committee for 2003.
The current City Charter has essentially remained the same since its adoption in 1952.
The one major change was going from at large to ward elections. After 50 years, it is time to take a serious look at other changes....
Most major charter changes across the State are focused on increasing the political leadership of the mayor. Some large cities in California have approved a strong mayor form-Riverside is the 11th largest out of 478.
Brief story: my first City committee outside of UCR was a City Charter Review Committee in 1968. I wrote a section clarifying and strengthening the powers of mayor.
The Council rejected the proposed Charter changes after a half hour hearing....
Personal note: today I offer my "best" good government perspective, It is not about more power for mayor, for my time in office is limited. Rather, it is my call for what is "best" for the future governance of Riverside.
1l. Credentials:
1) I have held elected office in the City of Riverside since 1979, 24 years-14 as a Council member, 10 as Mayor. This is the longest time anyone has ever served in the City's history.
2) By profession, 1 am a UCR political scientist, teaching and writing on local government and policy.
3) Selected by the National League of Cities to represent state municipal leagues, / served on the National Civic League's 8th Model City Charter Revision Committee. 4) In the 1970's, I wrote a book, City Managers in Legislative Politics-interviewed almost every city manager in the Bay Area. At one time, I had read nearly everything ever written on city managers.
5) As an active member of the League of California Cities, I have talked with many mayors and council members across California and to a lesser extent, the United 1 000207
Ill. Role of the Mayor:
1) The Mayor is elected by and represents the entire City. 2) Edward Banfield and James Q. Wilson, City Politics: there are two major functions of cities: provide services and manage conflict. The emphasis of city managers is on providing services; in contrast, the emphasis of mayors is on managing conflict. 3) The roles of the Mayor of Riverside are quite diversified. Let me quickly review a column / wrote several years ago for a Political Science Department Alumni newsletter. (See Attachment "A".)
4) To underscore this diversity, let me also quickly review my schedule for this week and next. (See Attachment "B".)
5) Political scientist James Svara offers the best analysis of a directly elected mayor in a council-manager city: Facilitative Leadership in Local Government. He identifies ten roles. (See Attachment "C".) | have also included his final chapter, "Key Leadership Issues and the Future of Council-Manager Government." (See Attachment "D".) Svara concludes: "The combination of political and professional leadership is a unique strength of the council-manager form of government. A key to ensuring that the council and manager will work together effectively and move in a positive direction is facilitative leadership by the mayor...With increasing diversity on governing boards, and in American communities, strong facilitative leadership may be the prerequisite of effective governmental performance in the 1990s and beyond."
IV. Personal Position on Powers and Duties of Mayor:
1) Scholars and practitioners agree that the dichotomy between policy and administration as explained in the early model charters is false. Policy making is formulation, adoption, and implementation. Both the city manager and the council make policy. For example, Focusing on the Vision (Citywide Strategic Plan 2003-2004) is mostly the policy priorities of the City Manager and less so for the Mayor and Council. 2) As developed in the 8th Model City Charter, I strongly support the council-manager plan.
"This edition.... specifies certain duties of the non-executive mayor that are entirely consistent with the basic concept of the council-manager plan. The office is quite different from that of the elected chief executive in a system that separates executive and legislative powers. Rather, the mayor... is the chief legislator, the leader of the policy making team."
000208
This new Model specifically addresses the importance of strong political leadership...by the mayor in council-manager cities.
3) I also strongly support the 8th Model Charter's powers and duties of the mayor. "The mayor shall be a voting member of the city council and shall attend and preside at meetings of the council, represent the city in intergovernmental relationships, appoint with the advice and consent of the council the members of citizen advisory boards and commissions, present an annual state of the city message, appoint the members and officers of council committees, assign subject to the consent of council agenda items to committees, and perform other duties specified by the council. The mayor shall be recognized as head of the city government for all ceremonial purposes and by the governor for purposes of military law but shall have no administrative duties." The commentary goes on to say, "...the mayor is preeminently a legislator, a member, and leader of the council; the mayor is not an executive." "Communities should avoid granting special voting status to the mayor (e.g., vote on council only to make or break a tie). Such power will likely impede rather than enhance the mayor's capacity to lead. Similarly, giving the mayor veto power in a council- manager city cannot help but confuse his or her role with that of the executive mayor in a mayor-council city."
4) Noteworthy, under the current Riverside Charter, the Mayor does not vote (except in case of tie) and does not appoint advisory boards or council committees.
It is my strongest possible recommendation that the Mayor should vote and appoint.
The Mayor should be the legislative leader of the Council-and it is difficult to do so without the responsibilities of voting and appointing. Such duties would contribute to an effective facilitative leader by the mayor. They would increase the integrative role of the mayor, representing the entire city. And they would lessen policy making by wards.
Most major/controversial policy decisions are made in council committees-here the Mayor has no role or influence.
Rob Grummet (articles in Governing): the concept of balkanization...lure of parochialism....
Policy strengths and weaknesses of Mayor, City Council, and City Manager.... the firing of Jerry Carroll.
That the Mayor should vote and appoint has been my position since first elected to the Council....
3 000209
Almost all directly elected mayors vote in California.
The 1987 Charter Review Committee....
There are two alternatives for the mayor to vote, one is San Diego and the other is Pasadena. Both are cities with the council manager form of government and with a long history of good government practices....
V. Election of Council Members:
One alternative to our present elections is worthy of discussion. Specifically, it is possible to nominate two candidates by district/ward and then have those two candidates voted on by the entire city. Stockton has adopted this approach-and their mayor and council members say it works-for it retains a geographic focus yet insures an overall city perspective.
000210
Attachment
"A"
000211
UCR Political Science Alumni Newsletter, June 2000
•
The Mayor of Riverside: A 20 year Perspective
Greetings! I offer my reflections on the role of the Mayor of Riverside. It is 20 year look, retrospective and prospective, and will especially focus on new and noteworthy governance directions.
Two perspectives are interwoven. First, / write as a UC political scientist, who studies and teaches urban politics. And second, for over 20 years, I have served on the Council (1979- five are now as Mayor (1994) If is the longest tenure of any alected officlat in history of Let me highlight eleven activities that characterize the life and times of the Mayor of Riverside-caveat, it is an illustrative rather than an exhaustive list. 1) Work full time. The Mayor has always been full time; however, the Mayor is now Tuil time plus. The day begins early at 7:30 and ends at 10:00. I am home perhaps one night a week. This schedule continues to increase because of the size, diversity, and activities of Riverside (11th largest out of 475 California cites; 270,000 in population). 2) Serve on Regional/State/National Positions Outside the City. There has been a dramatic increase in the outside obligations as well as opportunities. Some require the involvement of the mayor, while for others, the mayor is expected to be active. The Mayor Is the ambassador of the city, including sister city duties, meeting with visiting representatives, and going to other cities. The Mayor must be active outside the city limits. 3) Compete with Other Cities. Cities compete for residents and businesses-and the competition is serious and ever increasing. It is the Mayor's major obligation. Riverside must continually monitor and invent the future of its quality of life and its economy. As Mayor, I have focused on sixteen pathways into the 21st Century. 4) Make Partisan Connections. The Mayor actively connects the City to state and national politics, and especially to partisan elected officials-partisan activities are off limits to appointed officials. Riverside has hired legislative advocates in Sacramento and Washington. The Mayor attempts to influence decision rules and to secure special funding for the City.
5) Manage Conflict. Managing conflict is a increasingly important role for Mayor. In an old text on urban politics, Edward Banfleld and James Q. Wilson argue that there are two major functions of local government: first, to provide services; and second, to manage conflict. While the City Manger focuses on providing services, I increasingly devote my ime to managing conflicts. This means working with diverse groups. City decisions involve values and tradeoffs as well as analysis and expertise. 6) Provide Information. The Mayor is now a center of ideas and information. In the past, contence Clera maid oks look ana way les and are rantee, licy; for example, I found three books especially helpful: Jeffrey Berry, et al., Rebirth o Irban Democracy: Rosabeth Moss Kanter, World Class: Thriving Locally in :
Global Economy, and James Svara, Facilitative Leadership in Local Government. 000212
Attachment
"B"
000213
Wednesday
O (7:30 AM - 8:30 AM) M Ashriff@ Marriott
© (10:00 AM - 10:30 AM) Pastor Diaz & Slephanie Gut re: status Weekly Schedule © (10:30 AM - 12:00 PM) EDC
© (12:00 PM - 12:15 PM) Myr say hello -United Way (breezeway) © (12:00 PM - 2:00 PM) TLC Luncheon - Riv Cmty Hosp
© (2:00 PM - 3:00 PM) Sharon Vineyard re: neighborhoods © (3:00 PM - 4:00 PM) IEEP Steering Cmte (tel conf - Myr calkl September 2003 779-6700 & ask for Jonathan)
© (4:00 PM - 4:30 PM) D Hays re: Victoria Ave
© (6:00 PM - 7:00 PM) Myr welcome 6:30 @ Ca Citrus State Hist Park (Riv Newcomers)
Week 38 © (7:00 PM - 9:00 PM) RCBA @ MI - Myr deliver comments ( Mary Ellen Daniels)
Sunday 25 Thursday
© (7:30 AM - 8:30 AM) A Garcia @ Marriott
© (9:00 AM - 10:00 AM) P Watson re: bldg on Univ (HBC)
© (10:00 AM - 11:00 AM) Adkison, Nakamura, Boyd re: Center Street
© (11:00 AM - 2:00 PM) 11:30 - Cops & Clergy @ CA Citrus State Historic Park
© (2:00 PM - 3:30 PM) SCAG Planning video conference
© (3:30 PM - 4:00 PM) C Monroe (coffee)
© (4:00 PM - 4:30 PM) C Leach & Alysa re: Youth Advy Brd © (5:00 PM - 6:00 PM) Charter Review Cmte in cerem room © (6:30 PM - 9:00 PM) MNO - Wood Streets @ Mag Elem
Monday 26 Friday
© 17:30 AM - 8:30 AM) Breakfast Mtg @ Marriott © (8:00 AM - 10:00 AM) Ramona HS - Avid Program Part II (Myr © (8:30 AM - 9:30 AM) DW share area of expertise)
© (9:30 AM - 11:00 AM) Staff Mtg © (10:30 AM - 11:30 AM) Myr few words @Ded Celebration @ © (11:00 AM - 12:00 PM) Calpers - tel conference Cal Bap © (12:00 PM - 1:00 PM) Lunch w/Press © (11:30 AM - 2:00 PM) State of IE @ Radisson - 295 North E St © (1:00 PM - 2:00 PM) Esther Andrews - San Bernardino
© (2:00 PM - 3:00 PM) Lge Conf Call © (2:00 PM - 2:30 PM) Senior Friendly City Accreditation © (3:00 PM - 4:00 PM) C Curtis & A Borgen re: review of © (3:00 PM - 4:00 PM) Performance Evaluation (T Holmes) © (6:00 PM - 8:00 PM) GO De Anza Surgery Center (Cmty Med © (4:00 PM - 5:00 PM) S Sniff & M Carasco re: traffic calming Group of Riv - 444 Magnolia Ave) 27 Saturday.
