HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet 09-29-1999 SpecialAgenda
Joint City Council/ Planning Commission Meeting
Plymouth Comprehensive Plan Update
Wednesday, September 29,1999
7:00 p.m.
Public Safety Training Room
A. Call to Order
B. Briefing on Water Supply Plan Issues
C. Briefing on Parks Plan Issues
D. Receive and Discuss Chapter 6 of Draft Comprehensive Plan: Water Resources
Element
F. Adjourn
Cd\plan\agendas\pc\pcother\092999] oint. doc
DATE: September 24, 1999
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dwight Johnson
SUBJECT: Letter to Ferndale North residents i k.
Kelli Slavik and Ginny Black have recommended that a letter be sent to the residents of
Ferndale North who spoke or wrote to the Council on the issue. The attached draft has
been prepared, and they intend to circulate the original of the letter among the council
members for signatures next Wednesday evening at our joint meeting with the Planning
Commission. The original is being placed in Kelli's packet.
I
September 29, 1999
Dear Ferndale North resident:
All of us would like to thank you for your letters, petitions, and calls on the use of the
Outlot A property in your neighborhood. This was a difficult issue us and we appreciate
that the debate was respectful and stayed focused on the issue before us.
As most of you know, we voted to not use Outlot A for a playground, but also voted to
continue to explore other opportunities in your neighborhood for such facilities. If any of
you have any new ideas about where a playground could be located, we would appreciate
hearing from you. As indicated at the meeting, we may need only a third of an acre or
less, which could be a fraction of a larger lot in the area.
As the City's comprehensive plan update continues in the coming months, general
policies regarding future park needs as well as the management of existing open space
areas will be considered, although specific plans for each park, open space, or
neighborhood throughout the city will be developed at a later time. You may contact the
Community Development Department at 509-5400 to stay informed about future hearings
and meetings on the comprehensive plan update.
Once again, thank you for all of your effort and input on this issue. We are interested in
the view of the residents and will continue to look for opportunities to meet the needs of
the neighborhood in a way that will prove acceptable to all. We hope the neighborhood
can work together in the same spirit.
Sincerely,
Plymouth City Council Members
PLYMOUTH A'Seautif u(T(ace To Live
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD • PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447-1482 • TELEPHONE (612) 509-5000
Citizens Lea_zue 708 South 3rd Street #500 Minneapolis MN 55415 Pho 612 8-0791 Fax 61 337-5919 www.ci
Promoting the public
interest in Minnesota
by involving citizens in
identifying and framing
critical public policy
choices, forging recom-
mendations and odvo-
cating their adoption.
OFFICERS
President
George Latimer
Vice -President
Matthew Ramadan
Secretary
Christine Roberts
Treasurer
Gary Cunningham
DIRECTORS
John Adams
Marcia Avner
Scott Brener
Andrew Brown
Mike Christenson
Cal Clark
William Diaz
Kent Eklund
Sally Evert
Laurel Feddema
Richard Forschler
Suzanne Fuller -Terrill
Peter Gove
John Gunyou
Katherine Hadley
Jean Harris
Susan Heegaard
William Johnstone
Lani Kawamura
Steve Keefe
Gene Merriam
Tony Morley
Pam Neary
David Olson
John Pacheco
Felix Ricco
Kathryn Roberts
Laura Sether
Missy Thompson
Emily Anne Tuttle
Robert Vanasek
Jane Vanderpoel
Kathleen Vellenga
Lee Pao Xiong
STAFF
Executive Director
Lyle Wray
Finance Director
Philip Jenni
Research Associates
David Chadwick
Kristine Lyndon Wilsor
Administrative Staff
Trudy Koroschetz
Gayle Ruttier
Minnesota Journal Editor
Dana Schroeder
September 20, 1999
Joy Tierney
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Mayor Tierney:
9-Zq-9 9
Enclosed please find a copy of one of the League's latest policy reports,
What's on the Public Agenda?" The League greatly appreciates your
willingness to be interviewed for this important project examining the
problems facing local jurisdictions, the amount of time spent addressing
these problems, the level of constituent input and other related issues.
I believe you will find some interesting insights contained in this report. For
instance, the big issues on our city, county and school district agendas are
not what you might expect. Furthermore, we found that at a time when
public officials are heavily criticized for being out of touch with their
constituents, our respondents were quite confident that their jurisdictions'
efforts were on target.
This year-long effort was part of the League's larger and ongoing Public
Leadership Initiative. Therefore, the findings of this report will be used to
inform and guide the League's continuing work in this area.
If you have any questions or comments about the report, please feel free to
give me a call. Additional copies of the report are available on the League's
website [www.citizensleague.net] or by calling the League office at
612) 338-0791.
Sincerely,
Lyle . Wray
Executive Director
LDW:gr
Tx,o,ks c.
Rs
0
jpi C
SEP 2 3 1599 -- N
G
r
What -'s on the Public Agenda?
A Report of the Citizens League's Public Leadership Initiative
Table of Contents
Fonvacrd: The Public Leadership Initiative ...................... 1
What's on the Public Agenda?: Summary of Findings .... 3
Appendix 1: Survey Results ............................................. 7
Appendix2: Participants ................................................ 11
Appendix 3: 1997 Interview Results .............................. 13
The Citizens League
708 S. 3rd St., Suite 500, Minneapolis, MN 55415
ph# 612.338-0791 / fax# 612.337-5919
www.citizensleague.net / info@citizensleague.net
Foreword.-
The
oreword.
The Public Leadership Initiative
The Citizens League's ongoing interest in public
leadership issues received increased attention in
the fall of 1996, when the League's Board of
Directors invited several community leaders to a
planning retreat to speak about what they con-
sidered to be the most pressing issues facing the
community. The Board heard repeatedly about
the challenge of rebuilding citizenship and its
effect on public leadership, and concluded that
the decline of civic participation and trust in gov-
ernment has a negative effect on public leader-
ship.
Out of this discussion came the Citizens League's
Public Leadership Initiative, a project designed to
examine the state of public leadership in theTwin
Cities metropolitan region. The first step of this
new project was to interview 56 individuals who
had direct experience with the challenges of pub-
lic leadership — as elected officials or appointed
public -sector staff in federal, state and local gov-
ernment; or as leaders in business, education, the
non-profit sector, the media and community
affairs.
Conducted by League Board members and staff
in the summer of 1997, these interviews high-
lighted several substantive policy issues in need
of good public leadership, including quality K-12
education; social issues such as crime, family
breakdown and racism; urban growth manage-
ment and redeveloping the central cities; trans-
portation and transit; and workforce training and
development.
In addition to these specific issues, those inter-
viewed saw significant problems in areas such as:
The creation and manipulation of public
opinion. Discussion of issues is trivialized;
polling buys elections but not leadership; the
media focuses on stories and issues that "sell"
while greatly reducing the public policy coverage;
powerful interest groups control how issues are
defined and discussed.
Understanding what government does—
and how. Too many people, citizens and elected
officials alike, don't know who does what in gov-
ernment, or why; there is no clear consensus
about what government's role should be; there
isn't much rationality to the division of govern-
ment responsibilities; public officials don't under-
stand what their responsibilities are.
Public involvement and the nature of
government. There are too many career politi-
cians; strategies to "open up" government have
become barriers to good leadership; Minnesota's
populist tradition equates leadership with elitism;
more powerful special interests and increased
partisanship has resulted in a focus on short-
term issues at the expense of a broader vision.
The leadership gap in the civic and busi-
ness sectors. Fewer business people are
involved in developing policy solutions to region-
al issues; citizen involvement has become equat-
ed only with volunteerism.
The complete results of these interviews can be
found in Appendix III.
The report that follows summarizes the findings
of a second round of interviews conducted dur-
ing the summer of 1998, with elected and
appointed officials from local cities, counties and
school districts. The opinions expressed by this
group are significantly different than those uncov-
ered during the first round of interviews. The
current local office holders were much more
confident that our public institutions are on
track, that they are addressing constituents' con-
cerns as well as jurisdictional needs. The earlier
group that included retired office holders and
leaders from the education, nonprofit, and media
worlds was much more pessimistic, expressing
serious concerns about the media's influence, the
public's lack of involvement, and the quality of
people attracted to public office.
