3NCD: Advice for the Incoming Administration

About this series: Each month, three New Canaan Democrats (3NCD) offer their thoughts on a matter in the news locally, at the state level or nationally.

Essay 1:

First, congratulations to all the newly elected (and re-elected) New Canaanites who will now administer the Town’s affairs. Thanks and appreciation as well to both Sally Hines and Jeb Walker for their service and many contributions over the years. Finally, kudos and respect to Kathleen Corbet who ran a classy (and VERY close) issue-oriented campaign for Town Treasurer. New Canaan is fortunate to have such public spirited citizens willing to serve in these increasingly complex and economically challenging times. Indeed the commitment to public service that the candidates (both  parties) demonstrate puts to shame the fact that less than one-fourth of their fellow town electors bothered to show up on election day – but that’s a topic for some other time. Today’s topic is to offer one Democrat’s unrequested but nonetheless sincere advice on how to move New Canaan forward.

Now that they’ve been elected, the hard part starts – they have to govern – which means they have to decide. In turn, that means that on one issue or another some of us will be happy, some won’t, and everyone will probably complain about something. No one ever said public service was easy. But, while trying to decide what government ought to do is never easy, it ought to always be done (by both elect-ors and elect-ed) with civility and transparency. That’s my first suggestion.

My second suggestion is: “If it isn’t broken; don’t fix it.”  I think there are many things that work quite well in out town. Our Schools, Police, Fire, and Emergency services are in my opinion simply first rate. Town employees, almost without exception, are helpful and competent. The various Boards, Committees, and Commissions work hard and overall, do a good job of discharging their responsibilities.

What other suggestion do I have?

Financial:  We need to do a better job of managing our financial affairs. I think the town does a pretty good job during the budgeting PROCESS in deciding what needs to be spent and by whom. I think we can do a much better job in the down-stream MANAGEMENT of those approved expenditures. All of us who come from the corporate world know how much time is spent on budget reviews, year-to-date-performance tracking, variance-from–plan discussions, annualized-run-rate analysis and better/worse than forecast reviews. We need to transfer more of those disciplines into our management of both our town departments and, most critically I think, in our oversight of third party contracts. Related to this is the need to have improved clarity and accountability regarding who can approve /authorize /disburse town funds under either already approved budgets or supplemental funding authorizations.

Downtown:  We need to stay focused on preserving/improving its vibrancy. It is one of the charms of New Canaan that helps sell the town to newcomers and thus helps preserve real estate values and the Grand List. Given the impact of the national recession and the reality of lower Fairfield County’s commercial rents this is not an easy problem. While I don’t pretend to have any brilliant solutions I do have two suggestions: explore  some form of limited tax abatement to landlords who agree to pass those savings on to merchants or service providers in the form of reduced rents upon locating in New Canaan or renewing existing leases and revisit (what I believe was looked at a few years ago) the idea of providing downtown employers some form of parking voucher that their employees can use at one or two of the town’s parking lots in order to free up parking spaces on Main and Elm Street for actual customers.

Seniors:  Finally – and here I confess I am at a loss – what, if any, accommodations should we make to the town’s aging demographic profile while simultaneously preserving those things which make New Canaan such an attractive place to come and raise a family?

I am sure I could fill up another umpteen pages with suggestions, ideas, comments, thoughts, insights, and ramblings but maybe I ought to let the new administration have a few days of well deserved peace and quite first!

We wish them (and us) a successful and productive term in office.

Essay 2:

I am impossibly challenged to imagine all of the issues that will arise in the coming years, and sufficiently humble not to prescript an opinion of possible answers. The only advice I would offer however, is to avoid the disease of DC gridlock.

I fear, in the immediate years ahead, NC government is at risk of gridlock arising from multiple divisions.  My advice? : listen with two ears; embrace differences of opinion; remain committed to finding a solution rather than being attached to the problem.

NC gridlock example #1

There are two kinds of mistakes:  “mistakes by action and mistakes by non-action”.  The worst kinds of mistakes are the latter: those by non-action. A mistake of non-action is like getting hit by a locomotive you see long in advance but are so gripped with fear, debate and polarization that you cannot make a simple decision to get out of harm’s way.  (i.e.: Repairing the leaky roof in Town Hall?)

NC gridlock example #2

Sometimes we resist change because we hate change.  We miss the benefit of new thinking and evolutionary change because of some tortured fear of where it might lead. (i.e.: Review / edit the NC Town Charter around the roles and responsibilities of the Treasurer?)

NC gridlock example #3

The art of leadership is avoiding corner-options.  If I enter the discussion room and immediately move to an intractable corner then there is no point in being in the room at all.  Everyone going away a little bit disappointed is often a hallmark of leadership success. (i.e.: Sidewalks? Long Range Planning Committee?)

