Please note that at the bottom of this page I have included a draft proposal addressing this subject.

Why Lansing Already Operates Like It Has a City Manager, and Why That’s Good for Us

In Lansing, the debate between adopting a city manager versus a strong mayor form of governance is more than just a political discourse; it’s about efficiency, expertise, and historical precedence. As we delve into the intricacies of our local government structure, it becomes clear that Lansing’s operational dynamics lean more towards a city manager model, even if not in name.

Historical Context and the Evolution of Local Governance in Michigan

Michigan’s cities and villages, including Lansing, have a rich history of evolving governance structures. Since the early 1900s, with the enactment of the Home Rule City Act, Michigan municipalities have had the latitude to tailor their charters to meet local needs. This autonomy allowed cities to decide on their preferred form of governance, reflecting a balance between local control and state oversight​​​​.

The Case for a City Manager in Lansing

Lansing, embodying this historical tradition, operates in a way that already mirrors a city manager system. A city manager is typically a professionally trained and experienced individual responsible for the day-to-day operations of a city, appointed by the elected council. This model promotes efficiency and accountability, as the manager’s performance is directly linked to their professional expertise and results​​​​.

In contrast, a strong mayor system vests significant executive power in an elected official who may or may not have the administrative experience necessary to manage city operations effectively. This can lead to a situation where the elected mayor, recognizing their limitations, hires an administrative official to manage the city’s daily affairs, effectively operating like a city manager system.

Why Lansing’s Governance Resembles a City Manager Model

In Lansing, while we elect a mayor, the operational reality often sees the mayor relying heavily on appointed officials to manage the city’s complex bureaucratic structure. This necessity arises because running a city is more akin to managing a large, multifaceted organization than simply governing. The administrative demands require expertise in various domains, including finance, urban planning, public safety, and community development.

Our city’s governance, therefore, naturally gravitates towards a model where a skilled administrator, akin to a city manager, is essential to ensure efficient and effective management. This practice not only aligns with the broader trends in Michigan’s local governance but also reflects a pragmatic approach to meeting the city’s operational challenges​​​​.

Conclusion: Embracing a Formal City Manager Model

Considering Lansing’s current operational dynamics and the historical evolution of local governance in Michigan, it is time to formally recognize and embrace a city manager model. This transition would not be a radical change but rather an acknowledgment of the existing functional reality. It would ensure that Lansing’s administrative leadership is in the hands of individuals with the requisite skills and experience, thereby enhancing the efficiency, accountability, and responsiveness of our city government to the needs of its residents.

In conclusion, Lansing’s governance structure, in practice, already embodies the principles of a city manager model. Formalizing this structure would provide a clear, efficient, and professional approach to city management, ensuring that our local government is best equipped to meet the challenges of the 21st century.

**Proposal for Amendment to the Lansing City Charter: Establishment of a Hybrid Executive Structure with Enhanced Procedures for CAO Accountability**

**Subject:** Implementation of a Hybrid Executive Model and Enhanced Removal and Replacement Procedures for the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO)

**I. Introduction**

This proposal seeks to establish a hybrid executive governance model in the Lansing City Charter that combines the leadership of a strong mayor with the professional management of a Chief Administrative Officer (CAO). Additionally, it aims to define clear and fair procedures for the removal and replacement of the CAO, enhancing accountability and maintaining governance integrity.

**II. Background and Rationale**

Adopting a hybrid model enables effective city management by leveraging strong political leadership and professional administrative operations. Establishing transparent and equitable procedures for the potential removal and replacement of the CAO will ensure that this key position remains aligned with the city’s needs and governance standards.

**III. Proposed Governance Model**

**A. Roles and Responsibilities**

1. **The Mayor** will oversee setting policy agendas and represent the city, with veto powers over council decisions. The mayor also participates in the nomination of the CAO.

2. **The Chief Administrative Officer (CAO)** will manage day-to-day operations and implement council policies, ensuring professional public administration under the dual oversight of the mayor and the city council.

**B. Selection Process of the CAO**

1. **Nomination and Approval**: Initiated by the mayor and requiring a supermajority approval from the City Council, ensuring both executive initiative and legislative oversight.

**IV. Procedures for CAO Removal and Replacement**

1. **For Cause Termination**: Initiated by a formal investigation into potential misconduct or non-performance, followed by a council hearing and a decisive vote.

2. **At-Will Termination**: The CAO may be dismissed without cause, provided such action is in accordance with employment agreements and includes appropriate notice and severance.

3. **Performance Reviews**: Regular assessments of the CAO’s performance, potentially leading to termination if standards are not met.

4. **Mutual Agreement**: Negotiated departure terms beneficial to both the city and the CAO.

5. **Term Limits**: The CAO serves fixed terms, with reappointment contingent on satisfactory performance evaluations.

**V. Impact Assessment**

Implementing this hybrid model with clear removal and replacement procedures will:

– Enhance leadership effectiveness and administrative accountability.

– Foster transparency and fairness in managing the city’s top administrative officer.

– Support dynamic governance through regular oversight and performance-based tenure.

**VI. Conclusion**

This amendment to the Lansing City Charter is intended to strengthen governance through a balanced executive structure and robust accountability mechanisms for the CAO. These changes will ensure that city management remains effective, responsive, and aligned with the best interests of Lansing’s residents.