There are numerous possible explanations for
the differing results. It might be that current
office holders restrict their focus to problems
within their own community, or issues they
believe they have the most impact over; thereby
leaving larger, regional issues unaddressed.
Another explanation might be the tendency to
think everything in your own community is fine,
and that the "real" problems lie in other com-
munities.
Whatever the exact reason for the variances, the
following report presents a unique picture of
public leadership in theTwin Cities, based on the
participants' personal perspectives at the time of
the interviews. And while the report contains
the answers to many of our original questions, it
leaves us with even more. Therefore, the
Citizens League, along with numerous other
organizations interested in the challenges of citi-
zenship and public leadership, will certainly con-
tinue to examine these issues in the future.
2
Introduction
In 1998, as part of an ongoing examination of
public leadership issues, the Citizens League
launched a new project entitled "What's on the
Public Agenda?" The purpose of the project was
to discover which issues and topics make up offi-
cial public agendas and to determine the degree
to which these issues correspond with the issues
the public says are important The project's
working hypothesis was that "the urgent over-
shadows the important' In other words, we
suspected that the time and attention of our
public leaders was being overwhelmingly con-
sumed by relatively minor and narrow issues, at
the expense of the more important, big -picture
issues.
During the summer of 1998, members of the
Citizens League's Board of Directors inter-
viewed 49 elected and appointed officials, from
metro -area cities, counties, and school districts.
These public officials were asked a series of 31
questions about the most important problems
facing their jurisdiction, the amount of time spent
on these problems, the level of constituent input,
etc. These one-on-one interviews were then fol-
lowed by two focus groups sessions, at which
respondents were presented with the survey
results and asked for feedback.
Findings
Put simply, the survey results contain a number
of paradoxes. At a time when public officials have
been criticized increasingly for being out of
touch with their constituents, our survey
respondents were quite confident that their
jurisdictions' efforts, and specifically their official
meeting agendas, were on target These officials,
especially the elected ones, told us the right
amount of time is being spent on the right issues,
that meetings are productive and that official
agendas are well aligned with jurisdictional
needs.
3
Our survey respondents also gave their con-
stituents high marks, for both their influence and
their aptitude. A majority of the officials we
interviewed said they use constituent contact to
determine the most important problems facing
their jurisdiction. Furthermore, they believe
their constituents have the "right" issues on their
agendas more often than not, and that the official
agendas of their public meetings reflect those
constituent concerns.
Exactly which issues are on the public agenda?
When asked for the most important problem
facing their school district, superintendents did
not say student achievement, as public opinion
polls or the media might lead you to expect
Instead they pointed to community relations and
lack of adequate funding. Similarly, city officials
did not say crime, an issue that has been a top
public concern for several years. They pointed to
development and redevelopment of their busi-
ness districts and residential neighborhoods, fol-
lowed by meeting the demand for services.
Survey respondents were also asked about the
amount of time spent on their most important
problem, and again the responses were paradox-
ical. Almost 60 percent said they spend either
very little or a small amount of time on their
jurisdiction's largest problem, yet they believe
that is enough.
As for the "urgent overshadowing the impor-
tant," again, we came across something of a para-
dox. While survey respondents were quick to
reassure us that the important issues are being
addressed, they also identified significant obsta-
cles to addressing the big -picture issues and said
they would like to spend less time on the mun-
dane details of running their city, county or
school district
One participant said that while the urgent does
overshadow the important at times, these things
go in cycles, and the important things do get
taken care of. Another official noted that once
elected officials are confident that the urgent is
being taken care, they can then move on to the
important
Still standing in the way of those important
issues, though, are several key obstacles that pre-
vent them from even getting on the agenda. Lack
of time was by far the number one obstacle
cited, followed by lack of citizen engagement,
political and personal agendas, and entrenched
modes of operation. Corresponding to this lack
of time for the big -picture issues was a desire to
spend less time on the urgent, including various
public meetings and events, phone calls, narrow
citizen complaints, paperwork, overseeing office
personnel, and handling "politically motivated
brush fires:'
Promising Practices
We began this project with concerns about the
state of public leadership and the degree to
which official public agendas match citizens' pri-
orities. Over the course of our work, we heard
from elected officials, including mayors and city
council, county board, and school board chairs; as
well as appointed officials, such as superinten-
dents, county administrators and city managers,
and while our results are quite paradoxical, they
do highlight a set of conditions under which the
important issues receive the attention they
deserve.
The Elected Official - Staff Relationship:
The relationship between elected officials and
staff members is extremely important, according
to both our survey results and the focus -group
feedback. Appointed officials, such as superinten-
dents and city managers, felt that keeping elected
officials on track was at least partially their
responsibility. Meanwhile, many of the elected
officials we interviewed gave significant credit to
their jurisdiction's full-time staff for handling the
small issues and educating them about the larger
ones. We heard that the relationship between
elected officials and staff can be either support-
ive and trusting or adversarial and hierarchical,
depending on the individuals involved, the culture
of the particular governmental body, and numer-
ous conscious and subconscious decisions.
4
This important relationship breaks down when
full-time staff decide to wait -out the duration of
an elected official's term rather than implement
reforms, or withhold valuable information in
order to influence a decision. Likewise, elected
officials that insist on micro -managing an entire
city or county in the weekly board meeting work
against a jurisdiction's efforts to address the big -
picture issues and virtually guarantee that it will
remain bogged down in minutia.
Public Information and Communication:
Our survey results also suggest that important
issues are more likely to receive the attention
they deserve in jurisdictions that have a strong
commitment to public information and commu-
nication. Many of our survey respondents told us
that there is a growing acceptance of funding
public information efforts and an interest in
exploring the communication and interaction
opportunities presented by advances in technol-
ogy. They also stressed the fact that local gov-
ernments must stick to public information and
avoid public relations campaigns. The public offi-
cials we interviewed and those that participated
in the focus -groups believe their public informa-
tion efforts are key to getting and keeping the
right issues on the public agenda.
Setting Priorities: As we listened to our sur-
vey participants talk about their jurisdictions and
the issues on their agendas, the idea of a formal
goal or priority setting process continually sur-
faced. While it came under numerous labels, the
basic idea seems to be a valuable exercise for
many Twin Cities communities. Both elected and
appointed officials report that having previously
agreed upon priorities or goals makes meetings
more productive and focused. Often conducted
after the election of new members to a board or
council, efforts to reach an early consensus about
how business will be conducted can help avoid
problems down the road.
Areas for Further Research
The topics explored by this project are both
large and complex, and at its conclusion many
questions remain to be answered. While the
results of this survey provide valuable insights
into what is on the public agenda, they do con-
tradict the results of our earlier round of inter-
views. In reality, no single survey can fully answer
these questions. Therefore, more research is
needed to better understand the relationship
between citizen concerns, official agendas, and
jurisdictional needs.
The local office holders we interviewed also
identified the need for additional research into
topics that impact the way they do business and
function as public leaders. These include the
open -meeting law, the salary cap for public offi-
cials, and cable television broadcasts of public
meetings, all areas that tend to go unnoticed by
the general public.
The Open -Meeting Law: Numerous local
officials expressed frustration with the open -
meeting law and its anti -cohesive impact We
heard that the law often doesn't allow the mem-
bers of a city council, county board, or school
board to interact in the settings they find most
conducive to their work. It does not allow time
for the group to build relationships, but instead
fosters divisiveness.
First enacted in 1957, the purpose and the spirit
of the open meeting law remain important
However, it is clearly time for a review. Are the
best policies produced by a system that forces
colleagues to air their disputes and settle griev-
ances in a room full of people and television cam-
eras? Does the current law give us accountabili-
ty and openness at the expense of good policy?
On the other hand, do we want to go back to an
era when decisions were made behind closed
doors? What tradeoffs are we willing to make?
These questions deserve serious consideration.
Salary Cap for Public Officials: The state of
Minnesota has a salary cap for almost all public
5
employees. In addition to the cap imposed by
law, public pressure to cut costs and stereotypes
about overpaid bureaucrats also work to keep
salaries low for many government jobs. This
leads to the question "are we being penny-wise
and pound-foolish?"
