Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
To me, that would be like bringing in a budget consultant for 170k a year to allow a mayor who wasn't good at money stuff to play to his strengths.
Maybe I'm weird, but if a candidate doesn't have the temperament to run efficient and effective meetings, then yeah, I'd say that person is a poor candidate for mayor. Because I consider the ability to see different sides of an issue and facilitate practical compromises without getting personal as a core skill for high political office. I don't want a bullish hot-head running my city, province, or country.
|
The amount of priority you place on meeting facilitation vs budget preparation would factor in to how you would consider candidate skill sets. To me the mayor sets a vision and drives toward it having mayor as just facilitator actually hinders the mayors ability to implement that vision.
If the mayor is just a tie breaking vote on committees and council and council just votes on things brought forth by the administration than running those meetings becomes pretty important. If you want a mayor to drive a vision of the city forward while managing a budget and finding efficiencies then meeting facilitation is probably low down the list.
You could probably define 10 or skills/attributes you want in a mayor and your top choice might be good at 6, okay at 2, and poor at 2. The public needs to decide which ones matter and to me meeting facilitation isn't one of them.
I would disagree that meeting facilitation and obtaining practical compromise are the same skill set.