“Go to the people…” The Reengaged Public Administrator

The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.

By Joe Jarret
February 17, 2025

Introduction

In the three decades preceding my teaching of public administration at the university level, I was a public administrator, risk manager and lawyer who served several state and local government entities. Regardless of whether the elected officials who passed the legislation I and others were called upon to carry out were left or right of the center of the proverbial aisle, Democrat or Republican, they shared a common goal: Elevate the entity’s trust with their constituents. It was presumed that this could be accomplished by making government more accessible through interactive, user-friendly websites, duly noticed and accessible board, commission, council and committee meetings and the occasional town hall meeting. The prevailing thought seemed to be that, by letting the public know they could come to us (The government), they would feel more engaged while developing greater trust in their elected and appointed leaders. But what if we changed the narrative from inviting the people to come to the government, to the government going to the people? This piece will explore the benefits of going to the people as means by which to build bridges between a skeptical public and the elected and appointed leaders they look to for leadership, protection and basic government services.

Reengaging with the Public

In the early days of World War II, Winston Churchill, Great Britain’s newly appointed Prime Minster, had a decision to make that would determine the fate of the British Empire and ultimately the free world: Appease Adolf Hitler and the other leaders of Nazi Germany, or wage total war against the tyranny being inflicted upon France, Poland, Belgium and Holland. He chose the latter. In one of his many speeches in support of war over surrender, he said, “We are fighting to save the whole world from the pestilence of Nazi tyranny and in defense of all that is most sacred to man.” This was an agonizing decision for Churchill, and one that he did not take lightly. In the movie “The Darkest Hour” (Based in part on the book by that same name by Anthony McCarten), Churchill shares his doubts and fears with King George VI. The King advised Churchill to “Go to the people. Let them instruct you. Quite silently, they usually do. But tell them the truth unvarnished.” Whether this conversation actually took place, or is merely apocryphal, it nevertheless provides today’s public administrator with profoundly sage advice. Go to the people, rather than insist that the people come to you.

Public Meetings

Unless citizens regularly present themselves to the offices of their elected officials, or meet them when they’re on the campaign trail, or knocking on doors or speaking a civic clubs, the most common arena for such official-citizen interactions is the public meeting. If there exists one consistency amongst the rules that govern the hodgepodge of state and local public meetings, it is that there is no consistency. Because there is no universal law, and few consistent court rulings that definitively define what constitutes “reasonable notice” of public meetings, citizens are often excluded from the governmental process. Such inconsistencies are not merely from county to county, but between counties and their incorporated municipalities and between city and county boards of education within the same county or parish. Where one board (The term “board” for this piece includes commissions, councils, etc.) publishes public meetings notices in the few local newspapers available, another may post them on the entity’s website.

Where one board may meet in the morning, another may meet at night. Where one board requires citizens to sign up in advance of public meetings to speak, others merely open the floor at the conclusion of the matters listed on the agenda. Where one board will provide 5 minutes of comment per person, others, 3 minutes and so on. Where one board makes it their practice to engage speakers, others merely sit silent. The point is, while some boards make a concerted effort to engage the public, many others still fail to make meetings as accessible as they should.

Likewise inconsistencies still exist when it comes to public meeting agendas. Although most states require that local government entities must publish an agenda prior to a meeting that reasonably describes what will be deliberated or acted upon at the meeting, where such agendas are published are wrought with the same inconsistencies as public meetings notices. Some are published on a board’s website, while others are only available in hardcopy form immediately prior to the meeting. Further, many states permit legislative bodies to discuss or act on items that are not on the agenda, as long as the body follows all of its bylaws, rules and procedures.

Finally, when citizens feel their due process rights are not being honored or respected, they lose faith in the governmental process and the people they elect to protect and serve them. Citizens have an absolute right to insist that government entities follow established rules and procedures when taking action that could affect a person’s life, liberty or property, thus protecting them from unfair or arbitrary treatment by the government. By way of anecdote, the 6^th Circuit Court of Appeals recently took issue with a municipality regarding its code enforcement practices, especially when it came to citizens’ due process rights when appealing the decisions of the code enforcement board. Despite the fact that the city’s code required that violation appeals be brought before an appellate board to hear such grievances, it was learned that no such board actually existed. 

Reengaging with Citizens

Although many public officials insist that by affording citizens the opportunity to attend public meetings, as well as air their grievances when doing so, constitutes adequate citizen engagement, I would argue otherwise. I believe the aforementioned is the least we can do as public administrators. We have a duty to reach out to all citizens, not merely those who regularly present themselves at public meetings and whose voices are heard loudly, clearly and consistently. Certified Public Manager Rick Davis, (Assistant city manager of League City, Texas), suggests that public administrators ask their citizens a set of basic questions that will serve to facilitate a dialogue and eliminate barriers between the governed and the governing. Specifically:

• What do you like most about living in our community?
• What do you perhaps like least?
• Why are you here or what made you move here?
• What, if it changed, would cause you to consider leaving?
• If you were “king or queen” for a day, what would you change or what would you do?

Armed with such information, as well as other needs and concerns expressed by citizens, public administrators can work towards prioritizing the needs and wants of  those on whose behalf they took an oath to protect and serve. If we take the time to go to the people, they will instruct us indeed, for the benefit of all.

---

Author: Dr. Joseph G. Jarret is a public sector attorney, administrator, and  manager, who has served public entities at all levels of government.  A former United States Air Force Special Investigator and United States Army Armored Cavalry Office with service overseas, he lectures on behalf of the Department of Political Science at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. He holds the B.S. in Criminal Justice, a Master’s in Public Administration, a Juris Doctorate, and the Ph.D. in Educational Leadership & Policy Studies. He is a past-president of the East Tennessee Chapter of ASPA.

(5 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...