The public officials who participated in our focus -
group sessions expressed growing frustration
with the situation. There were numerous stories
of losing highly -valued employees to jobs in the
private sector that paid twice as much. For the
region's school districts the problem is not losing
superintendents to the private sector, but to
other states. This suggests that this not just a
public -sector problem, but more specifically a
Minnesota problem.
While anecdotal evidence is never a good basis
for public policy, it does suggest the need for
more in-depth analysis. Are significant numbers
of people leaving public sector jobs for opportu-
nities in the private sector? Is money the reason?
Are we losing committed public servants to
other states? Are public sector employers having
more difficulty attracting and retaining employees
than private -sector employers?
Our survey findings stress the important role
that staff play in maintaining the balance between
the urgent and the important A review and pos-
sibly revisions of the salary cap for public
employees would be an important step in helping
local governments fill these important positions
with the best possible people.
Cable Television Broadcasts of Meetings:
This issue was raised by several local officials
during the one-on-one interviews and again dur-
ing the focus group sessions. Some officials felt
that the TV cameras were turning their meetings
into more of a show than a meeting. They believe
the cameras make some officials reluctant to take
a firm stand, while causing others to take advan-
tage of the opportunity for grandstanding. Other
officials believe TV coverage gives citizens an easy
way out by allowing them to watch from home
instead of having to come to the meeting and
participate. On the other hand, many public offi-
cials were satisfied with the fact that some peo-
ple who otherwise would not follow local gov-
ernment at all, are at least watching the meetings
on television. A few officials admitted to watch-
ing the television coverage themselves, saying
that it allows them to follow the meetings of the
parks board or the utilities commission without
giving up yet another night at home.
Clearly, more research needs to be done on this
medium's impact on the local policy process. Is
it making a lazy public even lazier or is it making
them somewhat more aware? Do cameras affect
elected official's behavior? For better or worse?
How many people actually watch these broad-
casts? Who watches them?
Conclusion
While we were struck by the paradoxical nature
of the survey results, participants in two focus
group sessions told us that they do in fact reflect
reality. Regardless ' of what we heard earlier,
these local officials are generally pleased with
both the amount of time spent on important
problems and the productivity of their meetings.
Furthermore they are confident that they have
the right issues on their agendas, and conscious
of both the conditions necessary for serious pol-
icy work and the need for more research in par-
ticular areas.
In the end, the obvious conclusion is that leader-
ship is full of paradoxes, and that one of the many
challenges of leadership in the public sector is
learning to accept these paradoxes.
6
Appendix I. What's on the Public Agenda? - Survey Results
Q. What is the most important problem facing your jurisdiction?
A. City Officials - Development/redevelopment
Supplying services
County Officials - Supplying services
School Officials - Community relations
Lack of adequate funding
The 26 city officials we interviewed identified numerous different problems. Development and rede-
velopment of commercial districts and residential neighborhoods was the most common problem.
The second most common problem facing cities was supplying the services demanded with the taxes
people are willing to pay. We also heard concerns about supplying services in a fair and reasonable
manner, and frustration about which level of government should be responsible for a particular ser-
vice. The limited number of county officials we interviewed failed to produce any overwhelming con-
sensus, but they shared the problem of supplying the services demanded with the tax revenue avail-
able.
The responses received from school officials were somewhat more surprising. Only two school dis-
trict officials listed student achievement as the most important problem facing their jurisdiction.
Instead, the group of school officials saw community relations and financial issues as much greater
problems. Included under the heading of community relations were issues such as public perceptions,
expectations, and support for public schools.
The survey respondents were also asked about the second and third most important problems facing
their jurisdictions, and many of the answers were similar to those above.What one jurisdiction listed
as their most important problem, several other jurisdictions were likely to list as among their top
three. Housing, aging infrastructure, managing growth, and redevelopment were some of the common
responses from city officials. Community relations, school funding and student achievement were fre-
quently listed by school officials. Implementation of welfare reform was listed by multiple county offi-
cials.
Q. How much time do you personally spend on the number one problem
in any given week?
A. 14% Very little time (0-2 hours a week)
45% A small amount of time (3 - 8 hours a week)
29% A significant amount of time (9-20 hours a week)
10% A majority of time (21 or more hours a week)
7
Q. When in official public meetings, how much time is spent by the full board
and various committees in discussing and attempting to solve or rectify
the jurisdiction's number one problem?
A. 14% Very little time (< 5% of available meeting time)
41 % A small amount of time (5 - 20% of available meeting time)
33% A significant amount of time (20-50%)
10% A majority of time (over 50%)
Q. In your opinion is there adequate time dedicated by the council/board in
public meetings to address this problem?
A. 69% Yes
4% No, too much time
24% No, not enough time
When combined, the responses to these three questions strike us as particularly interesting. While 59 per-
cent of respondents report that they personally spend either "very little" or only "a small amount" of time on
the number one problem facing their jurisdiction and 55 percent report that their full group spends either
very little" or "a small -amount" of time on it, a startling 69 percent of respondents believe this is adequate.
The time allocation is similar for the second and third most important problems. In this case, 57 percent said
that they personally and 61 percent said that their full group spends either "very little" or a "small amount"
of time on these issues, and 55 percent believe this is adequate.
Elected officials were slightly more likely to say that enough time was being spent on the most important prob-
lem. Of the officials we interviewed, 56 percent of elected officials compared to 44 percent of appointed offi-
cials said adequate time was being devoted to the jurisdiction's number one problem.
Q. How do you know what the most important problem is? On what do you
base your opinion? (multiple responses were accepted)
A. 61 % Constituent contact
51 % Discussion/contact with other public officials
45% Staff reports (written and verbal)
23% Media (newspapers,TV or radio news, etc.)
55% Other
Almost all of our interviewees said their assessment of what issues are the most important was based on a
combination of sources. While the media is often criticized for having too much influence on policy makers,
in this survey it was the least often cited source. Meanwhile, a majority of our respondents said their assess-
ments were based, at least in part, on contact with constituents.
8
Given the fact that these are local officials, it seems quite plausible that constituent contact outweighs
the media's influence. The major media outlets in the Twin Cities give only limited coverage to the
issues before suburban city councils, county boards, and schools boards, while these local officials
reside full-time in the communities that they serve and therefore have numerous opportunities for
interaction with their constituents.
Q. Do you believe the public — your constituents — have the "right"
issues on their agenda?
A. 14% Yes, all of the time
59% More often than not
20% Often not
4% No, rarely
Q. Does the "official" agenda of public board/council meetings reflect the
concerns of constituents?
A. 45% Yes, very closely
49% Yes, to a degree
4% No
As these statistics demonstrate, the public officials we interviewed do not see a substantial "discon-
nect" between their agendas and the concerns of their constituents. An overwhelming 94 percent
report at least some degree of a match between the two.
The responses from elected and appointed officials were quite different, though. Elected officials were
much more likely to say that official agendas reflect constituent concerns "very closely." Seventy-nine
percent of elected city officials said the official agendas of public meetings matched constituent con-
cerns very closely, but only 25 percent of appointed city officials agreed. Similarly, 56 percent of elect-
ed school officials said their agendas reflect constituent concerns very closely, while only I I percent
of appointed school officials agreed.
What mismatch they did see was credited to the fact that some agenda items are internal business
such as hiring and contracts that are of little interest to the average citizen. One respondent told us,
The only mismatch is a matter of time, not subject — public deliberation is a lengthy process," while
another said,"Constituent contact tends to be very specific — it may relate to the larger picture but
be more confined or narrow in scope — their question is'how does this effect me?"'
Q. jurisdictional needs and the topical issues addressed at public board /
council meetings are ...
A. 41 % Closely aligned
47% Generally aligned
12% Not very well aligned
0 Poorly aligned
9
This response seems to complete the chain, leading to a public agenda with the "right" issues on it.
Our survey respondents believe .their constituents have the "right" issues on their agendas, official
agendas reflect these constituent agendas, and therefore, public meetings are addressing the jurisdic-
tion's needs.
Q. In general, official public board/council meetings are...
A. 20% Extremely productive
59% Generally productive
18% Somewhat productive
0 Not productive
Survey respondents identified several keys to productive meetings and overall success as a local gov-
ernment. Productive meetings, they said, depend on both staff and officials doing their homework
and coming to meetings prepared. Other keys include having stakeholder involvement at all stages of
the process and having a previously agreed upon governance model, agenda setting process, or strict
schedule.
