I’ve been thinking a lot about the role of a singular elected official on any give body such as the City Council, School Board or Hospital Board. Mostly in reflection to a comment which noted that School Boardmember Trish Spencer was valuable because she “asks questions that need to be asked.” While certainly asking questions is an important part of any elected officials job, shouldn’t a person’s role on a legislative body be known for more than just asking questions?
While “building consensus” may be a feel good term that gets thrown around, the ability for any elected official to coalesce support behind their particular stance is probably the most important task for any elected official. If you can’t manage to get others Boardmembers to support your issue then even asking a million and one questions won’t really do anything but suck time and attempt to derail through procedural methods.
An elected official is — ostensibly — supposed to be a leader that is able to guide his or her supporters in the proper direction to get whatever it is that they want or be an effective enough leader to be sufficiently persuasive to get his/her other Boardmembers to see the error of their ways.
Anyone can ask questions, but it takes leadership to move an issue. Take, for example, the issue of the Superintendent’s compensation package. People see to forget that it was a 3-2 split vote and could have easily gone the other way. Any multitude of questions wasn’t going to move another Boardmember from the yea to the nay column, but perhaps if there were a bit more persuasive arguments being offered as opposed to question after question, there might not even be this compensation package to be used as political football.
While some elected officials may relish their position as the dissenting voice on whatever elected body that they sit on, it’s certainly not a way to get anything actually accomplished. It’s the ability to turn that dissenting voice into actual action that separates a leader from a contrarian and becomes yet another chorus of this and more inaction from already sluggish government bodies.
Speaking of leadership what I have heard about the City Attorney recruitment from some City Hall dwellers has been a doozy. 3 finalists were apparently chosen, and it sounds to me like the first choice declined for some reason (believe that was Wan from Morgan Hill). 2nd choice accepted (believe from Pleasant Hill) and discussed with City Manager the position. She was told that she needed to finish the layoff of an attorney that is in process (Deputy City Attorney) and also should touch base with the current Acting City Attorney as she will be her boss. Number 3 choice was the Acting City Attorney and she went off on the 2nd choice during the phone call to inform her. Mayor calls 2nd choice and says something like “What were you thinking?” 2nd choice says “No thank you” at this point and decides not to make the move. 3rd choice is no longer an option.
So now another recruitment is in effect. No that’s leadership!
Comment by Just as Vigilant — December 19, 2011 @ 8:17 am
Not sure I agree with your argument. Don’t you wish someone had spoken up about the tree removal on Park Street?
Politically, Rep. Barbara Lee and Ron Paul voted against the Iraq War. Rep. Ron Dellums and Sen. William Fullbright were early opponents of the Vietnam War. Consensus could not be built until years later. Key to American political life are individuals who refuse to go along with the majority. That is not to say they are always right, but they are hardly always wrong.
Comment by Really? — December 19, 2011 @ 8:27 am
I wonder from what body of thought the concept of, ‘to get along, go along’ sprang from. The thought that one should give up his beliefs if one is unable to sway to consensus is particularly onerous in the non-dictatorial society we say we live in…though that may be changing.
Comment by Jack Richard — December 19, 2011 @ 8:48 am
Lauren, have you watched any of CSPAN’s series:”The Contenders”? It’s about people who ran, didn’t win, but changed history. There is always a role for the minority opinion & it should not be silenced.
Comment by vigi — December 19, 2011 @ 10:16 am
Sheeple.
Comment by Adam Gillitt — December 19, 2011 @ 10:58 am
Now here’s a guy who could really ‘build consensus’…
Comment by Jack Richard — December 19, 2011 @ 12:21 pm
Brilliant Jack.
We need someone with courage to stand up and reengineer the Schools.It needs to be turned upside down. It certainly won’t be someone who will have strong support by the present mind set of our administrators and teachers.
If we start putting the Student first and all their needs and then build from there.
The Students today are exposed to rapid changes in technology and life. The leaders say the kids don’t like change. The kids are screaming for it. It’s the leaders who can’t change.
We have a model that is broken and needs a tourniquet and using the same thinking is Crazy.
Comment by John — December 19, 2011 @ 2:58 pm