In my workshops over the years, I often illustrated this problem by referencing the parable of the pothole councillor. [This case is discussed in the Guide to Good Municipal Governance, now in its second edition with Municipal World, as is the “Ponds and Pit Bulls” case cited in my previous blog.] The parable case concerns Councillor Keen who promised to look after every problem brought to his attention – and is pleased with his efforts in this regard. Just the day before, a local citizen had phoned about a large pothole in front of his home. He said that the hole had been there for months, even though he had called the municipal office several times. Councillor Keen demanded that the road superintendent send a work crew to patch the hole that very afternoon. The citizen had been very pleased, and that made Keen feel good.
The term “pothole councillor” refers to an attitude of mind and an approach to duties on the part of a councillor. The issue does not have to be potholes. It can be any specific servicing issue on which there has been a public complaint. For some councillors, any such complaint must receive immediate attention. Toronto Mayor Rob Ford was known for following up personally on complaints or problems forwarded by residents. While no doubt pleasing to the individuals involved, this is hardly the best use of the time of a head of council, especially one presiding over a population of 2.5 million people.
I can’t help also noting that residents who feel that they should call a councillor when they have any problems may abuse this relationship. A good friend of mine was head of a municipality several decades back and was awakened by a phone call at 2 a.m. It was one of the folks in his municipality complaining about a barking dog. “But why are you calling me at this hour,” my friend said. “Well, if I can’t sleep, you shouldn’t be able to either,” was the response from the grumpy resident!