Q. What obstacles keep important issues off of the official agenda, or
relegate them to minor roles?
A. The survey identified several key obstacles that prevent important issues from getting on the
agenda. The number one obstacle was a lack of time, especially for part-time officials. Also listed as
obstacles were a lack of citizen engagement, political and personal agendas, entrenched modes of
operation, and cable television coverage of meetings. The perceived inability to solve a problem or the
lack of resources to do so were also given as reasons why important issues are not addressed.
Q. How would you like to spend your time as a public official differently?
A. The responses to this final question, more than any other, suggest that the urgent is in fact over-
shadowing the important in terms of the daily activities of these public officials. Both elected and
appointed officials at the city, county, and school district level said they would like to spend less time
on "the mundane details of running a city [county or school district]:' These included various public
meetings and events, phone calls, narrow citizen complaints, paperwork, overseeing office personnel,
and handling "politically motivated brush fires:'
The public officials we interviewed seemed desperate for more interaction with other jurisdictions
and opportunities to discuss issues at the metro level. Large numbers also reported needing more
time for planning and evaluation. Among appointed officials there seemed to be the feeling that they
are trapped in their offices and lack the time to make real connections with their communities and/or
schools. Elected officials were much less likely to report this and more often felt that appearances in
the community were consuming too much time.
IM
Appendix II: Participants
What's on the Public Agenda?" was co-chaired by Peter Hutchinson and Joan Anderson Growe,
with the assistance of steering committee members Sally Evert, Marie Grimm, Jean Harris, Carl
Holmstrom,Tom Johnson, and Jim Rickabaugh.
The Citizens League greatly appreciates the time and input of the following public officials who agreed
to be interviewed for this project
Bob Benke Kevin Edberg
Mayor, New Brighton School Board Chair,
White Bear Lake
Michael Bisanz
Mayor,West St Paul Tom Egan
Mayor, Eagan
Ted Blaesing
Superintendent, Matt Fulton
White Bear Lake City Administrator,
New Brighton
Thomas Bollin
Superintendent, Roger Giroux
Robbinsdale Superintendent,
Anoka -Hennepin
Dan Bostrom
City Council President, Bill Green
St Paul School Board Chair,
Minneapolis
Jon Brekke
Mayor, Shakopee Gary Hagstrom
School Board Chair, Eagan -
Robert Burlingame Mendota Heights -West St Paul
Mayor, Maple Grove
Tom Hedges
Charles Cheesebrough City Administrator,
School Board Chair, Eagan
Centennial District 12
Daniel Jett
Jackie Cherryhomes Superintendent,
City Council President, Minnetonka
Minneapolis
Randy Johnson
Jack Denzer Chair, Board of Commissioners,
Mayor, Cottage Grove Hennepin County
Jerry Dulgar Carol Johnson
City Manager, Crystal Superintendent, Minneapolis
Ben Kanninen Myra Peterson
Superintendent, Chair, Board of Commissioners,
Burnsville -Eagan -Savage Washington County
Elizabeth Kautz Mary Thornton Phillips
Mayor, Burnsville School Board Chair, St Paul
Stephen King James Prosser
City Administrator, City Manager, Richfield
Savage
George Rossbach
Martin Kirsch Mayor, Maplewood
Mayor, Richfield
Vicki Roy
Greg Konat School Board Chair,
City Manager, Burnsville -Eagan -Savage
Burnsville
Ryan Schroeder
Dianne Krogh City Administrator,
City Manager, Cottage Grove
West St Paul
James Schug
Al Madsen County Administrator,
City Administrator, Washington County
Maple Grove
Jeff Spartz
John McClellan County Administrator,
Superintendent, Hennepin County
Centennial District 12
Jerry Splinter
Michael McGuire City Manager, Coon Rapids
City Manager,
Maplewood Bill Thompson
Mayor, Coon Rapids
Peter Meintsma
Mayor, Crystal joy Tierney
Keith Moberg
Mayor, Plymouth
School Board Chair,
Robbinsdale Dave Unmacht
County Administrator,
Robert Monson Scott County
Superintendent, Eagan -
Mendota Heights -West St Paul Scott Wasiluk
School Board Chair, North St Paul -
Kathleen O'Brien Maplewood - Oakdale
City Coordinator,
Minneapolis Michael White
Jan Ostazeski
Superintendent, North St Paul -
School Board Chair, Maplewood - Oakdale
Columbia Heights
Note: The individuals listed above held the stated positions at the time they were interviewed.
12
Appendix III: Results of 1997 Interviews
About the Interviews
The Citizens League has embarked on a major project to look at the state of public leadership in the
Twin Cities today. The purposes of the project are to (1) define what public leadership is—and ought
to be—in terms that are meaningful in today's political and social climate; and (2) develop proposals for
tangible, practical steps the League and others could take to develop and support public leaders in
Minnesota and the Twin Cities.
As the first stage of the project, members of the Citizens League board interviewed 56 individuals who
have direct experience with the challenges of public leadership—as elected officials or appointed public
sector staff in federal, state and local government; or as leaders in business, education, the non-profit
sector, the media and community affairs. The League appreciates the gracious and thoughtful cooperation
of these public leaders.
Sharon Roe Anderson William Finney Chris Park
David Beal Brian Herron Tim Pawlenty
Stacy Becker Karen Himle Tim Penny
Peter Benner Peter Hutchinson Orville Pung
John Brandl Ron James Al Quie
Richard Braun Curt Johnson Shelly Regan
Dick Broeker Lani Kawamura James Rickabaugh
Larry Buegler A.M. (Sandy) Keith Dan Salomone
Gerald Christenson Kenneth Keller Lyall Schwarzkopf
Dan Cornejo Reatha Clark King James Solem
Kenneth Dayton Joel Kramer Tom Swain.
Charles Denny,Jr. Rick Krueger ImogeneTreichel
Gail Dorfman George Latimer Kathryn Tunheim
Steven Dornfeld Larry Laukka Bruce Vandal
David Doth Dan McElroy Winston Wallin
Dave Durenberger David Metzen Laura Wittstock
Judith Eaton David Morris DeDe Wolfson
Jon Elam Ted Mondale Lee Pao Xiong
Joe Errigo Rafael Ortega
While the conversations were broad -ranging, we focused on four major questions:
1. What are the most important public challenges that must be addressed in the Twin Cities?
2. What are some of the barriers that leaders encounter when trying to get something done today?
3. What are the main gaps in leadership?
4. What is the most important contribution the Citizens League could make to improve the quality of
public leadership on the top -priority community problems? If the Citizens League were to conduct a
study committee on a public leadership issue, what would be the most practical, tangible, useful focus
for such a study?
13
We assured our interview subjects that their comments would not be attributed to them directly. The
interviews were conducted by League board members, occasionally with the assistance of staff. This
summary, prepared using the written notes of volunteers and staff, represents our best effort to report
the individuals' comments. We have included quotations to give the reader a better sense of the tone
of the discussions; however, because the discussions were not tape-recorded and because some of these
conversations are recounted second-hand, these quotations should be considered approximate.
Substantive policy issues in dire need of good leadership
K-12 EDUCATION
Number of persons mentioning: 22
When asked "What are the most important public challenges that must be addressed in the Twin
Cities?;' the public leaders we interviewed overwhelmingly mentioned elementary and secondary edu-
cation. But while the interviewees agreed that K-12 education was a critical challenge, they had a wide
variety of views about what the problems were—or how to solve the problems.
Several leaders said the challenge was to improve the educational achievement of students who are
now failing, including African American students, whose test scores and dropout rates are worse than
their white peers. One person said schools must be preparing a work force capable of competing in a
high-tech, global economy, while another complained that the business community was being permitted
to set the education agenda: "Schools must create citizens, not just workers"
Several comments pointed to underlying tensions related to racial and geographic division. "Middle-
class whites will not send their children to public schools in Minneapolis and St. Paul," said one person.
Others said that"it does no good to blame the schools," while others noted that regardless of the real-
ity of inner-city schools, negative perceptions are feeding a flight to suburban or private schools.