© 17:30 AM - 8:30 AM) L Soubirous & B Floyd @ Marriott © (12:00 PM - 8:00 PM) Benefit Concert for Sean Witt @ Castle © (8:30 AM - 9:00 AM) La Sierra Traffic Issues - Myr's ofc © (9:00 AM - 2:00 PM) CSDR Open House
© (10:30 AM - 11:30 AM) Walter Jensen re: Intl Visitors © (11:30 AM - 12:30 PM) Myr welcone & few words @ MI (
Nigerian Delegation - Irma)
© (1:30 PM - 2:30 PM) Closed Session
© (2:30 PM - 5:00 PM) Public Hearings/Workshop
© (6:15 PM - 8:00 PM) Park & Rec Comm Report; Consent,
Discussion & Pub Hearing
Ron Loveridde 08/25/2003 - 9:46 AM
000214
Wednesday
© (7:30 AM - 8:30 AM) C McBride @ Marriott
© (8:30 AM - 10:30 AM) Tour Riv Cmty Med Ctr Foundation (E Weekly Schedule Roda pick up Myr @8:30)
© (11:30 AM - 1:30 PM) Duane's w/A Moore
© (2:00 PM - 4:00 PM) Business Visit - Huffman Rooting Co • (4:00 PM - 5:00 PM) American Heart Walk - Myr few words in ceremonial room
© (4:00 PM - 6:00 PM) The Children's Center Open House
@7344 Magnolia
September 2003 © (5:00 PM - 5:30 PM) Dr. Geraty
Week 39
Sunday Thursday
© (2:00 PM - 5:00 PM) Sports Hall of Fame @ Newman Park (D © (8:00 AM - 4:00 PM) SCAG Guthrie) © (7:00 PM - 9:00 PM) Installation Banquet (Lge of CA Cities) @ Rolling Hills Country Club
Friday
© (8:00 AM - 2:00 PM) Brd of Directors Mtg & Exec Brd Mig @ © (7:30 AM - 8:30 AM) City/Univ TF @UCRX, Sie 2 LAX (Sheraton Four Points - 9750 Airport Bivd) © (8:15 AM - 8:30 AM) Myr welcome & few words (Leadership Riv in cerem room)
© (5:15 PM - 7:00 PM) Myr few words - Keep Riv Moving Retreat © (9:00 AM - 12:00 PM) AQMD Brd Mitg @ Fairmount Park (Robin Metz) © (2:00 PM - 3:00 PM) McNiel & Alysa re: DT Residential Traffic © (3:00 PM - 4:00 PM) Myr welcome Intl Students @ RCC Hall of Fame
© (4:30 PM - 5:30 PM) MG swear in @ old courthouse (Judge Field)
© (6:00 PM - 10:00 PM) ARC Riv @ Sports Complex (UCR) (Myr opening ceremonies)
30| Tuesday Saturday
O (8:00 AM - 5:00 PM) Policy Cmte in Sacio © (10:00 AM - 11:00 AM) Myr few words@ 14th & Redwood i Evergreen Cemetery)
© (2:00 PM - 3:00 PM) Indian Sisters Art Show
© (5:30 PM - 8:30 PM) Myr stop by Riv Cmty Hospital (
Foundation Fall Gala)
© (6:00 PM - 9:00 PM) Singh Twins @ Riv Art Mus
Ron Loveridge 08/25/2003-8:47 AM
000215
Attachment
"C"
000216
Key Leadership Issues 227
226 Facilitative Leadership in Local Government
of business in council meetings and may help develop meeting values of council-manager government. The mayor or chairperson agendas. A new role added to this set is that of representative and who is effective in this role adjusts relationships not only internally promoter. This role builds on the other traditional ones and in- but also externally. He or she can then provide a buffer between cludes those contacts that the chief elected official, as titular head. governmental officials and the public and help orient staff to citi- has with other local governments and with state and federal govern- zens in a more positive way. The final role is that of policy initiator ment agencies. Contacts with external agencies are closely related to (formerly advocate). This change distinguishes the mayor or chair- the general activity of promoting the jurisdiction and creating a person who develops programs and policies to address problems. positive image. Advocacy of policies shaped by others (including the mayor or The next three roles involved active coordination and com- chairperson) is included in the role of articulator and mobilizer; the munication-active in the sense that the mayor or chairperson must policy initiator has a substantial impact on the shaping of the gov- recognize and choose to fill them; these roles are not built into the ernmental policy agenda. position. In this set of roles, we are likely to see the differences In sum, the case studies in this volume have clarified the between the approach and effectiveness of an activist mayor or roles, as originally described in Chapter One, and offer a wider chairperson and a passive one. The first role in this set, formerly the range of activities to illustrate them. The revised list of roles now educator role, has been expanded and renamed the role of articula- includes only ten and eliminates external relations as a separate role tor and mobilizer. As already noted, it is difficule in practice to category. Virtually all the roles have been broadened to capture a distinguish between efforts to educate and efforts to convince or win wider range of interactions and more active involvement of other support. A key aspect of this role is raising awareness by articulat- officials and persons, organizations, and agencies outside of govern- ing issues and promoting understanding of problems, but these ment. Of course, these roles are mutually reinforcing. Success in one activities are also usually undertaken with the intent of prompting enhances success in the others. Furthermore, they are played action. The role of liaison with the manager continues to be very concurrently. important in this conceptual framework but has been broadened to recognize the active partnership that may exist between the mayor Types of Leadership or chairperson and the manager. The role of team leader has also expanded and now includes networking; thus the role is now that There is variation in the nature and scope of leadership even among of team relations and network builder. Effective mayors not only the effective mayors who are the subjects of the preceding cases. The unify the council and establish a posieive tone bat are also likely 1o distinction between the coordinator and the director, based on pre- develop networks of communication and support chat extend out- vious research, is further substantiated by most of the cases. Both side government. These mayors actively involve the community in types create an atmosphere that promotes cohesion and communi- governmental affairs as well. One aspect of this role is helping cation among officials and strengthens the capacity of the council others accomplish their goals. to identify problems and make decisions. The coordinators-Rhea, The final three roles are essentially the same as before, but DuPuy, Taylor, and possibly Gene Roberts of Chattanooga (Chap- each has been broadened somewhat. In the role of goal setter, there ter Ten)—are not strongly associated with a policy agenda of their is general as well as specific leadership, as when the mayor or chair- own, even though they contribute to fashioning and acting on agen- person creates a sense of direction or a climate for change. Consen- das. The directors-Halter, Macilwaine, Mears, and Melvin-do sus building is connected with this role, too, since consensus have their "own" policy agendas, although these reflect to a greater appears to be reached in terms of common goals. The role of dele- or lesser extent, the views of other officials. This is a subtle distinc- gator and organizer is the same, with the addition of defending the tion in the sense that neither type is a solitary leader, and both types 000217
Attachment
"D"
000218
Key Leadership Issues 217
The first issue concerns the style of the mayor or chairperson 11 James H. Suara and the perception of leadership on the part of the media and the public. The type we have labeled the comprehensive leader or di- rector receives recognition for leadership, whereas the coordinator does not necessarily get any more credit for leadership than a less effective mayor does. This is a problem that results partly from not Key Leadership Issues defining leadership properly and from overlooking leadership of a and the Future of facilitative nature. Nevertheless, it is also partly a reflection of the chief elected official's inability to communicate effectively with the public about where the city is headed. Insolar as it causes other Council-Manager Government officials or community leaders to bypass the chief elected officer, or even to recommend structural change to strengthen leadership, the failure to project a sense of purpose can limit the effectiveness of the chief elecied official, produce distrust of the manager (who may appear to have more influence than is actually the case), and de- crease the legitimacy of the government.
The second issue concerns whether structural change is
needed to increase the leadership of elected officials-either modest adjustments in the mayor's position or changes that alter the form of government itself. Some take the position that only major struc- tural change to expand the mayor's or chairperson's power over the manager will strengthen democratic leadership. The case studies Mayors and chairpersons can provide effective leadership in have provided evidence that this approach is not necessary. council-manager cities and counties; and in many (although not in The third issue concerns whether changes in conditions in most) cities and counties, they do. As the case studies in the preced- cities and in characteristics of city councils have altered the viability ing chapters demonstrate, the type of leadership provided matches of the facilitative model of leadership. Once again, structural a facilitative rather than a controlling, power-based model. This change is implicit in this issue. If the leadership style that is natural approach is well suited to the characteristics of the council-manager form of government and can work in the commission form. It is to the council-manager form is not viable, one must raise questions potentially useful in elecied-executive forms as well. Knowledge about the future of the form itself. and insights from the case studies encourage us to review and revise In dealing with all these issues, the argument will be made the ways we think about the office (see Chapter One) and permit us that it is a mistake to seck a quick structural "fix" by adding powers to refine our conceptualization of this position and of the facilita- to the office of the chief elected official or changing the form of tive leadership model. government. If structural change is not the answer to increased Changes in council-manager governments, however, and the leadership, then alternative approaches are needed to enhance the special circumstances of very large cities raise questions about the leadership of the mayor or chairperson and make it more common- relationship berween political leadership and the future of council- place. Recommendations will be offered for strengthening mayors manager government. In this regard, there are three issues to be and chairpersons by increasing the likelihood and effectiveness of explored. facilitative leadership in council-manager iurisdictions. 216
000219
Facilitative Leadership in Local Government Key Leadership Issues 218
Leadership of Chief Elected Officials in Council-Manager ing, they expand the capacity of their governments to deal with the Jurisdictions: Evidence from Case Studies aspirations and needs of their communities.
The case studies demonstrate these broad contributions.
The case studies presented in the previous chapters advance the more clearly than previous studies based on surveys. The contribu- conceptualization of the chief elected official's office and illuminate tions include the political and moral leadership that can be offered some aspects of the position not previously observed. These por- by the mayor or chairperson. As noted in the Preface, mayors and traits of effective leaders in a variety of jurisdictions expand our chairpersons as political leaders are operating at the interface be- repertoire of role models for council-manager jurisdictions and viv- (ween government and the community. Drawing on all their roles, idly depict how mayors and chairpersons can make unique contri- they are engaged in shaping the governmental agenda (with varying butions as political leaders in their governments. Observations and mixtures of their own original ideas and idas drawn from others), a summary of key points from the case studies are organized here involving individuals and groups, mobilizing support, and estab- in terms of the overall contributions, roles, types of leadership, re- lishing new relationships inside and outside the community. They lationships, and resources of effective leaders. can bring forth a commitment to the support of local governmental activities by convincing individuals and groups, as Mayor Taylor Overall Contributions of Effective Leaders of Roanoke was adept at doing (Chapter Six), "what a difference it would make to the community." Other elected officials, the man- What stands out most dramatically in the cases is the totality of ager, and the stall also contribute to these activities. The potential positive effects that mayors and chairpersons can have on their com- for political leadership of mayors and chairpersons is unique, how- munities. The parts of their leadership (their performance in spe- ever, because they can weave communication channels together. cific roles) are important and will be sketched in the next section, The mayor or chairperson, as the titular head of government, but the whole of their leadership exceeds the sum of its parts. The can also make a special contribution that bears on the legitimacy activity of Mayor Mears of Decatur (Chapter Two) in the develop- of the council-manager form, not simply by occupying the office ment of a hotel and convention center provides a good illustration bie thigh actions that real vidan ed pet in canim lorde. of how specific roles are interwoven to provide general leadership on an important issue. He was a goal setter in developing support livering services and a responsive and accountable part of a derno- among community leaders for the project; a team leader in securing cratic local government. ' Paula Macilwaine (Chapter Three), as and holding on to the support of council members; a liaison with chairperson, helped reshape attitudes and promote acceptance of the city manager, whose activities complemented those of the professionalism in a county government. Gary Halter, Jim Melvin, mayor; a cheerleader in generating public support; a negotiator in and Noel Taylor, among others, all gave explicit attention to mon- dealings with property owners; and a representative of the city in itoring and strengthening the values of the council-manager form contacts with various outside interests and agencies. Throughout, of government and thereby strengthened the base of their own lead- he coordinated his efforts with those of other key actors, who also ership in cooperative relationships with other officials. made important contributions to the success of the effort, particu- larly the mayor pro tempore and the city manager. This example Leadership Roles illustrates how effective mayors and chairpersons can take advan- lage of their strategic position and tap into the features of council- The cases contribute to a fuller understanding and an expanded manager government to provide multifaceted leadership. In so do- definition of the roles that mayors and chairpersons can fill. Exam- 000220
Facilitative Leadership in Local Government Key Leadership Issues 221 ples presented here correspond to the eleven roles listed in Chapter spokesperson role (and possibly the roles of educator and goal set- One. ter) is the "state of the city" address (see Chapters Six and Seven).
Performing ceremonial tasks can be a tremendous asset if The mayor or chairperson, as presiding officer, is responsible that role is used by the mayor to build public trust and support for for ensuring the orderly conduct of council meetings. Some, like other activities. Many of these officials were adept at linking cere- Jim Melvin, are able to use this role to exert influence over the way monial activities with substantive concerns and policy positions of issues are handled and how (and when) they are resolved. Carla the government. For example, Carla DuPuy (Chapter Five) dramn- DuPuy selected issues on which she would provide direction to the alized the need for new approaches to solid waste and county recy- board. By extension, like Betty Jo Rhea, the mayor or chairperson cling programs by climbing into a garbage can at a "pseudoevent." may work with the manager in developing meeting agendas.
