Cronyism and forms of government

One of the most common reasons I hear for opposition to Fort Smith changing its form of government to the mayor/council for is cronyism. I personally think this argument is limiting. Cronyism is available to any form of government including our administrator/director form.

Let’s start with the basics. Cronyism in this context is when a government official in the position of authority hires or appoints friends, family, or supporters to city jobs or awards lucrative contracts to these same people regardless of their qualifications to perform. Cronyism is apparently what incited the citizens of Fort Smith to adopt the administrator form of government 50 some odd years ago.

Cronyism is a subset of political corruption. For today’s discussion, political corruption isn’t meant to refer to criminal activity, although it is possible that some of the activities could be criminal. But let’s leave that distinction to legal minds. Political corruption is simply when public officials make decisions without regard for the public interest of those they govern. It is an intentional act, not a decision resulting from lack of information or poor judgment (ignorance and incompetence).

Illustration of this broader definition of political corruption might include situations where a director had an economic relationship with the city preventing him or her from challenging actions not in the public interest of a city administrator. It would include city officials who work to avoid transparency of their actions to the public to avoid having to deal with the questions and challenges from the “crazies” that object to anything and everything. (For that I can feel their pain, but transparency is a necessity of good government and for public discussion.)

Cronyism’s effect is when self-interest excludes the public’s interest by unethical individuals with authority to act on their self-interests. It is a people problem, not a structural problem. Any form of government is susceptible to Cronyism. So as a factor to decide whether we should keep or change our current form of government, the possibility of Cronyism infecting city government should carry little or no weight.

There are arguments in favor of the administrator form of government, many theoretically strong. But in practice, have these benefits been as beneficial as promised?

One argument is that the administrator form of government allows a professional manager to more effectively manage the city’s day to day operations without political interference. I would argue it only drives the politics underground, less obvious to the public view.

The administrator is theoretically a professional manager hired to act as Fort Smith’s chief executive officer or chief operation officer insuring more efficient and effective city operations. I may need a fact checker here, but I believe Fort Smith has fired more than one city administrator in Fort Smith’s 50 year history of our current form of government. Just as the mayor form of government was not perfect back in the 1960’s, neither has the administrator form of government proved to be without flaw.

Whether Fort Smith operates as a mayor/council form of government or keeps its current administrator/director form of government, there will be issues of unethical behavior, poor judgment, and the need from time to time to “fire” incompetent performance. That is the nature of any large organization of imperfect people.

The question is whether the mayor/council form of government allows us better control our future rather than our current form. Which form of government allows Fort Smith’s citizens a voice and provides our city an opportunity to thrive, not just survive. I lean toward the mayor/council form of government. If I’m wrong, convince me otherwise.

The debate is an argument about accountability. Accountability of our government leaders to Fort Smith’s residents. But holding government leaders accountable will only work if Fort Smith residents take responsibility for our own government and our city’s future. If we don’t care why should city leaders and city employees care?