The comments of our interview subjects reflect the highly symbolic role of public schooling. The
debates about how to improve K-12 education appear to have as much to do with the public's views
about civic life in general as about learning per se. "Busing has been a disaster," one person said.
Without the school as a focal point, the community breaks down. Schools are fundamental to com-
munity." Another person commented that"all the language in the debate about education is about par-
ents having the right to choose for their child. What's not talked about is responsibilities and rights of
citizenship, the societal obligation to ensure an adequate education for everyone:' Another said that"if
we have an `everyone on their own' ethic, we lose. How do we build a community purpose that includes
everyone?"
In response to our questions, two interviewees said point-blank: There is no consensus about what the
problems are or how education could or should be improved. Nor is there much of a consensus on
the fundamental question of what kids should know and be able to do.
RACE AND DIVERSITY
Number of persons mentioning: At least 15
At least 15 leaders listed the issues of race and diversity as critical issues needing public attention.
Others mentioned race and diversity matters in the context of other substantive issues. Again, how-
ever, there were a variety of views about what exactly the challenges are.
14
To some of our interviewees, the problem is a general inability or unwillingness of the predominantly
white Twin Cities community to accept and respect people of color. Because of our long history of rel-
ative homogeneity, the region isn't prepared for a diverse society. Racism is killing us, one person said.
The community has to "understand the consequences of insisting upon white privilege," said another.
Others talked about people's tendency to blame "those people" for ruining "our" Twin Cities. "People
in the suburbs have found a way out and think they are safe from the threats of poor and minority peo-
ple," another commented.
One of our interviewees observed that in the Twin Cities, the expectation is that people who come
here must become like those who are already here. People should be more open to newcomers, and
the community should think of itself as an evolving, changing place, the leader said. But another noted
in an aside that many city residents are "people without the roots to keep us behaving."
The community's attempts to deal with increasing diversity have created new problems, said one leader;
multiculturalism has itself become a barrier to dealing with education and other important problems.
Multiculturalism rejects the notion that people not of the place have anything to say about an issue,
and says it's not proper to question someone's values or opinions," the leader said. "The rule is that
each group is not to be judged by any other group. It's a pernicious, anti-intellectual notion" If per-
sonal anecdote becomes an acceptable form of dialogue, our ability to have a dialogue at all erodes, the
leader said, adding that "personal anecdote always trumps. It's not a valid form of persuasion:'
CRIME
Number of persons mentioning: I I
Crime was also on the minds of the leaders we talked with. But not just any crime; it was violent crime,
and violence perpetrated by youth, that seemed most troubling. "Kids are committing serious crimes
before age ten," said one person, who noted the recent increase in juvenile murder cases. Courts are
dealing primarily with youth, primarily young men, the individual said.
The reality of crime—and the fear of crime both are driving the abandonment and decay of inner-city
neighborhoods, we heard. "In areas where people won't go out at night, they're afraid of kids, not
adults," one person said.
The public and public leaders must examine the connection between crime, public safety and race, one
of our interviewees said. In Minnesota, about 220 women are incarcerated and 5,000 men (over half of
whom are minorities), the leader said. Another said that Minnesota may have a higher proportion of its
population of color incarcerated than any other state; 50 percent of the prison population are people
of color, compared with 8 percent of the general population, the person said.
Another leader suggested that a solution to youth crime will require attention to the "societal piece"—
such as providing more employment opportunity for low-income parents and more affordable child
care. Another commented that young people's perception of their economic opportunity is important;
society unravels" if people don't believe they have economic opportunity, this leader said.
15
FAMILY BREAKDOWN
Number of persons mentioning: 3.
At least three people mentioned "family structure and effectiveness" explicitly in their list of the pub-
lic's most pressing problems. The indicators of trouble include rising out -of -home placements, declin-
ing participation in parent -teacher conferences and PTA, said one interviewee. Another leader saidthatthe "first, second and third priorities" of public leaders should be "the way kids are brought up in
the inner city." (The speaker clarified that this includes a constellation of issues including family struc-
ture and dysfunction, values, child health and related concerns.) "We see the effects of this problem
in school failure, youth crime and so on," the leader said, but people have difficulty talking about the
problem. "There is no consensus that there is a problem, and no consensus about what to do;' the
leader said.
Others we interviewed mentioned family breakdown in conjunction with other policy concerns.
While talking about the problems of education, one person mentioned University of Minnesota pro-
fessor Sam Myers' recent study of student test score differences. Myers' findings were that"the things
that matter [to student achievement] are the things that families do—but we don't talk about that
because it isn't nice;' this person said.
Family dysfunction was also mentioned in connection with youth crime. Divorce and out -of -wedlock
births (the latter, higher in the core cities and among the minority population) contribute to crime
among young people, some respondents said. "We need better development of values in children
prior to the age where they're unsupervised$" one person said; "thirteen and fourteen -year old kids
end up baby-sitting younger kids, even before they have developed values to enable them to set a good
example."
URBAN SPRAWL/GROWTH MANAGEMENT/ INNER-CITY REDEVELOPMENT
Number of persons mentioning: 13
The Twin Cities should be more concerned about urban sprawl, according to 13 of the leaders we
talked with. But there wasn't as much agreement about whether the region is ready or willing to make
the tough choices to stem it
One leader suggested that"we need philosophical and political debates" on the question: "Should we
invest in the inner cities or continue to expand the suburbs?" But others observed that there has
been debate—it's just that there doesn't appear to be agreement about the answer. One leader said
that "there is a schizophrenia about the management of growth" While it makes more sense to do
compact development, this person said, "all the social pressures work against what makes sense."
Another reflected that "I'm not sure suburban areas are ready to accept the much higher density of
development the Metropolitan Council's plans suggest"
Others said that leaders simply have to be more forceful about insisting on the correct policies. "The
Met Council and each individual city needs to really address the hard choices ... we need to stop allow-
ing development on the fringes, we need to start to insist on higher density infill development,"
according to one interviewee.
A few suggested that some technical know-how will be needed in order to reverse sprawled devel-
opment patterns. The region will have to learn how to make better use of existing land and existing
16
infrastructure. "The public sector has a hard time doing mixed-use urban development on its own,
and so do private developers," one person said. This leader added that the Twin Cities region "should
be on the forefront of figuring out how to move the public-private relationship up a notch." That rela-
tionship may be hindered by ideological conflicts about whether the "free market" should be left to
shape the region's development, another person suggested.
Three other issues that are closely related to urban growth were also mentioned:
Segregation/economic polarization. At least eight people mentioned the Twin Cities region's
distinction as one of the most economically and racially segregated metro areas in the U.S., and the
growing disparities between central cities and suburbs. A few suggested that reversing the trend is a
matter of public education and persuasion: "people aren't aware of how segregated the metro area
is," said one, and another suggested that we have to "[get] real about what makes our community
vital:'
The spatial patterns are cause and effect of social division, we heard. Division and divisiveness are a
problem of political boundaries, social and economic classes, and racial division, one person said.
We've come to be more narrow in our attitudes about our community," said another, and "this is
feeding a have -have not economic system, a sense that other people's problems are irrelevant."
Housing. Five people mentioned housing issues, including the relationship between housing and
urban sprawl. The "affordability gap" remains, better links are needed between housing and jobs, and
the Metropolitan Council is not pushing suburban communities to set—or meet—more ambitious
goals for affordable housing, we heard. And leaders should be concerned about the availability of
enough senior housing to accommodate baby boomers, who will start retiring after 2010, one person
said.
Infrastructure. The region's physical infrastructure—and the demands placed on it by unfettered
urban growth—were mentioned by four people. One leader cautioned that "our region's infrastruc-
ture is neither complete nor ready to survive the next century. The state has itself spread so thin,
especially with regard to its physical plant, that it's not doing anything well:'
TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT
Number of persons mentioning. 14
Fourteen of the leaders we interviewed mentioned transportation and transit, often as an example of
what might be called a "pure leadership" challenge. Their view seems to be that the solutions to our
transportation problems are well-known, and the major impediment to implementing them is a lack
of leadership. (It should be noted that some of the people who said the region needs better transit
equated "mass transit" with "light rail transit.")