Betty Jo Rhea (Chapter Seven) was able to use these occasions to As educator, the mayor or chairperson can raise public con- communicate on a personal level about what the city was doing. sciousness about an issue. 'The ability to articulate issues is an im- Michael Mears built his leadership partly by showing up and being portant aid in education. Effective mayors have the ability to frame, highly visible as a representative of the city. Noel Taylor was adept explain, and communicate an issue in a way that it is recognized at instilling civic pride by using ceremonial events for celebration. by other officials and the public; for example, consider John Crow- As Gary Halter (Chapter Eight) points our, however, ceremonial ley's articulation of the fiscal crisis in Pasadena, discussed in the activities can also be a trap that consumes a lot of time and energy Preface. Carla DuPuy viewed her job as one of raising the commu- at the expense of other aspects of the job; mayors and chairpersons nity's attention. Her approach demonstrates that active leaders must be selective. Some mayors lessen the burden by actively involv- merge educational efforts with efforts to build support for action. ing other members of the council in ceremonial tasks and delegat- Articulation and mobilization, although conceptually distinct, are ing many appearances to them.? often blended. Mayors and chairpersons are key actors in gencrating The spokesperson role is closely related to the ceremonial support for public projects. They are often cheerleaders for their role, since the mayor or chairperson, in appearances before groups, jurisdictions, as when they recruit new business.
The role of liaison with the manager is illuminated by all the is often disseminating information about the work of local govern- cases. The nature of this relationship is important to the manager's ment. The mayor personalizes communication about local govern- performance because, as Wheeland (Chapter Seven) observes with ment through contacts with a wide range of people. The cases regard to Mayor Rhea, the manager's effectiveness increases when clearly indicate that the mayor or chairperson is engaged in two. the right mayor or chairperson is in place. A number of the cases way communication, which the term spokesperson does not fully demonstrate that the mayor or chairperson not only can improve capture. Noel Taylor's accessibility affected the way people in the communication between the council and the manager but also can city related to government. Gary Halter saw himself as a "complaint engage in active partnership with the manager. For example, Mayor center," receiving a large number of comments from citizens about Mears and city manager Curtis Branscome had a complementary their problems and concerns. (Halter also points out the importance relationship. The mayor was the optimist, espousing arguments to of avoiding the dual trap of either inviting ever more complaints support initiatives, whereas the manager was the pessimist, provid- or becoming the person who tries to resolve then by channeling ing "reality checks" and making sure that plans were workable. In them directly to the manager or the appropriate staff member.) other situations, the roles might be reversed. Bob Herbert, city man- Mayors and chairpersons are a visible point of contact and represent ager of Roanoke (Chapter Six) illustrates a more active role in in- an important link berween government and citizens. Indeed, link- itiating proposals, with the mayor determining by means of this age is the essential aspect of this role. One means of formalizing the support whether a project would be successful. Other chief elected 000221
Key Leadership Issues 223
222 Facilitative Leadership in Local Government
the city staff, and his own ideas about what would move the city officials, like Jim Melvin and Carla DuPuy, worked with their man- ahead. agers in a give-and-take manner. Delegating or organizing involves assigning tasks, to ensure Team building is advanced by explicit group-development that coordination is maintained. The chief elected official monitors measures (such as those used by Jim Melvin), by a general style that the governmental process and makes adjustments, as necessary. For promotes a sense of cohesion and common purpose (compare Carla example, Carla DuPuy selected the issues to which she would pay DuPuy, Betty Jo Rhea, and Noel Taylor, among others), and by an atention partly on the basis of what was left over. By so doing, she emphasis on collaborative decision making (sec Michac) Mears's empowered other commissioners to pursue their areas of interest style of settling disputes). One approach used by at least two offi- and avoided competition over who would take the lead. She also cials (Carla DuPuy and Paula MacIlwaine) is the skillful use of ensured that important concerns, like solid-waste disposal, were not questions to guide discussion toward agreement, as when DuPuy neglected. would ask, "What do we need to do to make this work?" Rhea The mayor or chairperson can also take steps to reinforce the recognized the importance of fairness to all council members in values and division of functions in a council-manager government. arranging compromises. by instituting an evaluation process for the manager, setting goals The cases make it clear that team building extends beyond for improved stalf productivity, and seeking to improve the sensi- working with the council, to building a broader network of support tivity of staff to citizens, as Jim Melvin did. This role involves active and interaction. Rhea made use of an extensive information network support for the council-manager form, including acting as a polit- consisting of organizations at the local, state, and national levels. ical buffer between the manager and unwarranted outside attacks Macilwaine broadened the boundaries of the team to include other (see Chapter Eight). elected county officials—the county engineer, the auditor, the county As policy advocate, the mayor or chairperson initiates pro- prosecutor, and the sheriff-and incorporated them into planning grams and policies to address problems in the community. Examples and decision making. She also built a network of support among include creating a foundation for industrial development (Halter), a business and labor leaders, party officials, local governmental offi- hotel and convention center (Mears), a regional waste-treatment facil- cials, nonprofit service and cultural organizations, and other citizens ity (Melvin), and welfare reforms (Macilwaine). If active in this role, by including them in a strategic planning process. the chief elecied official is instrumental in shaping the policy agenda.
Goal setting was accomplished by some leaders through at- The agenda can have the clear stamp of the mayor or chairperson but tention to matters that required action (Melvin), retreats for the still be drawn from the council and other sources (Mears, Melvin), or council (Halter), or the fostering of community-based strategic it can be derived primarily from the mayor or the chairperson's per- planning (Rhea, Taylor, Macllwaine.) The chief elected official sonal preferences (Halter, Macliwaine). may focus on specific goals or foster a general orientation: a climate Mayors and chairpersons are usually actively engaged in ex- for positive change (Taylor), a sense of direction (Rhea), or a com- rernal relations. The activities that fall into this category are diverse mon commitment to problem solving (DuPuy). For the facilitative and cover many of the roles already discussed. Promotion of the city is closely linked with the ceremonial role (Betty Jo Rhea. In the mayor, goal setting is a collaborative process. Mears helped other council-manager form, mayors and chairpersons are uniquely situ- council members get things accomplished. DuPuy would draw on ated to take the initiative in relations with other governments be- information and ideas from a variety of sources inside and outside cause they act as official representatives. Building working of government, until a plan was developed that most participants relationships with other governments involves networking (Rhea). could claim parts of as their own. Taylor used his annual "state of Some policy initiatives (such as the countywide tax-sharing program the cily" address to make recommendations derived from the public, 000222
Facilitative Leadership in Local Government
Key Leadership Issues
promoted by Macilwaine, or the founding of a new megaregional Liaison and partner with the manager: being the council's organization by DuPuy) involve intergovernmental relations. Rather than separate external relations into a separate role, it is more useful liaison with the city manager; increasing communication and to add an external-relations aspect to other roles, where this aspect understanding berween the council and the manager; building would be relevant. These points also suggest that the activity of the teamwork and sharing tasks with the manager in a comple- mayor or chairperson, as official representative and promoter, mentary way should be recognized as a distinct role. Team relations and network builder: unifying the council; establishing a positive tone for the council; developing a net- Revision of Roles work of communication and support inside and outside gov- ernment; helping others accomplish their goals; actively involving the community in governmental affairs
The evidence from the case studies greatly enriches our description of the eleven roles already identified in Chapter One. The cases also Policy and Organizing Roles point to some shortcomings and limitations in the list of roles. Here Goal setter: setting goals and objectives; identifying problems; is a revised list:
lining up majorities on the council; building consensus; creat- Traditional and "Automatic" Roles ing a sense of direction and a climate for change Delegator/organizer: assigning tasks for coordinated effort; Ceremonial figure: giving speeches, offering greetings, cutting helping the council and the manager maintain their roles; ribbons helping council members recognize their responsibilities; de- Link to the public: acting as spokesperson for the council; fining and adjusting the relationship between the council and announcing and explaining positions taken by the council; the manager; defending the values of council-manager govern- receiving comments and complaints from citizens; making government more accessible to citizens; conducting media re- Policy initiator: developing programs and policies to address problems; shaping the policy agenda
Presiding officer: facilitating discussion and resolution of business in council meetings; helping determine agenda for The first four roles have been labeled traditional or "auto- meetings matic. " These roles are built into the office; all mayors and chair- Representative and promoler: acting as liaison with local, persons play them unless they make an effort to avoid them. state, and federal governments; promoting intergoverniental Obviously, mayors (and chairpersons, perhaps to a slightly lesser cooperation; acting as a representative of the council before extent) are asked to perform ceremonial tasks. As noted earlier, these ourside agencies; promoting the city or county; creating a pos- may be either an opportunity or (if accepted with no constraints) itive image; attracting development a curse. The second role has been broadened from "spokesperson," to recognize the general role played by the mayor or chairperson as Active Coordinating and Communicating Roles a link to the public. Beyond announcing and explaining positions Articulator and mobilizer: educating the council, manager, taken by the council, the chief elected official, by virtue of the nature and/or public; articulating issues; promoting understanding of the office, receives a large volume of comments and complaints of problems; instilling awareness of the need for action; build. from citizens and has extensive dealings with the media. Thus this ing support for projects official makes government more accessible to citizens. As presiding officer, the mayor or chairpersons foster discussion and resolution 000223
226 Facilitative Leadership in Local Government Key Leadership Issues of business in council meetings and may help develop meeting values of council-manager government. The mayor or chairperson agendas. A new role added to this set is that of representative and who is effective in this role adjusts relationships not only internally promoter. This role builds on the other traditional ones and in- but also externally. He or she can then provide a buffer between cludes those contacts that the chiel elected official, as titular head, governmental officials and the public and help orient staff to citi- has with other local governments and with state and federal govern- zens in a more positive way. The final role is that of policy initiator ment agencies. Contacts with external agencies are closely related to (formerly advocate). This change distinguishes the mayor or chair- the general activity of promoting the jurisdiction and creating a person who develops programs and policies to address problems. positive image. Advocacy of policies shaped by others (including the mayor or The next three roles involved active coordination and com- chairperson) is included in the role of articulator and mobilizer; the munication-active in the sense that the mayor or chairperson must policy initiator has a substantial impact on the shaping of the gov- recognize and choose to fill them; these roles are not built into the ernmental policy agenda. position. In this set of roles, we are likely to see the differences In sum, the case studies in this volume have clarified the between the approach and effectiveness of an activist mayor or roles, as originally described in Chapter One, and offer a wider chairperson and a passive one. The first role in this ser, formerly the range of activities to illustrate them. The revised list of roles now educator role, has been expanded and renamed the role of articula- includes only ten and eliminates external relations as a separate role tor and mobilizer. As already noted, it is difficult in practice to category. Virtually all the roles have been broadened to capture a distinguish between efforts to educate and efforts to convince or win wider range of interactions and more active involvement of other support. A key aspect of this role is raising awareness by articulat- officials and persons, organizations, and agencies outside of govern- ing issues and promoting understanding of problems, but these ment. Of course, these roles are mutually reinforcing. Success in one activities are also usually undertaken with the intent of prompting enhances success in the others. Furthermore, they are played action. The role of liaison with the manager continues to be very concurrently. important in this conceptual framework but has been broadened to recognize the active partnership that may exist between the mayor Types of Leadership or chairperson and the manager. The role of team leader has also expanded and now includes networking; thus the role is now that There is variation in the nature and scope of leadership even among of team relations and network builder. Effective mayors not only the effective mayors who are the subjects of the preceding cases. The unity the council and establish a positive tone bat are also likely to distinction between the coordinator and the director, based on pre- develop networks of communication and support that extend out- vious research, is further substantiated by most of the cases. Both side government. These mayors actively involve the community in types create an atmosphere that promotes cohesion and communi- governmental affairs as well. One aspect of this role is helping cation among officials and strengthens the capacity of the council others accomplish their goals. to identify problems and make decisions. The coordinators-Rhea, The final three roles are essentially the same as before, but DuPuy, Taylor, and possibly Gene Roberts of Chattanooga (Chap- each has been broadened somewhat. In the role of goal setter, there ter Ten)—are not strongly associated with a policy agenda of their is general as well as specific leadership, as when the mayor or chair- own, even though they contribute 10 fashioning and acting on agen- person creates a sense of direction or a climate for change. Consen- das. The directors-Halter, Macilwaine, Mears, and Melvin-do sus building is connected with this role, too, since consensus have their "own" policy agendas, although these reflect to a greater appears to be reached in terms of common goals. The role of dele- or lesser extent, the views of ocher officials. This is a subtle distinc- gator and organizer is the same, with the addition of defending the tion in the sense that neither type is a solitary leader, and both types 000224
Facilitative Leadership in Local Government • Key Leadership Issues 229 have broad goals for their citics. The coordinators are also asso- engage in some of the policy and organizing roles. They are strong ciated with selected policy initiatives, as pointed out in the Preface. at goal setting, and they promote understanding of roles and a The distinction is captured, however, by Winner's observation constructive division of labor between the council and the manager. (Chapter Six) that Mayor Taylor believed that he knew what was They also have been responsible for some policy initiatives and are best for Roanoke and did want to be progressive, but without any seen as contributors to policy formation. Rhea is probably typical specific agenda. Wheeland (Chapter Seven) points out Mayor of this group: among all the roles she performs, she received the Rhea's concern about policies, but he also says that Rhea does not lowest rating from other officials for developing programs and pol. attempt to develop them and have them adopted by public officials icies, but that rating was moderately good, rather than below aver- and community leaders. Rhea's policy leadership is more general, age or poor.
according to Wheeland. Mead, in Chapter Five, notes that Carla DuPuy espoused no particular issues and had no preestablished Relationships agenda.
