While canvassing, I often get asked about what a councillor actually does. Anyone can make general statements (they run the municipal government, they represent their constituents). Let me give specifics that separate good councillors from bad ones. It’s important to look at your council candidates and their past behaviour to determine what type of councillor they’ll make.
Councillors solve problems for constituents. Good councillors take a planned and systematic approach to decision-making, often anticipating problems and solving them before they arise. Average councillors wait for their constituents to raise issues and they tackle them one-by-one.
Councillors also serve as a source of information for their constituents and help residents navigate the mess we call bureaucracy. To enable that, good councillors write blogs and send newsletters to keep people informed. They also act as a liaison between municipal staff, bylaws and policies, and people they serve. Average councillors only research questions when they come up. Poor councillors do not stay connected with staff and do not participate in subcommittees, and are always poorly informed themselves.
Effective councillors put right policies in place that allow staff to solve problems themselves. Though it’s fun to hear council argue about stop signs and debate sidewalk (both happens, sadly), it’s not an effective use of their time. Their time should be spent debating issues that non-elected staff cannot, or should not, handle.
Councillors do not just represent, they also lead. That’s what distinguishes an average councillor (a representative) from a good one (a leader).
Voters should look at candidates and analyze their past involvement. Are they already leaders? Do they regularly volunteer in the community? Do they already represent their neighbours in subcommittees? Do they attend council and committee meetings? Do they attend public meetings?
No Comments
Trackbacks/Pingbacks