We're maintaining the roads with bubble gum, and starting to look like other states;' one person said.
Downtown Minneapolis is being cut off by lack of access—one reason for the departure of American
Express, according to another. Appropriate transit is crucial to the region's effort to help low-income
people become educated and move into good -paying jobs, another leader said.
Another person noted that since 1967 public leaders have debated whether the public sector should
shape the demand for infrastructure or expand to serve demand. Overall, in transportation, we're still
17
reacting to demand, this leader said. But what's needed, according to several of our interviewees, is
a balanced transportation system that reduces dependence on the single -occupant vehicle and the
demand for more highways. To do that, the state's "antiquated system for raising and distributing
transportation dollars," now embedded in the state constitution, will have to be overhauled.
What's stopping us? The majority of those who spoke about transportation said that it's an issue of
political will. Compromise is available on transportation and transit funding, they said. "This is an issue
that has to go to the leadership at the highest level;' said one person. Another was more pointed:
The Governor has to take this on and get a deal:'
EMPLOYMENT/WELFARE REFORM
Number of persons mentioning. 10
Minnesota has done a good job of putting together its design for welfare reform, but the continuing
devolution" of responsibility from the federal government to the state will produce chaos for some
time to come, according to several of our leaders. Devolution is producing a "crisis" that is "on every-
one's agenda," and "how we respond to this indicates how well we are able to deal with future pos-
sibilities" in general, we heard.
Welfare reform efforts have not addressed the hard issue of employment, several people said, and
there isn't an easy public -sector fix for jobs. The problem was variously described as one of finding
or creating jobs for people, on the one hand (that is, good -paying jobs that will support a family and
that offer some upward mobility); or helping people to become more capable of landing the jobs that
are there ("there is a disconnect between the jobs that are available and the skills people have ... we
need to improve people's skill level," said one person).
OTHER POLICY ISSUES MENTIONED
In addition to the broad policy issues described above, the list of policy challenges includes a few other
issues that were mentioned by four or fewer people. These issues are:
Economic development in a changing economy. Three people said the state and region must
focus on developing a sustainable economic position in a global economy.
Post -secondary education. Four people commented on post -secondary education issues. Three
expressed concern that the University of Minnesota has become less attractive over the past decade,
and that the perceived slippage is effecting the state as a whole. "We're in a knowledge- and infor-
mation -intensive world," one person said, adding that "the private sector is keeping us afloat in this
area." Public leaders must enunciate goals for the University and convince the "person on the street"
about the U's importance to the state, another person said. Another said that the state must reduce
the costly duplication and overlap in its higher education system, and direct more state resources to
students rather than institutions.
Health care. Three people warned that health care costs will soon be on the rise again. The mar-
ket did not fix health-care cost inflation, one person said. The Twin Cities region now has a health-
care market controlled by four or five major systems, but "no one is willing to deal with anti-trust in
health:' Minnesota also needs to address the problems associated with an aging population, the state's
heavy dependence on institutional care and the unrealistic expectations of the middle class, said
another interviewee.
18
The problems with leadership today
We asked our collection of public leaders to reflect on the "state of the art' of public leadership
today. What are some of the barriers that leaders encounter when trying to get something done
today? What are the main gaps in leadership?
The following paragraphs summarize the themes we heard in the responses. Passages in italics are
approximate quotations.
THE CREATION AND MANIPULATION OF PUBLIC OPINION
How the public comes to know about an issue, and the terms in which issues are framed, have a pow-
erful impact on the public's ability to solve problems. Too often, the discussion of issues is superficial
and public opinion is manipulated to serve narrow interests.
Public leaders are depending too much on public opinion polling. Polling is used to identi-
fy the public's concerns, then targeted mailings and push-pull marketing are used to define the issuesinpalatabletermsandmobilizenarrowconstituencies.The process may identify issues well. But while
poll -driven politics can buy an election, it doesn't buy leadership.
The way in which we cobble together majorities, by targeting messages with mailings and phoning to
various interest groups, means we've only managed to pull together several separate interest group
messages—we haven't united people around one over -arching message.
The way policy ideas are packaged and sold tends to polarize and trivialize debate.
People who understand the mass media—particularly organized interest groups—can manipulate the
media to appear as if they are leading, even though they have no real solutions to any problems. Far
too many issues get polarized immediately as a result of media hysteria generated by interest groups.
Can we expect any more of the leaders than we expect of the public? Only a rare leader will
educate the public. How do you educate a public that doesn't want to be educated? How do you
get from pandering to leading?
There is no market for taking on the big issues. People do not feel challenged to deliver on the big
issues, so they're dealing with petty stuff You have to create the market [for any idea] now ...by hiring
PR firms. You have to be able to "bumper sticker" an issue to make it fly. All your work can go down
the drain when the opposition hires a hired gun with access and shoots you down. It is hard to
articulate an idea, but you can beat an idea down with one word.
The media are thwarting public-spirited discussion. The way journalism has been run has
degraded communities. Journalists talk about the public's "right to know" but the media's judgment
about what's important to know about is poor. Coverage of serious policy questions has declined,
while the emphasis on crime, sports, lifestyle and popular culture has increased. There is less public
education, discussion and consensus building about important issues such as transportation that peo-
ple ought to know about The superficial way issues are treated gives citizens the impression that they
citizens) know and understand the issues, even when they don't—and that leads citizens to dispar-
age people who have real expertise. And the media's disregard for privacy and civility is scaring tal-
ented people away from public leadership.
19
If the Legislature had to reenact the 1967 metro sewer act or the 1971 fiscal disparities act, would
the news media even cover these issues?
There are no ethics now, a person's kid is even a news item. It's sickening and it may be one of the
reasons creative people from the private sector don't contribute to the public solution.
No one wants to subject themselves to the negative, shallow, persistent, pathological desire of the
media to find fault It's vicious.
Special interest groups not only exert control over decision making through their finan-
cial clout, they play a critical role in shaping public opinion. The proliferation of interest
groups is, in part, an outgrowth of the expansion of government's role. Over several decades of strong
economic growth,Americans chose to insert government into areas it had never been. And once gov-
ernment is in, interest groups crop up to protect and defend their interests. Powerful groups that
know how to use the media can succeed in defining problems in terms that polarize and block con-
structive solutions.
The whole purpose ofjoining such a group is to be pure. You lose membership if you're too
pragmatic, so there's no incentive to come together. Compromise is defeat.
UNDERSTANDING WHAT GOVERNMENT DOES—AND HOW
Citizens, and sometimes elected officials, don't know who does what in government.
Today's schools are not providing basic civics education. The public needs a"government 101" course.
The public's understanding of economics is also pretty paltry, and the lack of understanding dooms
attempts to develop more rational taxing and pricing policies for public services.
The public doesn't seem to be sure what government's role should be. The public needs a
discussion about the appropriate role of government—not just about what government shouldn't be
doing, but about what government could or should do.
For 50 years, the political debate has been over which large entity suited your needs the best—big
government or big business. The core of the DFL was the New Deal delivery system; its delegates
pledged allegiance to the machine. For Republicans, the core was the social conservative activists. The
concept of big government and big corporations taking care of you is no longer a fashionable idea.
What is the new social compact?
The Citizens League should] engage the various players in understanding the ability of public
decisions to influence private decisions. What are the limits of this ability? Public decisions can
be made without understanding that they cannot control private decisions. The legislature can
try to control a business, but the business can go elsewhere. For many companies, it doesn't matter
much where they are located.
There isn't much rationality to the division of government responsibilities at various lev-
els—federal, state, city, school board. It's up to leaders to make some sense about whether govern-
ment belongs in various activities, and if so, at what level of intervention.
FT
That problem is particularly thorny when it comes to metropolitan issues, because none of our cur-
rent governmental structures—municipalities, counties, states—may be appropriate for dealing with
regional concerns that spill over 13 counties and the Minnesota -Wisconsin border. Leaders should be
thinking "outside the box" about whether entirely new structures are needed for the governance of
regions.
We need to get under control. What are state issues, what are metro issues, what are local issues?
It's idiotic for the City of St Paul to build a hockey arena for a state team.