It is difficult to classify Gene Roberts as a commission The cases illuminate the mayor's or chairperson's key relationships mayor. He was viewed as proactive and innovative, and yet he re- with the council, the manager, and the community. With regard to ceived low marks as goal setter and policy advocate. (Only 9 percent the council, a mayor may fill a vacuum by proposing policy ideas, of the respondents saw these as major roles that he filled.) His and the council may then be receptive to the mayor's lead. In other strongest area of performance was in forming consensus as a team situations, the mayor or chairperson works to fashion an agenda The chairpersons and mayors who are coordinators have from a fragmented council or helps the council develop its own been highly effective at developing a sense of cohesion and purpose agenda. It would appear that the latter condition is becoming more in their cities or counties. The spirit of cooperation they have common. The San Diego case (Chapter Nine) raises a question:
helped instill did not exist before they took office. Part of their Should the mayor be given power over the council, in order to bring leadership has been to shape the policy-making process. They are the council into line with his or her agenda? The other case studies not themselves active policy initiators, however. They have raised indicate that with team building, active involvement, and patient issues, and they have advanced policies, but they are more process- listening, it is possible for the mayor or chairperson to pull council oriented than policy-oriented. members together into a functioning group, not necessarily agree- The directorial mayors and chairpersons have created agendas ing with each other on all substantive matters but agreeing to sup- in the sense that they have originated agendas (at least in part) and port a process of making decisions. If no one on the council is able put their imprint on them, and they are recognized by other officials to promote sufficient cohesion, then the local government is ham- and by the public for this contribution. These officials have fully strung, and the remedies recommended by Sparrow in Chapter Nine developed all aspects of the office. They provide traditional, coordin- may be necessary. ative, organizing, and policy leadership. Because of the scope and In relationships with the manager, the case studies indicate extent of their activity, they are perceived as leaders by the public and (again with the exception of San Diego) that strength and effective- the media. This becomes an important resource in itself. By incorpo- ness in the mayor's or chairperson's office support rather than rating policy and organizing in their facilitative leadership, these weaken the manager. The chief elected official helps promote com- officials provide a focal point for their governments. munication between the council and the manager and shields the Differences berween the coordinators and the directors in manager from interference. As noted in the discussion of the liaison these case studies are somewhat muted because the coordinators role, mayors or chairpersons and managers, in many cases, have 000225
230 Facilitative Leadership in Local Government Key Leadership Issues 231 developed partnerships in which each side complemented the other mean that the amount of time per se determines effectiveness. Halter in active joint leadership. contrasts the way he used his own time with the approach of the In relationships with the community, the mayor or chairper- mayor in the neighboring city of Bryan. That mayor also spent a son helps link citizens with local government. Several leaders fea- substantial amount of time on the job, but it was largely taken up tured in the case studies took active steps to involve citizens in by the time-consuming traps that Halter sought to avoid. * Jonathan decision making. By such actions, a chief elected official makes Howes, former mayor of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, has observed government more accessible and increases citizens' input. With that over his years in office, a number of council members began strong moral leadership, the mayor or chairperson contributes to spending more time in their positions than he did as mayor. the legitimacy of the council-manager form and strengthens the Highly active council members may increase the difficulty the position of the manager. Some mayors used analogies, such as "par- mayor has in coordinating their efforts. Mayors cannot become ish" or "family," to suggest the close relationship between citizens leaders by dint of the time spent on the job alone, yet a minimal and government. commitment appears to constitute the sine qua non of success. It is Effective mayors and chairpersons extended external rela- not the amount of time per se that is important but what use is made tions to key community groups, economic interests, governmental of it and how it is converted to other resources, like knowledge or officials, and other organizations, agencies, and governments from networks. which the local government needed support or resources. The abil- The importance of personal qualities in deterinining the in- iry to establish and broaden networks was a key attribute of these clination of individuals to seck leadership and their ability to ex- chief elected officials. Again, there is no clear distinction between ercise it is confirmed by the cases. Energy, resourcefulness, contacts, the coordinators and the directors in their adeptness ar handling connections, the ability to communicate, a clear sense of purpose, these relationships.
and the ability to keep sight of broad goals while making specific choices are important for leadership in any setting. Effective leaders Resources
have a positive attitude and are able to convey that orientation to others. These qualities must be channeled into appropriate role The resources needed to fill the mayor's office, as suggested in pre- vious rescarch, fall into the categories of formal and informal re- behavior, however. In council-manager governments, the founda- tional roles-performing ceremonial tasks, presiding, linking the sources that determine the nature of the office and resources that define performance in the office. The cases indicate that facilitative government to the public, representating, promoting, articulating. leadership does not depend on a position of superior power. There mobilizing, serving as a liaison, and building tears and networks— ale resources available in the council-manager form, and within the support goal setting, organizing, and policy initiation. A highly incumbent as a person, to develop leadership in the areas of coor- committed, assertive, impatient mayor or chairperson can jump dination and policy guidance. The strategic location occupied by into the higher-level roles without developing the others, but he or the chief elected official provides the foundation for effective lead- she runs the risk of having only short-term success or being isolated ership. Mayors and chairpersons with a clear conception of the from the council. job-its possibilities, interdependencies, and limitations—are more Information is a key resource. Through self-education, the likely to be able to take advantage of this resource. chief elected official stays on top of issues. A high level of knowl- Willingness and ability to commit time can give the mayor erige strengthens the mayor or chairperson in interactions with the or chairperson a relative advantage over other officials (examples rest of the council, staff, and citizens and is a source of influence in include DuPuy, Mears, Melvin, Rhea, and Taylor), but this does not working with others. Mayor Rhea made good use of her trips to 000226
232 Facilitative Leadership in Local Government Key Leadership Issues 233 other cities, learning about practices that could be considered at home.
The cases illustrate the importance of the strategic location in the governmental process. of the chief elected official. He or she is in a favorable position to Here is a summary of the factors that contribute to the effec- secure and channel information and build relationships. A resource tive performance of a mayor or chairperson:
most clearly manifested by Carla DuPuy and Paula Macliwaine was close contact with staff. Knowing staff personally and communicat- Resources Derived from Position ing with them informally were assets, in terms of information and • Strategic location for securing and channeling information and sympathetic responses to ideas. The chief clected official must building relationships clearly show that these ties to staff will not lead to any bypassing • Access to information of the manager or to any attempts to take individual action to Support of and interaction with the city or county manager remedy problems; doing so will jeopardize working relationships • Staff support necessary for filling demands of the ceremonial with the manager and/or the council. role
Another resource is integrity. It undergirds the trust that Powers and duties that enhance visibility and support the dele- other officials have in the mayor or chairperson. One of Mayor gator role of the mayor or chairperson but do not isolate him or Taylor's assets was that he was considered to be both above reproach her from other members of the governing board, as such powers and clearly concerned about the public interest, rather than about as veto or staff-appointment authority would do self-interest. Similarly, Mayor Rhea was viewed as an "honest broker" who could be counted on for fairness in working out com- Informal Resources promises with the council.
• Support of key groups in the community
To be effective as a coordinator or director, the mayor or Contacts and connections; desire to expand network
chairperson needs certain interpersonal skills for leadership. The • Media attention and support mayor or chairperson must be effective at working with others and must accept certain responsibilities to them. Inclusiveness, sharing Personal Resources, Attributes, and Chararteristics of information, facilitation of the expression of divergent views, and ability to resolve differences are important traits for the mayor or • Clear conception of the office • Understanding of how to fill roles appropriately and of how to chairperson to have in his or her dealings with the council. The relationship with the manager requires tact, respect, the ability to use traditional and coordinating/communicating roles as the share authority, and trust in the manager's commitment to advanc- foundation for goal setting, organizing, and policy initiation ing the goals of the city and achieving the highest performance from • Clear sense of purpose government as a whole. • Time to devore to the office (with efficient use of time, avoidance Finally, mayors and chairpersons need to be flexible and cap- of traps, and conversion of time to other resources, such as able of shifting the emphases they place on their different roles. The knowledge and network building) chief elected official acts as a stabilizer who attends to those areas Energy where contributions are needed at a given time. As a consequence, • Positive attitude the mayor or chairperson may shift in the extent to which he or she • Resourcefulness is central to decisions, visible to the public, and assertive of his or • Integrity and fairness her own point of view, depending on conditions. Despite this flex- • Commitment to full involvement of members of the governing 000227
234 Facilitative Leadership in Local Government Key Leadership Issues 235 board through inclusiveness, sharing of information, support teamwork. The chief elected official cannot act alone or compel the for the expression of divergent views, and acceptance of the initi- council's support, and so there must be reciprocity between him or ative of other members her and the council, both in goals and in style. Furthermore, the • Respect for authority and prerogatives of the city of county issues and policies pursued by the mayor or chairperson are likely manager 1o be limited to those that have the support of the governing coa- lition in the community. It is a powerful asset for the chief elected Skills official to be able to tap into support for consensus goals in the • Ability to communicate (particularly active listening and effec- community. Moreover, the effective mayor or chairperson can be tive speaking) more successful in accomplishing these goals than the governing • Ability to set goals and priorities and keep sight of broad goals coalition can be, acting on its own or through a poorly led council. while making specific choices The reverse side, however, is that the chief elected official will have Ability to enlist and motivate others difficulty seeking to move beyond or to change those goals. • Ability to resolve conflicts and differences Durning suggests that more attention be given to the rela- Flexibility (ability to shift the emphasis placed on different tionship between the roles and resources of mayors and chairper- roles) sons and the context in which certain values, goals, and leadership roles and styles are permitted, required, or constrained. This is an There is considerable interaction among these factors. As we have important area for further inquiry. It is clear that all the directorial seen, the position itself, with no unilateral powers over other offi- chief elected officials were drawn from or represented the views of cials, permits the mayor or chairperson to establish positive rela- the most influential groups in the community, although it would tionships with those officials-but only if he or she has a good appear that some (for example, MacIlwaine) helped shape or recon- appreciation of the potential of the office and possesses skills of figure the governing coalition. They not only acted on but also facilitative leadership. This array of factors indicates that personal helped identify goals. For example, Halter appeared to give the attributes and skills are more numerous and important than either council a sense of purpose, to a greater extent than he received formal or informal resources. permission from it, partly because he discreetly helped get support- ers elected to the council. Melvin, by contrast with his predecessors Constraints and successors, defined his relationship with the council, rather than simply accepting a definition from the council, as did Mears.
Mayors and chairpersons depend on internal and external support The cases suggest that the interaction between the chief elected of. to be effective. Inside the government, the council's response is crit- ficial and the internal and external sources of support should be ical. Externally, the chief elected official needs to be able to draw examined, and that researchers should be open to the possibility on the support of key groups, sources of influence, and shapers of that the influences run in both directions. values. Durning (Chapter Two) points out that although Mayor Mears bencfited from the backing of the council and influential Recap: The Facilitative Model of Leadership groups, internal and external support, by their very nature, may become constraints on the mayor's leadership. Clearly, the permis- The mayors and chairpersons profiled in the case studies are prac- sion of the council is needed in order for mayors and chairpersons titioners of facilitative leadership. The leadership they provide, the to work on their own agendas. The check of the council also com- roles they fill, the relationships they establish, the resources they pels the mayor to act in a facilitative way and adopt roles that stress use, and the constraints under which they operate are grounded in 000228
236 Facilitative Leadership in Local Government Key Leadership Issues 237 a facilitative model. Their experience indicates that one can con- • The leader focuses the attention and efforts of officials on ceive of leadership in government as collaborative and as focused on accomplishing the shared vision. the accomplishment of common goals. In the alternative inno- vative-entrepreneurial model, leadership is competitive and focused This kind of leader is committed to helping other officials accom- on individual goals. The former model presumes that relationships plish their goals. He or she promotes open communication among among officials are essentially cooperative-a condition commonly officials. His or her approach to managing conflict stresses collab- produced by the integrated authority of the council-manager form. oration, in which the interests of the leader and others are mutually The latter is appropriate to a setting in which relationships are satisfied, as opposed to competition (assertion of one's own prefer- conflictual—a condition typically produced by the separation of ences over those of others), accommodation (sacrificing of one's powers in the mayor-council or county executive forms of own interests to those of others), compromising (splitting the dif- government.® ference among interests), or avoiding (ignoring conflict) (see Thom- From the case studies, the facilitative model in local govern- as and Kilmann, 1974). The leader shares leadership and seeks to ment can be elaborated more fully than before. The characteristics coordinate efforts among officials. Finally, the leader seeks to create of the facilitative leader can be divided into three categories: the a shared vision that incorporates his or her own goals and the goals leader's attitude toward other officials, the kinds of interaction the of others, promoting commitment to the vision and focusing every- leader fosters, and the leader's approach to goal setting: one's effort on accomplishing it.
