|
by Dr. Carl Mumpower
Op-Ed
Asheville Citizen-Times
July 6, 2000
The
business of government is complex. Whether we undertake to manage a
home, community, city, state, country or even our own personhood,
effective governance is an artful science. There are many approaches to
government, and most of us seem to prefer a representative form that
gives us some say in the process.
The city of Asheville, like
many others throughout our area, is experiencing a period of dynamic
growth and expansion. With this development comes added complexities
that challenge existing systems of management and service. Like all
forms of change, adaptation becomes a necessity. Responsible and
well-intended people, like our elected officials and city staff, seek
new ways to do new things. Hopefully, wise decisions are made on our
behalf.
Currently, one of these decisions centers on the role of
appointed boards and commissions as a component of city government.
There are some in pivotal roles who question the usefulness of these
citizen groups and the constructive purpose they may serve. In recent
years, these questions have evolved into a position that finds boards
and commissions an increasingly less important player in city
government. We may be losing something in this silent evolution of
control and authority.
There are essentially three pathways for
an ordinance-based board or commission to take. The first is to assume
the role of an authority that is directly responsible for the
management o!
f a part
icular entity or service. The Airport Authority
would serve as an example. With a few exceptions, the City Council is
our chosen source of authority for most city functions and services.
The second model involves an oversight role that provides for budgetary
input, policy making, service review and management observation. This
function enables a board or commission to serve as a filtering agent,
problem-solving resource and informed observer without having direct
control or responsibility. This is a meat-and-potatoes role that
provides pragmatic service without autocratic control. The final option
provides for service in the purely advisory capacity. Experience
teaches us that genuine advice-seeking is a random and
personality-based activity at best, especially in the demanding arena
of city politics. Further, without a clearly defined board and
commission role involving accountability and substance, the pool of
service-minded citizen volunteers thins dramatically.
Unfortunately,
the gradual drift in our citys view on boards and commissions appears
to be toward the latter model. In taking this course, we may be losing
a key component of the hand that guides our citys course. That hand is
comprised of five fingers, each of which contributes a unique touch
that, collectively, creates strength and resilience. The taxpaying
citizens of this community make up one of those fingers, while the city
staff comprises another. Our city manager holds a strong finger of
responsibility, as does another group of citizens, our elected City
Council. It is these good folks who bear final authority and
responsibility on our behalf. The fifth finger is best represented by
appointed boards and commissions–structured citizen groups that, unlike
any of the other fingers of our governing hand, are uniquely able to
maintain an objective, informed and targeted perspective of the entity
or service they oversee. From this p!
osition,
a board or commission can
evaluate, facilitate, and mediate within a structure that provides
restrained opportunity for personal or political agenda.
As our
City Council seeks to address the role of various boards and
commissions, it may be helpful to give careful consideration to the
fading utilization of this finger of government.
Minimizing this
form of oversight may initially increase efficiency by removing a layer
of accountability, but what will be lost in the exchange? Oversight is
rarely convenient, but in the complex world of government it is always
necessary. Just as a hand of five fingers is always stronger ...
|