Where is it written that the United States will always have 50 states? Maybe we should define the
20 or so counties around Minneapolis and St Paul as a state .... Our Constitutional form of government
worked well for 200 years, but is the structure we have today suited to our problems? We tend to
think short term; we have to think about how we'll solve our problems over the next 200 to 300 years.
We have to think differently.
Public officials often don't understand what their responsibilities are. New legislators don't
necessarily understand the legislative process. Members of school boards, city councils and appoint-
ed commissions may not know what the appropriate role of their entity is. Political leaders need an
education in the basics—legislative process, strategic planning, board of director training, fiduciary
responsibilities. Boards and commissions such as the Board of Regents should examine and clarify
what they are there .to do—and define the expectations for their candidates accordingly.
The Board of Regents, city councils and others can't get good people to run because it takes too much
time and there's no reward in it
Nobody wants to steer. Everybody wants to row and have their hands on the details.
1 don't know how to train leaders not to micro -manage. [In my experience serving on a school board]
the school board members didn't understand the big problems so they spent lots of time on the Ittle
problems.
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN GOVERNMENT
Many of the policies that were designed to open up government to public participation
have become a barrier to good leadership. The plethora of federal and state regulations stipu-
lating public involvement and input have mostly been to the benefit of those with narrow interests.
It takes much more time to get anything done—and the longer the process becomes, the more time
opponents have to organize the troops and manipulate public opinion.
The constant presence of the press and public has also contributed to a decline in basic courtesy in
meetings, as officials think of their meetings as theater and feel free to insult one another publicly.
The Open Meeting Law means you can never float an idea or have a discussion. It forces leaders to
act stupidly and the public to become cynical.
By opening up participation more, by increasing the openness and access to lots of information, we've
made the system complicated. We've created lots of points of access that mostly benefit lobbyists.
We've facilitated conflict. We're haggling over minutiae, picking small fights and declaring winners
and losers, rather than seeing the policy context We have to figure out a way to negotiate and
accommodate with some privacy.
21
At some point, you've got to be able to close the door, work things out and cut a deal.
Minnesotans have an egalitarian and populist tradition that causes them to view leader-
ship with suspicion. We are more concerned about "fairness" than about ability and merit, are
more oriented to accountability for process than for outcomes. The tendency here is to overempha-
size grass roots public involvement at the expense of knowledge and leadership.
Minnesotans also strive for consensus, even at the cost of real debate. While the tradition of civility
is generally a good thing for public life, the assumption that consensus is the best way may prevent us
from having harder debates and engaging in constructive disagreement And viewing consensus as a
pre -requisite for action means that sometimes action never happens.
There is very little room for leadership here. The populist expectation views leadership as antithetical.
The Minnesota notion is that if you allow status, others are in danger. We are not willing to acknow-
ledge back ground and expertise, or positional power.
Minnesotans are willing to accept mediocrity as long as the process is fair.
the model of consensus is that we all come together to discuss problems. It's sitting around talking
and talking We don't think of consensus as innovation that succeeds, builds credibility and produces
momentum. Get the key people, start with an idea, get reactions, and do something—be action -oriented.
Minnesota may be too gross -roots oriented. How do you ever reconcile differences at that level?
Grassroots politics is politics of passio"eople who are willing to pay the price for the cause. It
creates polarization and makes it hard to compromise.
sometimes there is manure below the grass roots.
THE LEADERSHIP CRISIS IN GOVERNMENT
Politician" has become a professional career path, and that is diminishing the quality of
policy-making. The members of the legislature are mostly farmers, lawyers (many of whom have
never practiced law), public employees and professional legislators who want to be elected politicians
their whole life. A large number have conflicts of interest; for instance, they make their living teach-
ing or farming while setting education or agricultural policy as legislators.
Professional politicians are unwilling to take risks because there is too much to lose in not getting re-
elected. Decisions are calculated to sustain that career path, and often that means caving in to pres-
sure groups.
It's important to get better people in politics who want to make a difference but who aren't linked to
special interests and who don't want to make a career out of politics. But talented people in the pri-
vate sector no longer view the legislature as a place to exercise leadership. The "job" doesn't pay well
and unless one is an executive or has great job flexibility, there is no way to devote the time to serve
in office.
Who is willing to take the risks to serve in elective office? The ambitious. Personal ambition is one
of the main qualities of elected officials. The system rewards people who are willing to do anything to
get elected or get a bill passed. Winning an election is self -ratification.
22
The result of the trend is that the quality of the Legislature has declined and issues have become more
politicized. There has been a decline in support for regional and statewide solutions to issues,
increased parochialism, and a lack of vision.
There are not enough risk takers. We need more courage. We need more people who are willing to
not be re-elected. Leadership is more than everyone liking you.
You shouldn't be a politician your whole life. We need to help people outside government to run for
off+ce...Elected officials think they must keep their jobs. We have to persuade them that there is life
after elective office.
The Citizens League should scare people: unless we improve the talent pool, we are on a downward
slide. We need to be scared.
Chief executives"—the governor and mayor—have special leadership obligations, but
Minnesota doesn't permit much authority in these offices. For example, the governor does
not have a significant role in selecting regents for the University; the weak -mayor system in
Minneapolis is a problem.
To get real solutions to public problems], the leadership has to come from the senior elected official,
the executive—whether governor or mayor. They're the ones with the bully pulpit the relationship with
the electorate, the capacity to make things happen. When you're elected mayor or governor, you're
elected to be a leader. You have more latitude among voters, more opportunity to persuade.
The state is evolving from an agrarian community to a megalopolis, but rural interests
still dominate the legislature. Minnesota policy-making continues to be driven by rural concerns.
The Legislature by political nature is driven toward geographical balance, which contributes to the ten-
dency to spread public resources too thin on infrastructure and many other matters.
There has always been partisanship, but party positions have become more extreme and
fragmented internally, and the willingness to work across party lines seems to have erod-
ed. As the number of people who go to the caucuses and conventions has declined, endorsed can-
didates have ceased to represent the views of the community. The politicizing of local offices (school
board, city council, county board) has been a disaster.
In politics there is polarization of the extreme. To get endorsed, you need to present yourself in a way
that may not be in line with mainstream voters. In the "golden era" of the 1960s [with Durenberger,
Elmer Andersen], things were different Now party leaders have been replaced by people with strong
agendas. Compromise is seen as disloyalty to the party.
If I had my way we'd go back to a non-partisan legislature. Partisanship polarizes. If things were less
partisan, more people would be attracted to serving in office.
The issue of public -sector unions has to get "on the table:'
The results of the decision to allow public employees to unionize has been atrocious.
I don't see unions responding to the change to a service economy, or to new waves of immigrants. The
issue of public education and the unions has to get on the table. -..The problem with unions is going to
be worked out historically, however. No legislative attempt is likely to solve the problem.
23
In the past, elected officials and appointees worked together, but now they often work at
cross purposes or feel little common commitment. The demeaning process elected officials
go through affects staff behavior. Staff assume that "this too shall pass" and learn to value safety over
performance.
Minnesota needs to create more of a sense of policy leadership among public sector employees. The
public should be concerned about the competence of leadership at all levels of government. Too many
department heads have never been outside of government—but recruiting talented people from the
private sector is hindered by low compensation.
Senior appointed officials can't be leaders. They're bag carriers. These are terrible jobs. They have to
spend all their time figuring out what the legislature wants.
Bureaucrats are embedded in the past They're not open to new ideas. The fear of change requires a
total turnover of top staff and elected officials to get anything done.
THE LEADERSHIP GAP IN THE CIVIC AND BUSINESS SECTORS
Corporations and businesses are considerably less involved in the hard work of public pol-
icy than they once were. In the past, corporate leaders were very involved in civic matters. Now
business leaders are unable or unwilling to take on public leadership challenges. The global pressure
of business is consuming time. There is a continuing turnover of company leadership; most senior
executives are from outside the Twin Cities and from a different corporate culture that doesn't value
civic involvement as much.
Employers' expectations of civic and community involvement have diminished. Business people used
to be given the message—spoken or unspoken that they were to be involved with the Citizens
League and other groups when they reached a certain position and pay range. Now people wait to
be asked. And what many businesses view as "public involvement" has become more involved with
philanthropy and public relations events than with key public issues.