Described in this way, the practice of facilitative leadership Attitude Toward Other Officials is not confined to a particular official. Other members of the coun- cil and the manager can and frequently do use the same style in their • The leader does not attempt to control or diminish the contri- own behavior. The connection of this style with the chief elected butions of other officials. official is stressed here for two reasons: first, it is the approach to • The leader empowers others by drawing out their contributions leadership that best suits the nature of the office in the council- and helping them accomplish their goals. manager form of government; and second, without effective facil. • The leader values and maintains mutual respect and trust. itative leadership from the mayor or chairperson, it is more difficult Kinds of Interaction Fostered for other officials to sustain a collaborative approach to achieving goals on their own. Consequently, the facilitative model is inte- • The leader promotes open and honest communication among grally (but not exclusively) linked to the chief elected official. officials.
• The leader secks to manage conflict and resolve differences in a Issues: Leadership Type and the Visibility of the Mayor way that advances the mutual interests of all officials. • The leader is willing to share leadership and form partnerships. The distinction berween the coordinator and the director may have • The leader fosters understanding of distinct roles and coordi- a bearing on public perception of the mayor's or chairperson's ef. nated effort among officials. fectiveness. If the key coordinator roles of team builder, liaison, and Approach to Goal Setting broker of information are stressed, with little initiation of policy. leadership may be relatively invisible.? The assessment of Gene • The leader fosters the creation of a shared vision, incorporating Roberts's leadership appears to have been lowered by his working his or her own goals and the goals of others. behind the scenes and allowing others to take credit for ideas that • The leader promotes commitment to the shared vision. he initiated. A low profile and, in the council-manager govern- 000229
Key Leadership Issues 239
238 Facilitative Leadership in Local Government
ments, a harmonious working relationship with the manager may inability to strengthen the council as a decision-making body would be interpreted to mean that the mayor or chairperson makes no indicate that the mayor is not an effective coordinator, despite what- particular contribution. ever her intentions might have been. Anyway, even a coordinator Similarly, if inembers of the council are highly independent, should have the ability to fill the vacuum and take the lead when the mayor or chairperson may appear to be insignificant. The chief other members of the council do not. A basic part of the problem elected official will have difficulty countering this perception if the with this mayor's performance appears to be that her critics did not council members often move in separate directions. The mayor's or identify a coherent overall agenda during her tenure. This does not chairperson's job can become a lot like herding cats. Helping the mean that a mayor or chairperson should be expected to come up council members move in the same direction and function effec- with all the initiatives, or that the chief elected official should be tively as a group is an accomplishment, but one that may not be incapable of supporting the ideas of others and letting them take recognized by the media and citizens. the lead. Still, the mayor or chairperson should be able to commu- In the four case studies of coordinative leaders presented in nicate what goals the local government is pursuing and how they this voluine, there appears to be broad appreciation of the chief all fit together. Doing so will not guarantee that the chief elected elected official's leadership contributions. If the mayor or chairper- official will be recognized as a leader by the media, but failing to son is not associated with an agenda, however, there is a greater do so invites the justifiable charge of a leadership void. chance that he or she may be perceived as weak and ineffective. Take Weak leadership becomes an issue, as opposed to a public the example of the mayor of Sacramento who served in from 1984- relations problem for the mayor or chairperson, when it creates 1992. A newspaper review of the positive and negative assessments dissatisfaction with local government and causes persons or groups of her performance captures the difficulty of pinning down what to bypass the mayor or chairperson because of his or her perceived constitutes leadership (DeBare, 1991, p. A6): "Complaints about her ineffectiveness. Lack of an agenda-the chief elected official's and/ leadership ability have plagued Mayor Rubin since she first took or the council's- impedes the council's ability to act decisively and office. The mayor has always retorted that it is a question of style, coherently. It can even fuel efforts to change the form of govern- not ability. As a feminist. .., she would rather work quietly and ment, in order to "strengthen" leadership. Coordinator mayors and cooperatively with her colleagues than twist arms or pound ta- chairpersons, who help to shape a consensus incorporating the bles."* This could be an example of a coordinator mayor who is not ideas of the council and the community, need to be certain that they being recognized for her contributions; as one critic pur it, the are communicating underlying purposes and strategies to the agenda was set by others, not by the mayor. As we have seen, how- public. ever, coordinative mayors and chairpersons are not the primary in- itiators of local governmental agendas. But other information in the Structure and Leadership article raises questions about whether the mayor has in fact been an effective coordinator: the mayor "failed to emerge as a consensus- In most cities (over 60 percent) and some counties, the method of builder and Ieader." and the council had difficulty handling some selecting the chief elected official has been changed from selection decisions and was characterized by some as "foundering." Critics by the governing board to direct election by voters. The primary also charged that the city missed opportunities because the mayor reason is to make the mayor or chairperson a more effective leader failed to take the lead and often played a sideline role. Simply on and to strengthen the link between voters and local government. In the basis of this analysis, it would appear that the mayor does not some places, proposals have been considered to make more substan- have all the attributes or accomplishments of a coordinator, inuch tial changes and give the mayor or chairperson special powers. In less those of a director. The failure to build consensus and the San Jose, for example, the mayor develops the budget to be pre- 000230
Facilitative Leadership in Local Government Key Leadership Issues 241 sented to the city council. Some mayors have proposed changing the or county in intergovernmental relationships, and (3) present an city charter to permit the mayor to nominate the city manager to annual "state of the ciry (or county)" message (for counties, see the council. The possibility of changing to the mayor-council or National Civic League, 1990). These expanded responsibilities are county executive form is being given more attention in some large recommended for mayors and chairpersons in all cities and counties. jurisdictions. Change in the form of government is rare, but it hap- regardless of how they are selected. The new charter attempts 10 pened in 1993 in St. Petersburg and West Palm Beach, Florida. crystallize a new leadership position in the council-manager form of government. The authority to appoint members of advisory boards, Modest Changes in the Mayor's and the responsibilities of representing the city in external relations or Chairperson's Position and preparing a summary statement of the city's conditions, needs, and direction, are designed to enhance the mayor's leadership role In the council-manager form, the most common revision affecting without diminishing the authority of the council or the manager.
There is the clear intent to make the office a source of coordination son. Expanded power to make appointments, as well as other new among officials in city government and a guiding force in policy responsibilities, have also been considered. These changes are mod- development. The recommendation that the mayor or chairperson est, but they generated considerable debate among present-day ur- be direcily elected when the council is elected from districts reflects ban reformers who were involved in the most recent revision of the the hope that the mayor will exert a centralizing and coalescing model city and county charters, completed in 1989 by the National impact on council members with diverse perspectives.
Civic League. Starting in 1899, the model charter has expressed the The case studies presented in this volume do not resolve the current thinking of municipal reformers about what constitutes the debate over the superiority of direct election versus selection from best provisions for local governmental charters. In a departure from within the council, but they do shed some light on this structural previous model charters, the seventh revision (National Civic question, on which reformers have differed. It is reasonable to as- League, 1989) provides for direct election of the mayor as an option sume that direct election enhances the leadership potential of the mayor or chairperson. A chief elected official would not have to so responsibilities for the mayor. The introduction to the seventh re- literally secure the permission of the council for a style or program, vision indicates that cach community should consider which meth- since he or she would be chosen independently of the council. od would be "most conducive to the development of strong political Furthermore, by directly mobilizing popular support through the leadership" (pp. xvi-xvii). The commentary notes, however, that electoral process, the mayor or chairperson may have somewhat "in many cities, particularly the larger ones, it is believed that this greater freedorn to develop goals that go beyond the prevailing con- method [direct election] increases the potential for mayoral leader- sensus. Moreover, when the mayor or chairperson uses the electoral ship by giving the mayor a city-wide popular support base" (p. 25). process to demonstrate broad popularity that cuts across racial, eco- Protasel (1988) offers indirect evidence that this is the case by show- nomic, and political lines (consider Mayor Taylor of Roanoke), che ing that abandonment of the council-manager form is less common chief elected official has a unique source of influence. Still, among in cities with direct clection of the mayor. the three directorial mayors featured here, two were initially chosen The mayor's or chairperson's role is further enhanced over by their councils, rather than by voters, as was the chairperson that prescribed in earlier revisions by the chief elected official's being categorized as a director. By contrast, two of the three coordinative given authority or responsibilities in three areas: the mayor or chair- leaders were elected. The relationship between method of selection person should (1) appoint members of citizen advisory boards and and mayoral leadership is a complex one; direct election will not commissions with the consent of the council, (2) represent the city in itself make the chief elected official an effective policy initiator. 000231
Key Leadership Issues 243
242 Facilitative Leadership in Local Government
The cases also offer insights into two other recommendations the emergence, during Wilson's tenure, of full-time council members of the National Civic League. First, several mayors have made good with independent staffs. The council is now fragmented, with cach use of an annual "state of the city" address, including Mayor Rhea, member operating as an "independent department head." The who initiated the practice in her city in 1987. It provides a vehicle mayor cannot reclaim control over other elected officials. Charter for education and goal setting and for reinforcing team building by change, in Sparrow's opinion, is now required; for officials and giving expression to the goals of the council. Second, the activity voters to know what they can expect from the mayor, the powers of of the mayor or chairperson in intergovernmental relations (Crow- the mayor's office need to be institutionalized. ley's efforts in the California legislature. DuPuy's formation of the The claim that council-manager government cannot work in Carolinas Counties Coalition, MacIlwaine's plan for revenue shar- very large, complex cities (and counties) is not a new one (see Ban- ing) or interorganizational relations (Mears's negotiations with field and Wilson, 1963). The emergence, in many of the other case- MARTA) has been an important element in the strong leadership study cities, of mayors who use a collaborative style to overcome provided by many of the facilitative mayors and chairpersons. dissension and drift suggests that the facilitative model can be ef- There is no direct information from the case studies on the fective in very large cities if the right kind of leader appears. Fur- impact of giving appointment power to the mayor or chairperson, thermorc, structural change is not necessarily a more likely path to but it seems unlikely that this power in itself would substantially increased governmental effectiveness. alter the influence of the chief elected official. What is important The creation of executive mayors (or executive chairpersons is whether the mayor or chairperson uses the responsibilities of the in this form is likely to produce other changes, which may have office in a facilitative leadership style, to engage all officials in negative consequences. If the powers assigned to the mayor separate effective decision making. the mayor from the council and subordinate the manager to the The case studies do not offer any information about the im- chief elected official, then separation of powers enters the govern- pact of giving the mayor or chairperson veto power. Melvin op- mental process. The emergence of mayor-centered systems of gov- posed the idea because he felt it would divide the mayor from the ernance in council-manager cities is likely to produce greater council; Protasel (1989) offers a similar argument. conflict between the council and the mayor and to create ambiguity The voting status of the mayor is emphasized by Wheeland, in the lines of authority berween each set of elected officials and the in Chapter Seven. In his opinion, the fact that Mayor Rhea could manager. The advantages of cooperative relationships between both preside at council meetings and vote as a regular member contributed to her acceptance by other council members. All the other mayors and chairpersons featured in the case studies (includ- ing Roberts, under the commission form) were voting members of their governing board. powers of the mayor with respect to the council could also have the effect of diminishing the influence of more representative, district- Substantial Changes in the Mayor's based councils that include larger numbers of minority group or Chairperson's Position members (Blodgett, 1994). It is certainly more difficult to achieve consensus in socially and ethnically diverse councils, but decreasing Sparrow's study of San Diego (Chapter Nine) questions whether there the significance of the council in local government is not the only is an outer limit of change beyond which facilitative leadership is no longer appropriate as the dominant model of leadership. He feels There could well be a net loss in leadership if the council is that this limit has been reached in San Diego. Part of the reason is weakened and the professionalism of the manager is constrained in 000232
244 Facilitative Leadership in Local Government Key Leadership Issues 245 favor of formal powers for the mayor or chairperson or a change in literature on leadership in the private sector argues for the facili- the form of government. Since these case studies indicate that the tative model, rather than for reliance on formal power, even though chief elected official can be effective even when the council is di- the chief executive officer in a corporation does have formal power vided, one could argue that it is more productive to promote the on which to draw. facilitative leadership of the mayor or chairperson than to change There is evidence that Roberts's experience is neither unique the structure substantially and make it more difficult for such lead- nor simply due to his having begun his tenure under the commis- ership to emerge. sion form. For example, Mayor Ed Rendell of Philadelphia has A recent assessment of the contributions of Mayor Emanuel been called "one of the more adept facilitators in office at the mo- Cleaver of Kansas City provides support for this argument (Enos, ment" (Gurwitt, 1993, p. 40). He has been able to overcome a long 1993). Cleaver has been identified in that assessment as a policy period of dissension "by carefully sharing both the spotlight and his leader with an "aggressive economic-development agenda." In ad- thinking" with other elecied officials and by sharing his power to dition, he has "taken on a healing role" and "mend[ed] fences" on achieve consensus. Another example appears to be Edward H. the city council. The mayor has been able to foster "cooperation on McNamara, elected in 1986 as county executive in Wayne County, a panel once plagued by infighting." In the words of a community Michigan. Emphasizing a team approach, he reorganized county leader, "The council is a team now, and the mayor is the quarter- government, made management changes, took measures to control back." Finding a facilitative leader to bring cohesion and a sense of health and child-care costs for indigents, and fostered economic purpose to a council-manager city may be easier and more effica- development (Shubart, 1992). Recognized in 1992 by City & State as cious than changing the powers of the mayor's office or changing one of the top local government executives, he credited the team the form of government. approach in county government for the accomplishments that had been achieved. Of course, both these strong executives have formal Facilitative Leadership in Mayor-Council Cities powers as well. An observer in Philadelphia comments that Rendell has used the powers of his office to offset the resistance of employee The Chattanooga case (Chapter Ten) indicates that the facilitative unions to budget cuts; if the power of the mayor were fragmented, style practiced in the commission for can be sustained by the same "there would be too many discordant voices without anyone in mayor after a charter change to adopt the mayor-council form. Gene charge" (Gurwitt, 1993, p. 41).