Essay 3:

The death of democracy is not likely to be an assassination from ambush.  It will be a slow extinction from apathy, indifference, and undernourishment.  ~Robert M. Hutchins, Great Books, 1954

What constitutes a mandate for governance when only a small percentage of the population votes?  In New Canaan, only 23% of the electorate voted. The Republican Party, in a contentious primary, only obtained the participation of 30% of their voting members. Who then do the elected actually represent?

We are living in strange and difficult times.  The disdain for government is real.  Congress has only a 9% approval rating.  Unemployment remains fixed at 9% and we all seem to be getting used to it though I don’t think that is true for those who are part of that 9% which National Public Radio, thankfully, continues to make three dimensional in their profiles of the unemployed.  Fortunately, there is a social safety net and the breadlines of history remain a historical footnote.  Instead, we witness an increase in demand at the local food banks (there are six high school clubs collecting Thanksgiving donations) from populations who used to supply them – food stamps are for the destitute, not those struggling. Perhaps you know someone who has been looking for gainful employment for over 12 months and has taken a 70% pay cut?  Or empty nesters whose sons or daughters graduated and now are reconverting the sitting room back into a bedroom or apartment?  I do. There is nothing wrong with living at home while you are beginning your career or for that matter with half a dozen room-mates in a pre-war apartment in NYC. The problem is it is symptomatic of stalled careers due to stagnant growth. The economic news is not terribly encouraging, with projections of another two to four more difficult years, whatever this means or equates to.  No one knows what will happen if the Euro is disbanded but neither does anyone want to find out – fiscal control seems like a good idea but how to implement a return to national currencies without creating havoc? – the consensus seems to be that conditions could turn catastrophic, so why risk it?  Others disagree. The jury is still out, or is it hung?

Across the country, the Occupy Wall Streeters have galvanized a motley crew of young, old and in-between to protest the status quo and focus attention on the economy and the growing disparity in wealth which has not existed since before the depression.  Greed is no longer a capitalist virtue, as manifested by inflated compensation, excessive materialism and ostentatiousness.  Will we finally embrace a New England sensibility of frugality?

But I digress… What is my advice for the incoming administration representative of less than 25% of the voting population?  Granted, with the exception of the race for treasurer, this was a fait accomplie for the candidates and the rationale for the low turnout.  I suppose one could argue that New Canaanites are passive aggressive voters and endorse the new government. This would be an ill-advised conclusion. Instead, our newly elected town officials should re-read the letters to the editor on the town’s mismanagement of the Lakeview bridge, review the minutes of the public discussions of the Long Term planning committee, and pay heed to the larger socio-political trends that reveal a growing distrust of government (regardless of Party affiliation) in general in the country, of which New Canaan is a part.

If they pay attention, they will understand that the public wants them to

1. Be skeptical of studies and data as the means to establish public trust and justify policy choices.
2. Establish an ethical culture from the top down that is not contingent only on rule-making by administrations.
3. Be truthful, not just transparent, with the public – what do you mean to do with the information obtained?
4. Be directly accessible, not just through polls or surveys.
5. Engage the public meaningfully in the decision-making process so it can assume a shared responsibility in the choices that affect the town.

The above advice parallels the surprising conclusions of the The Public Agenda and Kettering Foundation’s recent research on how the public judges its leadership and holds its government accountable.   In five areas the study finds differing perspectives of the meaning of accountability between the public and leadership.  Contrary to a popular consensus within governing circles, more information gathering does not equate to greater public confidence and may indeed have the opposite effect.  People are skeptical of statistics, motivations behind data gathering and the manipulation of complex information to justify decisions.  Similarly, benchmarks or tests, while important management tools, do not provide any assurances of good governance if the culture does not value ethical behavior or other intangibles- How do we protect against grade inflation, cheating, or test manipulation?  “The public believes that accountability will fail unless institutions have an ethical culture to support them,” said Jean Johnson, Executive Vice President of Public Agenda.  Thirdly, transparency does not signify an automatic high public approval rating.

We, the public, are tired of automated customer service and anonymous surveys.  We want our government to be available and be responsive in a timely and honest manner.  And, finally, the public wants to participate in the solution — this seems to contradict the trend in what has been a usually accurate barometer of civic engagement and voter turnout.

And herein lies the dilemma for our democracy — we want our representatives to include us in the decision making process concerning the policy choices that directly impact our lives and yet we do not participate in their election.  We cannot expect our leaders to listen to us if we do not go to the polls and if their re-election is not contingent upon our participation.  For our local leaders, the problem becomes one of both governance and eventually town survival.  A town that does not listen to those who live in it will lose its residents, or become reliant for its sustainability on small ruling elites. Why should this be of concern to the new administration in New Canaan?  If the public does not participate and is not engaged, the town could eventually lose its economic base as people become more alienated and disenfranchised by the decisions made.  We could even see a local version of Occupy Wall Street.

N.B. The report, “Don’t Count Us Out: How an Overreliance on Accountability Could Undermine the Public’s Confidence in Schools, Business, Government and More,” is based on interviews and focus group in five cities and can be found on the website, http://www.publicagenda.org/dont-count-us-out