Jane McWilliams, LWV Observer 
The council met in an all day session to build mutual expectations and processes for their work together during the coming year. Northfield resident Hans Muessig, a consultant specializing in organizational effectiveness and change management, facilitated the discussion. Participating were Mayor-elect Mary Rossing; incumbent councilors Rhonda Pownell, Jon Denison, Jim Pokorney and Kris Vohs; Councilors-elect Erica Zweifel and Betsey Buckheit. Interim City Administrator Joel Walinski also participated. Participants introduced themselves, told about their hopes for the session and then broke into 2 groups to talk about and rank the issues they wanted to discuss today.
From the small group discussions, several themes emerged: the need to clarify the council’s decision-making process and the need to agree on the respective roles of the council, staff, boards and commissions and the public.
Muessig led the group in the formation of steps for making decisions. This was driven in part by the elements generated in the small groups and to a large degree from the experiences and views of seated city council members, Jim Pokorney and Kris Vohs. Information from professionals (staff) and from advisory groups, consideration of principles and policies (Comprehensive Plan, for instance), a timeline for decisions and an evaluation process were cited as necessary components of decision-making. Buckheit noted that while the council should work for agreement, split decisions may not always reflect failure of the process, but could be a reflection of community values. Buckheit, Pownell, Denison and Walinski using the results of this process will present a recommendation for the council’s decision-making process to the council for consideration at the council’s first meeting in February.
There was an extensive discussion about the best use of public input. Pokorney said he hears only from people who live 3 blocks from the problem at hand, and not the entire community. Zweifel announced she would hold quarterly meetings in various parts of the ward. Rossing reported that the staff is looking at redesigning the former mayor’s office into a space to meet with constituents. Zeifel, Pokorney and Vohs will present proposals for public engagement opportunities, such as ward meetings, and town meetings and will report to the council by the end of the month.
The appropriate use of advisory groups was of concern to the council. Rossing said she had sent a letter to all boards and commissions asking for their goals for the year so that the council can give them direction. Vohs stated he doesn’t think the boards and commissions are representative of the community. Denison added that this is a new era, that some people had formerly been afraid to apply and that the council must communicate that every application will be given equal weight – that new ideas are desired. Pownell and Buckheit will study the roles, make-up, staffing and schedules of these bodies and report to the council in early February. Changes under consideration are whether some groups might be eliminated, or meet less frequently. Rossing wondered whether the council would have the political will to make hard decisions on who is approved and which boards and commissions to keep. Muessig suggested that given the character of Northfield where there is high interest in civic affairs, the council think carefully how to take advantage of the communities’ desires. He said that if “you get this stuff right, all will go well: if the priorities are clear, most of the decisions will be pretty straight forward. The challenge is public engagement. Citizens are in some ways your customers. Don’t feel frustrated or overwhelmed.”
The council’s six-hour session was amicable and frank, and while Muessig facilitated the early brainstorming portion of the day, much of the later discussion was rather unstructured, touching on concern about the Capital Improvement Plan, how the Comprehensive Land Use Plan should drive decisions, and how to efficiently manage their meetings. Muessig applauded the group for their work and said he will summarize the evaluation forms he distributed, transcribe the sheets of notes they created, and offer some thoughts about the day and how to “operationalize” the results of the discussion. These will be distributed at Monday’s council meeting. It should be noted that there was a brand new copy of Robert’s Rules of Order at each council members’ place at the table. No reference was made to this handy tool.
5 Comments
Thanks, Jane. Always appreciate your timely and thorough summaries of protracted city council doings. It’s almost like being there!
Jane, excellent write up. Your report really gave us a flavor of what occurred.
Thank you, Jane, for attending this marathon event.
I am very concerned for the future of the Citizen Boards and Commissions, given some of this discussion, and the remarks heard from a couple of the councilors over the past year or so.
It seems to me that some councilors do not value this citizen work in the way they should. These groups would probably be glad to work on projects suggested by the council, but that is not their prime reason for existence. They are there to make use of their expertise and do in-depth work to better advise the council.
There has been a council attitude developing that they (B&Cs) are not autonomous; that they exist only to confirm the council. Well, then there is no reason for their existence if they are just a big group of rubber-stampers.
Some negative councilors have been competitive rather than appreciative, as if they, the councilors, are diminished by a thoughtful differing opinion from a Board.
I cannot balance a view which talks about ‘citizen input’ and ‘regulation or elimination of Boards and Commissions’ in virtually the same discussion.
These are a large body of citizen volunteers that exist to give depth to NF’s governance process.
The League will have to be strong to preserve the autonomy of these important citizen volunteers, if their role is threatened by unwarranted criticism.
Thank you for your comments, Margit, Marcia and Kiffi. I share your concern, Kiffi, about the implications of losing the kind of scrutiny boards and commission give city decisions. By necessity, the councilors are generalists, and depend on the professional advice of staff and the sometimes professional, but always focused analysis and advice the advisory groups can provide. While the council did form the group to study the advisory groups, they also talked about using local experts instead of hiring consultants for certain purposes!
While Pownell and Buckheit will do a thorough job of looking into the bylaws, including the role and responsibilities of each group, I hope the council will take time to consider carefully each before they make significant changes.
Do you think there is a role for the League in this matter?
Yes, Jane, I do think there is a role for the League in this matter.
I definitely feel, as I stated , that the Boards and Commissions are what give Northfield the POSSIBILITY of a very citizen involved and in-depth representative government.
If there are councilors who want to curtail that possibility, then I think the League should speak to that.
I felt for the last year and a half of the”troubles”, that League should be getting involved… Isn’t the best management practices of government our guiding mantra?
I think it was only the insecurity of not knowing how to help a situation gone that far off the track that kept League immobilized. Just my very personal opinion.
But League has a responsibility to fulfill its ‘charge’, and this time we should not let it get so far out of hand that it’s viewed as impossible to deal with.