Roberts was still seen as a team leader by one-third of the officials Nevertheless, recognizing the value of the facilitative ap- interviewed and was seen as an educator more often than he had proach and avoiding the divisive consequences of attempts to im- been under the commission form. The dynamics of interaction in pose control are positive alternatives for "strong" mayors and governments with separation of powers can easily push the chief county executives. One mayor in a strong mayor-council city has elected official into adopting a power-oriented leadership style, bur concluded that mayors like himself may be more effective if they Roberts managed to maintain a facilitative style. stress cooperation with other participants in local government. Mi- Indeed, the facilitative approach may have relevance to both chacl B. Keys (1990), mayor of Elyria, Ohio, interviewed six other the mayor-council form and the county executive form. Obviously, strong mayors and reports these findings: 1° mayors and county executives do not have direct control over a wide range of participants in the political process (members of governing • Effective city government is characterized more by cooperation boards, citizens, interest groups, officials in other local govern- than by conflict. ments). Even their own organizations are likely to include some • The mayor should serve a team-building function, working to staff with independent authority (especially in counties), and the build consensus in the council. 000233
246 Facilitative Leadership in Local Government Key Leadership Issues 247 • The mayor should blend direction to the council in some areas relationships in precisely this kind of situation. This was certainly with facilitation of the council's decision making in other areas. true of DuPuy, Mears, and Macilwaine. Mayors Rhea and Taylor helped establish a new level of communication among officials and Keys's conclusion is that an executive mayor both wishes and is able with the public. Such contributions are particularly important in to be a facilitator with the council in certain areas. To do so, an periods when a city and its political climate are changing. elecied chief executive needs to understand this alternative approach Changes that are occurring on councils and in communities to leadership and to have training in the necessary skills. where the diversity of the population is increasing do not under- mine the viability of facilitative leadership, although they certainly Change and the Viability of Facilitative Leadership strain it. Chief elected officials probably face greater difficulty in getting the "permission" of councils to be effective leaders. Mayors The College Station case (Chapter Eight) raises questions about the and chairpersons must rise to this new challenge by raising the level impact of change on the viability of facilitative leadership, even in of their performance as facilitative leaders. Gurwitt (1993) concludes small cities. The council in College Station has become more di- his assessment of whether governmental structure can produce ef- verse and contentious as narrowly focused neighborhood advocates fective political leaders with this advice: "The most important chal- and business representatives have replaced the university employees lenge isn't to write chariers for them; it is to nurture them in the who had dominated the council. A strong leadership role for the first place" (p. 41). mayor had previously been expected, but meeting this expectation was simplified by the fact that the mayor was giving expression to Recommendations for Strengthening Leadership values shared by most members of the council. A collaborative style of leadership, which had been "natural" for working with a homo- Efforts to improve performance should start with the campaign for geneous council, no longer worked as well. office-among the electorate, or within the council. A newly elected Similar changes are occurring throughout the country. chief should also pay attention to the way he or she inoves into the Council members are more diverse in their characteristics and seek position during the transition process. All mayors and chairpersons to speak for a wider range of interests (Svara, 1991). More activist need to examine key aspects of the council process: promoting trust in their orientation, they are more frequently inclined to pursue and cooperation, goal setring, council procedures, and working independent political agendas. More are inclined to see council relationships. membership as the start of a political career (Ehrenhalt, 1991). By contrast with more homogeneous councils, made up of people who Selection of Mayors and Chairpersons view council membership as community service, councils today in- clude larger numbers of independent members from diverse back- When a mayor or chairperson is directly elected, the campaign and grounds, with varied and sometimes narrow agendas. Such councils the coverage in the media will typically highlight some but not all are not likely to accept the leadership of the mayor or chairperson of the information that voters need in order to choose an effective facilitative leader. Campaign activities are akin to the ceremonial Facilitative leadership is still appropriate in these situations, and promotional aspects of the job; platforms and proposals offer but a mayor or chairperson, to be effective, will have to find new insights into the extent to which the candidate will bring policy ways to foster stronger working relationships and fashion a com- initiative to the office. It is important to determine what the can- mon sense of purpose and direction. The mayors and chairpersons didate wants to accomplish and what kind of agenda the candidate in many of these case studies provided leadership that transformed has. Two evaluative questions about the policy agenda are the fol- 000234
248 Key Leadership Issues 249
Facilitative Leadership in Local Government
lowing: How well does the agenda match the needs of the commu- and the administrative organization continues to operate under the nity and the local government? How realistic is it, in terms of the city or county manager. This is still an important time, however, nature of the mayor's or chairperson's office? for taking stock and setting in motion actions that will lead to The interpersonal qualities of the candidate are likely to be change. Rapid change-for its own sake, or to take advantage of a less evident, unless voters and reporters specifically look for them. closing "window of opportunity" —is not required. Since the mayor How will the candidate work with other officials to accomplish or chairperson and the council can initiate shifts in policy or direct goals? How well is the candidate listening to other candidates and the manager to alter administrative practice at any time, they can to incumbent members of the council as they talk about their own concentrate initially on establishing goals and assessing the need for ideas for local government? What is the nature and extent of the change. candidate's networks? What is his or her record in working with On occasion, the mayor or chairperson comes into office others on collaborative efforts? Candidates often receive support for with the feeling that the manager should be changed. Of course, projecting themselves as solitary leaders, singlehandedly tackling removing the manager is an action taken by the entire council, not problems and charting a new course for the future, but facilitative just by the mayor or chairperson. But, unless there is evidence of leadership will be strengthened by people who can work with and wrongdoing that cannot be ignored, there are two major reasons through others. why the mayor or chairperson should not move quickly to line up The task of assessing the less obvious personal qualities of a majority of the council for terminating the manager's tenure. '2 the candidate will be easier for the members of a governing body First, the new mayor or chairperson should realize that he or she has who choose the mayor or chairperson from within their own ranks, not been in a good position to judge the competence or responsive- particularly if they have had experience in working with the pro- ness of the manager. Those with no experience on the council may spective chief elected official. " Nevertheless, a mayor or chairper- feel that the manager is "in charge" and therefore must be removed son selected from within the council does not have the opportunity in order for them to change priorities or programs. This perception to generate popular support for policy initiatives in an election. from a distance is usually erroneous; the manager has probably been Consequently, he or she may have greater difficulty securing sup- doing what the council wanted. A mayor or chairperson who served port for an agenda from other officials. on the council may be concerned that the manager was so close to the former chief elected official that an effective working relation- Transition to Office ship with the new mayor or chairperson will be impossible. An incumbent may even have been able to manipulate events, to make Our common view of the transition process is that the newly elected it appear that the manager was supporting him or her in the cam- official must take charge, hit the ground running, and do as much paign. This apparent closeness may be the impression that the as possible to put his or her stamp on government before opponents former mayor or chairperson wanted to create, rather than excessive regroup and obstruct the new official's plans. This advice, although loyalty to the previous incumbent on the manager's part. Second, applicable to conflict situations and the transition of an elected as several of the cases demonstrate, the performance of the manager executive, is typically inappropriate for council-manager govern- is affected by the abilities of the mayor or chairperson. Shortcom- ments. The key goal of the new mayor or chairperson is to strength- ings could have been produced in part by the weakness of the pre- en teamwork and develop a common sense of direction and purpose. vious incumbent in promoting effective teamwork. Stronger In other words, the new mayor or chairperson secks to put facilit- leadership by the mayor or chairperson, as we have seen, can en- ative leadership into practice as soon as the election is over. hance the performance of both the manager and the council.
The government has a direction, set by the previous council, The mayor or chairperson and new council members should 000235
250 Facilitative Leadership in Local Government Key Leadership Issues 251 assume that the manager will perform in a professionally respon- a useful vehicle for accomplishing a number of tasks (Jenne, 1988). sible way, to assist them in taking office and to help them achieve It is important that the entire council accept the idea of having a their goals in office. In most cities and counties, chis assumption is retreat and agree to participate. The council does not need to leave warranted. In the atypical situation, in which the manager is per- town, but the retreat should be so structured as 10 make it different ceived 1o be wedded to the previous mayor or council and hostile from a normal council meeting. There should be sufficient time, to newcomers, the reality usually is that the manager is just as intent usually one or two days, to discuss a range of issues fully. Arrange- on working for the new council and will demonstrate that, if given ments should be made to have an outside facilitator guide the coun- the chance. Therefore, making a change would be unnecessary, cil through its discussion. This is an open meeting, but media costly, and disruptive of a smooth transition. When the manager's representatives, if they attend, should be encouraged to respect the performance is objectively judged to be unsatisfactory, after a period spirit of the session. The purpose is an open-ended exploration of of joint work the council can make a change, with neither the where the city is going and how officials work together, and offi- appearance nor the reality of claiming the spoils of electoral cials are encouraged to try out ideas. Comments should not be re- ported in the detail that would be expected of debate that precedes an official action of the council at a regular meeting, nor should Promoting Trust and Cooperation they be taken out of context. Whatever method is used to organize the discussion, attention should be given to goal setring and to The foundation for building effective relationships is a clear under- relations between and among the mayor or chairperson, the council, standing of the mayor or chairperson's role in the governmental and the manager. process. Although it is the exception rather than the rule, some mayors and chairpersons-both new and experienced-produce Goal and Priority Setting tension with the other members of the council or the manager be- cause of a poor understanding of their own role. For example, the The goal-setting process starts with a review of conditions and mayor who says, "I'm in charge" and seeks to make unilateral trends in the city or county, drawing on information prepared by changes in policy or practice (outside his or her own office) is going the manager and staff. This background information is helpful for to strain relationships. The manager is put into a difficult position, ensuring that goals address real conditions, rather than superficial since he or she is obligated to defend two principles: that the whole symptoms of deeper problems. This information may also reveal council makes policy, and that the manager is the chief executive problems that have not been recognized. Goals are the long-term officer. The support of the council may also be jeopardized. improvements that the council would like to accomplish. When The mayor or chairperson should lead the council and the agreement is reached, goals provide a framework for identifying the manager in a collective effort to determine how they can all work policies and programs that should be undertaken in the short term together effectively and ensure a high level of performance in the (the next year or two). It is important to establish priorities among government. The chief elected official should pay attention to pro- these policies and projects, as a guide to the manager and staff about cess and promote awareness of the need for change when it is war- where to place emphasis and how to allocate scarce resources. ranted. This will often entail the use of special kinds of meetings, As we have seen, effective mayors and chairpersons differ in at which the council is not addressing an agenda of specific actions. the degree to which they seek to have their own policy agendas These may take the form of periodic work sessions, a retreat, or a accepted by their councils. Some place more emphasis on creating combination of the two. a common commitment to goal setting and help all officials work If the groundwork is properly laid, a council retreat can be through the process of generating and sorting out proposals, in- 000236
252 Facilitative Leadership in Local Government Key Leadership Issues 253 cluding their own. Others advocate a comprehensive set of initia- the manager should be examined. How the mayor or chairperson tives. These officials can provide important policy leadership, as and the manager will work together should be clearly understood long as they recognize that they cannot impose their ideas on the and accepted. The council's and the chiel clected official's mutual council or exclude council members from policy development. expectations should be reviewed. It is important for everyone to Either approach can work well if the mayor or chairperson pays recognize that the mayor or chairperson monitors and adjusts rela- close attention to whether other members of the council are coming tionships to ensure effective interaction. For example, this may en- forth with ideas of their own. tail talking 1o an individual council member who is getting In addition to policy initiatives, the council should consider involved in dealing with the staff. If council members are dissatis- whether improvements in administration (service delivery) or man- fied with the amount and kind of information that is being pro- agement (productivity) are needed. If so, council members should vided to them in advance of meetings, the mayor can work with the confer with the manager to set clear goals and expectations about manager to adjust it. It is particularly important to ensure that a the nature of change, and they should review the manager's pro- regular process has been established for the council's appraisal of posed timetable for accomplishing it. the performance of the city or county manager.