I don't sense anymore the tie between the elected and appointed officials, jicials, and the privatesector
leaders. It seems like the private sector sits back, and doesn't lean on the public officials. 1 don't
feel large companies are including public problems in their priorities for time and resources.
Less and less of [major Twin Cities companies) business is right here in the Twin Cities. The CEOs of
these companies live on airplanes. We can't change those conditions. We have to find another way to
involve the corporate community that doesn't depend primarily upon the use of the CEO's time.
Now a CEO has to be in 55 countries in 30 days. They don't have the time to spend on civic affairs.
But they need to build a cadre of deputies that the political leadership can go to. It's now at too low
a level We have to find a substitute for the old days when a handful of people got together to get the
job done.
Public officialsjicials have to take the initiative to open the door to private -sector involvement The vast
majority of pubic officials are myopic. How can we encourage them to think big and take risks—even if it
means possibly offending some people? Private -sector guys won't waste their time with something that will
fail in the marketplace. The. public sector should figure out how to tap profiteering as a motive that can serve
the pubic good
24
Individuals are participating less in civic affairs. People are "cocooning:' Membership in
Rotary, Jaycees and similar groups is declining and isolationism is evident in everything from pop psy-
chology to urban policy. Citizenship is construed as protecting our turf.
We've lost the sense of how we come together to solve problems. 1 see lots of passion and new ideas.
1 see less understanding of how to really solve problems. It all degenerates into advocacy and finger
pointing—"they need to be accountable to me."
Some problems that seem intractable seem less so if you get up close. Somebody needs to say to
people: Stop complaining and get involved.
The general disengagement of citizens, the inability to trust leaders (or anybody) is largely the result
of the maturing of the U.S. from an immigrant, rural society, through the remarkable economic boost
after World War 11. We're now having to deal with reality.
CONTEMPORARY CULTURE
A leader depends on a shared set of values, but in today's society there is little agree-
ment about core values. The solution to many of the region's most important problems isn't a
governmental solution. Improving education, for instance, depends on improving the behavior of par-
ents, families, communities—in short, on improving the culture. But it is difficult today to address
these value and culture concerns. The baby boom generation embraces an ethic of "do your own
thing:' The multiculturalist perspective holds that it's not proper to question someone's values or
opinions, that each value or opinion is to be accepted as equally desirable. Some leaders are worried
about where people are going and don't want to lead people where they want to go.
A lot of the things that don't work in communities today are the result of transient behavior of
various kinds. In business, in personal life, in communities—we're living in a culture where staying
doesn't count for much. You're supposed to get up and move on. People think there's actually
something wrong with you if you plan to stay. People are no longer prepared to spend 10 years doing
things. It is widely accepted that leaders today will re-engineer things, then move on to something else,
they aren't actually expected to stick around and be part of the enterprise.
We need to] develop a simple set of middle-class values to impart to young people, from when they're
small children up to age 30. Baby boomers have inculcated their kids with a set of values—and have
become teachers and ministers and are passing those same values on to other people's kids, too. The
60s values were to free up everybody to do whatever they want to do, without many responsibilities.
The prevailing view is "who cares what happens to anybody else?" Today there isn't a solid core of.
values, so pressure groups have sprung up to promote their own idea of values. The result is frag-
mentation. ragmentation. A lot of people think you shouldn't teach values at all. [Question: Can you give examples
of what you consider these core middle-class values? Answer. Responsibility, honesty, trustworthiness,
respectfulness.]
The [question for the Citizens League is]: What is the job of a leader when the culture is the problem?
25
AVISION FORTHE STATE AND REGION
There is no compelling vision of where theTwin Cities region should be heading. Nobody
is dealing with the big picture. We need to build a new vision—three or four goals for the state and
region, plus major systems to help us achieve them.
We [in the Twin Cities region] have lost our lust to be excellent
Minnesota is heading rudderless into the Brave New World.
There is little sense that the individual communities of theTwin Cities metropolitan area
add up to a regional community. The region has become balkanized and citizens and leaders alike
have become more parochial. We don't have effective regional governance mechanisms to address the
problems we share as an entire community. Both our thinking and our systems must change from
local and parochial to regional. But because the region hasn't faced a crisis, or suffered in the way oth-
ers have, there have been few unifying moments as a region.
There isn't much sense of regional citizenship, of common destiny. To most people, bad outcomes in
Minneapolis don't mean we should do something about the problem—it means nobody in their right
mind would live in Minneapolis.
Fixing [problems such as urban sprawl] in today's paradigm would require an amazing degree of
altruism on the part of individuals.
FINDING, DEVELOPING AND SUPPORTING LEADERS
People are afraid to lead today because of the brickbats. A puritanical and hypocritical pub-
lic is asking for a standard of behavior in its leaders that it doesn't expect in itself. And the process
of policy-making today is one that beats down rather than builds up.
The process by which you become an elected policy maker turns off many serious people. The fund-
raising groveling, deals cut and covered up, the loss of privacy and leisure time, the insularity and
artificiality, the ego boosts provided by deferential supplicants. It's demanding. It's demeaning. Over
time, you forget why you got into it in the first place.
Some people would never consider public leadership because they could not take the personal attack.
Women particularly. Women didn't learn how to try to kill your opponent, then go out for beer
afterwards—that it's just part of the game. Women get hurt in the battle.
Leadership today is often equated with passion about a specific issue of immediate self-
interest. Some people think of themselves as leaders if they see a particular thing they're willing to
work on for a short period until the immediate problem is solved or the demand is met—even though
the result of their effort might not contribute to the public good. There aren't enough statesper-
sons—people willing to ask mission and purpose questions that aren't self-interested.
People don't know how to be leaders anymore. It takes a strong sense of responsibility, the ability to
anticipate and understand things and make judgments, the skill to articulate an issue so people can
understand why it's important And you have to know how to plan and actually do things. People
won't take time to be leaders today unless something affects them personally.
The practice of leadership requires disciplined self-examination, thought and analysis. To
be a visionary leader, a person must examine what principles he is willing to work to exemplify, and
reflect on what it is that will mark his civic commitment Finding the time and space to reflect and
debate and exercise one's analytical skills is difficult. And thinking in the abstract isn't enough; leaders'
behavior has to reflect their principles.
Legislators face multiple role expectations: constituent service, policy leader, party leader, community
leader, family member, and professional [in their other career]. Constituents expect their represen-
tatives to know about every issue the legislature deals with. The time demands are extreme, especially
for those who do have careers outside the legislature. The time demands are a real obstacle to
reading books and thinking
If you are a leader, your task is to help find a beacon light..[Leadership requires] character and
integrity. There has to be congruence between what you say and how you live. The leader sets
the tone for the whole enterprise. Is each individual going to start changing his or her own life?
Without character and integrity, it's difficult for people to look at leaders with respect
The informal process of succession planning for the next generation of civic and govern-
ment leaders has broken down. The community used to know "who to call;' who the leaders
were. Those people are now in their 60s and 70s. It's very unclear who the next generation of lead-
ers will be.
The baby boomers may be a lost generation of leadership. They aren't stepping up to the responsi-
bilities of community leadership, nor are they passing on values and expectations about public service
to their children.
The baby boom generation may be hopeless. Expecting wisdom to come out of this generotionZJ
worry. We're running out of time. Maybe [the Citizens League] should skip a generation—not give
up on them, but concentrate on bringing up the younger adults. There is hope for bringing them along.
People have to be recruited into leadership, and that isn't happening as it should. There must be a
more conscious effort to cultivate young adults as future leaders.
People have to experience the joy of leadership, of taking risks. There's some cultivation that has to
take place among the next generation. Volunteer leadership is a building block process. You are asked
to do some thing, you do it, have a success, and get asked again. How do we bring the 25- to 35 -
year olds into these issues?
Sometimes only one person is identifled as a leader [in a particular ethnic community], when more
may exist. Leaders in the white community, in positions of power, end up defining leaders in commu-
nities of color by how they identify those leaders. We need much more outreach effortfort to broaden the
leadership base in diverse communities.
Some people go into public leadership for the right reasons, others don't. Shouldn't we identify those
quietly behind the scenes who never ask for recognition—those who want to make a differencej'erence but
don't care if they get credit?
27