In sum, the mayor or chairperson must take responsibility for Council Procedures carefully examining how the city or county does its business (the pro- cess of government) and where the city or county is going (the pur- It is useful for officials to examine the council's work methods and pose of government). Using extensive consultation with the council procedures periodically. Are the timing and frequency of meetings and the manager, and in regular contact with a wide range of groups appropriate? Is there dissatisfaction with the length of meetings or in the community, the mayor or chairperson can guide officials with how smoothly they run? As presiding officer, the chief elected through a process of constructive change. official will guide the council in the conduct of its business and should look at how well the process is organized. The mayor or Conclusion chairperson and the manager should review how well prepared the chief elected official is to handle iterns that will be covered in a Mayors and chairpersons can be important leaders in council- meeting, and whether more careful briefing is required. With more manager communities, and there are many who are because they use careful preparation, meetings may become shorter and more pro. a facilitative style of leadership. The material presented here offers ductive. The mayor or chairperson should encourage the council 10 a description of the roles these officials fill, the resources they use, discuss mutual expectations of the mayor, council members, and the and the impact they have. The case studies provide detailed portraits manager and staff regarding preparation and the conduct of meet- of a select group of successful chief elected officials. From these ings. (It is useful to cover these topics, along with policy goals, at studies, it has been possible to refine the conceptualization of the the council retreat.) Other matters that should be addressed include job of the mayor or chairperson and to fully elaborate a facilitative appoinunent of board and commission members, committee assign- leadership model for the public sector. Although this leadership ments, and the council's relations with the public. approach is not confined to council-manager governments or to the chief clected official, it is particularly well suited to the office of Working Relationships mayor or chairperson in this form of government.
Cities and counties are at a critical juncture in the choice of In addition to procedures, the working relationship between the methods to enhance the leadership of the chief elected official. They mayor or chairperson and the manager and between the council and can seck to increase the ability of this official to be a facilitative 000237
254 Facilitative Leadership in Local Government Key Leadership Issues 255 leader, who will operate within the normal confines of the council- the only path to suengthening elected leadership. The combination manager form, or they can separate the mayor or chairperson from of political and professional leadership is a unique strength of the the council by giving this official some formal power in policy council-manager form of government. A key to ensuring that the making, administration, and/or management. The experience in council and the manager will work together effectively and move in mayor-council cities (the experience of Chattanooga notwithstand- a positive direction is facilitative leadership by the mayor or chair- ing) is for the mayor to seek ever more formal power in order to person. The case studies indicate that the mayor or chairperson can exert greater control over the council. focus the council's attention on important goals and lead the coun- Eflective mayors and chairpersons do not need to overshadow cil and the manager to accomplish them. With increasing diversity the rest of the council or supplant the city manager. The cases on governing boards and in American communities, strong facili- illustrate how the mayor or chairperson can have a positive impact tarive leadership may be the prerequisite of effective governmental on the level of the council's involvement in goal setting and policy performance in the 1990s and beyond. making. Evidence from a survey of cities in North Carolina and Ohio indicates that high mayoral leadership increases the council's Notes attention to long-range concerns, makes the council more proactive, and improves the council's ability to make decisions. Furthermore, Professor Larry Keller of Cleveland State University stressed the council is more actively engaged in the formation of mission this point in his paper on the "moral leadership" of Mayor and the setting of policy as the mayor's leadership expands. The Murray Seasongood of Cincinnati, presented at the 1991 con- leadership of the mayor or chairperson offsets a tendency for the ference on facilitative leadership for which the papers that council to be essentially reactive and restricted to simply reviewing became the chapters in this volume were prepared. proposals that come from the manager. For example, Mayor James Eason of Hampton, Virginia.
The manager's involvement is not negatively affected by the whose leadership was described in a paper for the conference level of the mayor's leadership. Referring again to the survey of (see note 1) by Assistant City Manager Elizabeth A. Walker. cities, we can see that there is a higher level of positive interaction takes the position that the mayor should share this task with when elected leaders are stronger. Strong facilitative leadership can all other members of the council and should not take on a be provided, along with that of the city manager. The working much heavier burden of commitment than other members do. relationship is strengthened as leadership by the mayor or chairper- There is room for confusion here, since the first four roles also son expands, particularly the relationship between the chief elecied involve communication, coordination, or both, and can be official and the manager. As noted in Chapter One, survey data filled more or less actively. For example, one mayor may ac- indicate that mayors who are ranked lower in leadership are also tively seek out the media and be forthcoming with informa- perceived to be too involved in administrative activities. It appears tion, whereas another may avoid the media as much as that effective leaders instill a sense of purpose and set broad goals. possible. The roles are essentially built into the position, and whereas mayors or chairpersons with limited horizons are preoccu. the mayor or chairperson is prompied to fill them by general pied with the here-and-now and inclined to meddle in administra- expectations, demands, and charter provisions.
Mayor Eason of Hampton refuses to spend inordinately more Thercfore, there is no evidence to support the presumption rime than other council members and seeks to delegate cere- that a high level of leadership necessarily causes the mayor to take monial tasks to other members of the council whenever over executive functions or leads to conflict with the manager, nor possible. is structural change to expand the powers of the chief elected official Jonathan Howes, director of the Center for Urban and Re- 000238
Trem No. 1ng Date: 9/25/2003
Item No.:
CITY OF RIVERSIDE
PIVERSIDE
"People Serving
People™ September 18, 2003
Committee Members
City of Riverside Charter Review Committee
3900 Main Street
Riverside, CA 92522
Subject: Legal Issues Raised at August 28, 2003 Meeting; Our File No. CA 02-2919 Dear Members of the Committee:
The following will address those issues raised at your meeting of August 28, 2003.
Section 404 - Vacancy in an Elected Office.
Section 404 of the Riverside City Charter addresses vacancies in an elected office and prescribes the manner for filing the vacancy. The particular question presented is whether Section 404 has ever been applied to hold a position vacant and might this happen in the future.
Based upon our research, the last application of Section 404 was on January 5, 1993, when the City Council declared the office of City Council member for Ward 4 vacant because of the election of councilmember Bob Buster as Riverside County Supervisor for the First District.
Consistent with the Charter, the City Council filled the Ward 4 vacancy within 60 days after such office was declared vacant.
While we are unaware of a past instance in which the City Council failed to fill a vacancy by appointment within 60 days after such office was declared vacant, the Charter would require under such circumstances that the City Council cause an election to be held forthwith to fill such vacancy. The City Council would have to consolidate the election with a statewide election or call a special election.
Section 411 - Citizen Participation.
Section 411 provides that each citizen of the City of Riverside shall have the right to present comments at any regular city council meeting or meeting of a standing committee of the City Council. The committee specifically requested an overview of the law relating to time limitations on public comment in general and at public hearings. - 8-1 O: 1Cycom WPDocsD0181P002100021375.WPD
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
3900 MAIN STREET • RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92522 a (909) 826-5567 FAX: (909) 826-5540 • www.riverside-ca.org
000239
Committee Members
September 18, 2003
The public has a right to address the City Council at any meeting on any subject that is within the City Council's subject matter jurisdiction. California Government Code section 54954.3(a). The right to express one's views in a public place is fundamental; however, it is not absolute and is subject to valid regulation. It is clear that city councils have authority to limit speech through the imposition of agendas and rules of order and decorum. White vs. City of Norwalk, 900 F.2d 1421 (9" Cir. 1990); Nevens v. City of Chine, 223 Cal.App.2d 775 (1965).
However, the regulations on public comment must be reasonable. Accordingly, city councils have the authority to impose reasonable restrictions upon public comment at council meetings if such restrictions are not too broad and do not constitute "prior restraints." Id, A city council may prohibit a member of the public from speaking on a matter not within the city council's subject matter jurisdiction. 78 Op.Cal. Att'y Gen. 224 (1995).
Furthermore, a city council may regulate the total amount of time on particular issues for each individual speaker, subject to the requirements of due process. California Government Code section 54954.3(b). See also, 75 Op. Cal. Att'y Gen. 89 (1992) (upholding time limit).
Many cities place a time limit on comments by the public, unless it is otherwise prohibited by law to ensure all members of the public have an opportunity to speak and the city council is able to complete its business. Time limits of three to five minutes are customary. City Council Resolution No. 20261, adopted on September 3, 2002, limit an individual's remarks to three minutes.
It should be noted that a city council may not prohibit public criticism of the policies, procedures, programs, or services of an agency or its acts or omissions. California Government Code section 54954.3. When a citizen is given the right to speak at a city council meeting, his or her speech is considered political speech. Perry Educational Association v. Perry Local Educators Association, 460 U.S. 37 (1983). As such, a speaker may not be stopped from speaking because the moderator disagrees with the viewpoint he or she is expressing. Id.
Some actions must be preceded by a public hearing; they may be legislative (such as a general plan amendment or zone change) or quasi-judicial (such as a conditional use permit or subdivision map). A public hearing must be properly and timely noticed. See, California Government Code section 65945.7. All considerations of due process apply - - a meaningful opportunity to prepare and be heard before an impartial decision maker must be accorded.
Quasi-judicial or "administrative" actions are governed by the due process requirements of the 14* Amendment to the United States Constitution. That Amendment says a governmental regulation may not deprive a person of life, liberty or property without due process of law. The procedure employed must be fair and accord those with an interest in the matter a meaningful opportunity to prepare and be heard. Formal rules of evidence are not required. Public hearings 0: 1Cycom|WPDocs\DO18\P002100021375.WPD
8-2
000240
Committee Members
September 18, 2003
are not required unless specified by state law or local ordinance. The decision maker must be fair and impartial. See, Clark v. City of Hermosa Beach, 48 Cal.App. 4th 1152 (1996). Examples of quasi-judicial actions include issuance of discretionary land use permits, business licenses, rent control hearings on applications for rent increases or decreases, and other similar actions in which a property interest is at stake and the body is charged with applying legal standards to a specific factual situation.
With respect to public testimony at public hearings, Resolution No. 20261 limits presentations other than quasi-judicial hearings to no more than three minutes. Depending upon the circumstances, more or less time may be authorized by the majority of the city council. For quasi-judicial hearings, presentations are limited as follows: an appellant or applicant may be allowed one ten minute presentation and an additional five minutes for surrebuttal. A designated representative of an organization in opposition thereof may be allowed a ten minute presentation.
The city council reserves the right to determine the total amount of time for testimony on any particular hearing matter and/or for each individual speaker.
3. Section 603 - Manager Pro Tempore.
The question posed by the Committee is whether the term "Manager Pro Tempore" should be changed to "Acting City Manager"? Section 603 provides that the City Manager shal! appoint, subject to the approval of the City Council, one of the other officers or department heads to serve as Manager Pro Tempore during any temporary absence or disability of the City Manager. The simple answer to the Committee's question is that the term should not be changed. The reason for not changing the term "Manager Pro Tempore" is the legal significance which attaches to that term as distinguished from "Acting City Manager". The City Charter and the Riverside Municipal Code allow the City Manager to administer the administrative branch of the City government and to delegate the performance of ministerial tasks. There are, however, certain duties and responsibilities which are non-delegable.
For example, Section 601 of the City Charter states that "the City Manager may approve or disapprove all proposed appointments and removals of subordinate employees by department heads or officers, and such appointments and removals by department heads or officers shall be subject to the approval the City Manager." This express statutory authority under the City Charter is non-delegable and the City Manager, and the City Manager alone, has the authority to approve and disapprove all appointments and removals absent an amendment to the City Charter.
Furthermore, Section 603 of the City Charter provides for the appointment of a manager pro tempore by the City Manager subject to approval by the City Council during temporary absence or disability of the City Manager. This express provision would be the only exception to O: 1Cycom WPDocsD0181P002100021375.WPD
8-3
000241
•
Committee Members
September 18, 2003
the authority enunciated in Section 601 or other non-delegable duties. Consequently, the nanager pro tempore appointed by the City Manager whose appointment is approved by the Cit Council, may perform all delegable and non-delegable duties of the City Manager. Conversely to the approval of the City Council. The Acting City Manager may perform all delegable duties (assuming they have been delegated by the City Manager), as well as all ministerial duties and nor believe that the termi Manager po empoe egol did bin chan between these two terms, we d " should be changed
4. Section 807 - Human Resources Board.
An issue was raised as to the scope of the duties and responsibilities of the Human Resources Board. Section 807 creates a Human Resources Board with the powers and duties to recommend to the City Council, the adoption, amendment or repeal of personnel rules and regulations. The Human Resources Board also acts in an advisory capacity to the City Council in matters concerning personnel administration. In addition to assisting in the development, review and revision of personnel policies and procedures, the Human Resources Board has been delegated the responsibility to hear certain employee grievances. Section 3 of City Council Resolution No. 15079, known as the Employer - Employee Relations Resolution, sets forth a detailed procedure for employee grievances. As a practical matter, most employee grievances are resolved informally or through a formal grievance procedure negotiated as part of a Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the recognized bargaining unit. As such, the Human Resources Board hears only those personnel grievances filed by management/confidential employees who are unrepresented and are not part of a recognized bargaining unit. Based upon our research, the Human Resources Board has not heard a personnel grievance in nearly ten years.
5. Residency Requirements.
Lastly, an issue was raised as to whether the Charter may prescribe residency requirements for council appointees and/or durational residency requirements for council members. Sections 600 and 700 of the City Charter provide for the appointment of the City Manager, City Attorney and City Clerk by the City Council. Bligibility to hold such offices are defined in the Charter but such requirements do not include residence within the City of Riverside. Article XI, section 10 (b) of the Constitution of the State of California, provides that "a city or county, including any chartered city or chartered county or public district, may not require that its employees be residents of such city, county or district; except that such employees may be required to reside within a reasonable and specific distance of their place of employment or other designated location." Consequently, the Riverside City Charter could not be amended to O:1Cycom|WPDocsID018\P002100021375.WPD
8-4
000242
Committee Members
September 18, 2003
require that its council appointees be residents of the City of Riverside.
FRATE
is no state interest of a compelling nature which justified the restrictions in question, and specifically rejected the contentions that the residence requirements were necessary for the education of the candidate regarding the issues and of the electorate regarding the candidate.
Accordingly, the Court held that any durational residence requirements for local office in excess of the a 30 day pre-filing period was violative of the equal protection clause of the 14* Amendment. Consequently, the Riverside City Charter may not be amended to require durational residency requirements in excess of 30 day pre-filing residency.
Should you have any questions regarding the issues raised in this letter, I will be available at the meeting of September 25, 2003, to discuss same.
Very truly yours,
Gregory P. Priamos
City Attorney
George A. Caravalho, City Manager
Colleen Nicol, City Clerk
O: 1CycomPDocsID0181P002100021375.WPD
8-5
000243
-
RC Meeting Date: 9/25/200
tem No.:
CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE
UPCOMING AGENDAS
September 25, 2003
• Interview with Mayor Loveridge
• Interview with Councilmember Pearson
• Vote of confidence for Chair and Vice-Chair
• Report on legal questions raised
October 9, 2003
• Interview with Councilmember Beaty
• Interview with Councilmember Defenbaugh
October 23, 2003 (La Sierra High School)
• Community Forum
November 13, 2003
• Interview with Councilmember Moore
• Interview with Councilmember Adkisor
December 11, 2003 (4 hours)
• Elections
• District vs at-large elections vs hybrid
• Run-off elections vs instant run-off voting
• Mail ballot elections
• Form of Government
• Mayoral Power
• Mayor and City Council compensation
• Part time vs ful time Mayor and Councilmembers
January 8, 2004
• Interview with Councilmember Hart
- Charter review.calendar
9-1
000244
CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING SCHEDULE
August 2003 through July 2004
DATE TIME LOCATION
September 25, 2003 5:00-7:00 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room October 9, 2003 5:00-7:00 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room
October 23, 2003 - -a Sierra High School
Community Forum 7:00-8:30 p.m. Performing Ărts Center
November 13, 2003 5:00-7:00 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room November 27, 2003 NO MEETING THANKSGIVING DAY
Lakeside Room, Fairmount
December 11, 2003 3:00-7:00 p.m. Park Boathouse, 2601 Fair- mount Boulevard
December 25, 2003 NO MEETING CHRISTMAS DAY
January 8, 2004 5:00-6:30 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room
January 22, 2004 5:00-6:30 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room February 12, 2004 5:00-6:30 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room February 26, 2004 5:00-6:30 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room March 11, 2004 5:00-6:30 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room
March 25, 2004 5:00-6:30 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room
April 8, 2004 5:00-6:30 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room
April 22, 2004 5:00-6:30 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room
May 13, 2004 5:00-6:30 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room
May 27,2004 5:00-6:30 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room
June 10, 2004 5:00-6:30 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room
June 24, 2004 5:00-6:30 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room
July 8, 2004 5:00-6:30 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room
July 22, 2004 5:00-6:30 p.m. Mayor's Ceremonial Room
9-2
g: Ic/kimasters|Charter Review Committee Meeting Schedule.doc Revised: 9-19-2003 000245 -
A10 TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2 2003
THE PRESS-ENTERPRISE
UBLISHERS O
DAVID HE PRESS SINCP 187
CORNWALL THE ENTERPRISE SINCE 1885
PUBLISHER THE PRESS ENTERPRISE SINCR 1052
MARIA
PRESIDENT 1930N948 PUBLISHER 1983-1988 HARRY HAMMOND
DE VITORNNE
EDENT 1948-1969 PUBLISHER 1D89-199
RESIDENT 1948-196
GALE
«DITORIAL PASE RTHUR A. CULVER
CO-PUBLISHERS
EDITOR 1963-1983
Grassroots public service
- ast spring a city charter review in Riv-
sions of a hands-on council, Frank
or the way the city oper aurd suddenly teeis the
• ates. In an election year, weight of its collective re- the charter suddenly sponsibility, government
looked as though it could at the grassroots is reas-
become a battleground. suring to watch.
That has not hap- At last week's meet-
pened, which is construc- ing, members worried
tive. The issue is instead about accomodating citi
in the hands of a citizens' zens at meetings. Latel
committee of 17 appoin- on in this process, which
tees. In the dog days of may go six-to-nine
summer, at times when
ner, committee members
have been meeting in a logos. But the tone that's
City Hall conference being set now - of taking
room. Last week they out- public service seriously -
numbered spectators sends a positive signal to
two-to-one. But the panel the entire city.
9-3
000246
City of Riverside
haun Memorandum
People Serving
People
To: CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: September 25, 2003
From: Sharon Cooley, Communications Officer ITEM NO: 9
SUBJECT: Charter Review Committee: Community Forum promotional schedule Attached please find a Promotional Campaign/Timeline for educating the public about the activities of the Charter Review Committee, in general, and the October 23 Community Forum, in particular.
Also being prepared is a suggested script, which members can use as a guide when promoting the Committee's activities to local service clubs, school groups, chambers of commerce divisional groups, and so on. It is important that committee members attempt to cover as many of the meetings as possible, so a coordinated schedule might be a good idea.
Forthcoming materials are:
Biographical sketches with photographs (in production)
Fliers/posters for October 23
Webpage with "citizens' guide to the Charter", biographical sketches, meeting schedule, special events, citizen input interface, and link to the Charter Please don't hesitate to contact me should you have any questions. I can be reached at (909) 826-5997.
000247
CITY OF
RIVERSIDE
CHARTER
PAST • FUTURE
Charter Review Committee
Promotional Campaign/Timeline
WHEN WHAT WHO STATUS
August 2003 Logo for promotional materials MJ Abraham Adopted September 2003 Biographical sketch Sharon Cooley Nds some additions September 2003 Schedule of meetings published in Sharon Cooley Complete Riverside Report
September 2003 Web site link up Sharon Cooley Anticipated Oct 1 September 2003 Cable access channel banner. Ch. 32 Sharon Cooley Complete September 2003 Press release Sharon Cooley Submitted every two weeks ~ September 2003 Oct 23 Community Forum campaign ALL Everybody needs to help get launch the word out. Collateral
material to be distributed in
Oct 3 agenda mailing or
available from Sharon on Oct
Oct 23 Save the date cards mailing Sharon Cooley Sched for Oct 3 (see mailing lists below)
Oct 23 Flier/poster posting Sharon Cooley Sched for Oct 8 All October COC Division meetings Committee See attached. Committee member will need to call
Chamber to get on schedule
All October Service club/community of faith/PTA See attached. Committee visits member will need to call
club/org to get on schedule
September 25 Mayor's Night Out Sharon Cooley Mayor announcing October (early) Sharon Cooley Under development
October 7, 2003 Sharon/Eric or Sharon to prepare staff
Ben report/Eric or Ben to present
October 9, 2003 GRCC: Good Morning Riverside Eric or Ben Need to check with Chamber announcement
[October 23, 2003 Community Forum
000248
•
Available Mailing Lists
# In List
Boards and Commissions: 200
Mayor's list 200
Office of Neighborhoods'
neighborhood leaders database:
Schools:
Communities of Faith: 400
Email: Chambers of Commerce (?)
Email: Human Relations' dbase
Email: General Plan committee (CAC)
• Flier/Poster Posting Sites
City Hall and other city building lobbies
Community Centers through Park and Rec
Police Storefronts
Fire Stations
Libraries
Riverside Downtown Partnership for downtown merchant windows Arlington BID
Other shopping centers
Schools, through appropriate channels
i
- Meeting Visits
Service Clubs
Chambers of Commerce Division meetings/GMR
Girl Scout troop meetings
Neighborhood group meetings
Other:
Meeting Schedule
Chambers of Commerce Divisional Meetings (Call Chambers for location and to get on schedule.)
Arlington: 2d Monday, 7:30 a.m.: October 13 -
Downtown, 1s" Thursday, 7:30 a.m.; October 2 - Pay a Dall EastHills, 2°° Friday, 7:30 a.m.: October 10
Hunter Park, 4" Wednesday, 7:30 a.m.: October 22
October -MVP Dary Johnsm
La Sierra, 1 Monday, 7:30 a.m.: October 17 - Ray a Crane Magnolia Center, 3' Friday, 7:30 a.m.:
Good Morning Riverside: October 9 -
Service Clubs
2 000249
Riverside Sunrise Rotary, Marriott, Fridays at 7:00 a.m. Sharon Cooley, Damon Castillo are members
Arlington Rotary Club, Cal Baptist University, 343-4211, Tuesdays at 7:00 a.m.
Riverside East Rotary, Canyon Crest Country Club, Wednesdays at 7:00 a.m.
Magnolia Center Rotary Club, Tava Lanes, 788-9625, Thursdays at 12:00 Riverside Rotary Club, Mission Inn, 369-1724, Wednesdays at 12:00 Soroptimist, Chambers of Commerce, 2" and 4" Tuesdays at 12:00, Gayle Webb, [email protected]
3 000250