1. Take the road repair leadership to task about the "drop-offs" at utility man-hole covers and meter covers left in the roadways after repaving,

2. Repair and maintenence of park facilities, specifically Glen Miller bridges and drinking fountain areas,

3. Real budget cuts where needed, ie; police manpower, reduction in the number of city parks,

4. Better traffic control at intersections, overhead signs in lieu of arrows painted on roadways(painted arrows dissappear when the first covers the arrow)

The Mayor's power is limited, but good leadership skills and good use of the Mayor's "bully pulpit" can get a lot of things done. If one wants to see a demonstration of how this can be done, just take a look at what strong Mayors has accomplished in Lafayette, IN. With strong Mayors, a sound tax base and personal drive, the city of Lafayette has become a very progressive city and a good example of "how to get it done". In 1975, Lafayette and Richmond were very close in population and tax base....Lafayette acquired many new industries and businesses while Richmond continued to lose the same. Has anyone analyzed why this happens? Where do we find the leadership to bring this city up and out of the depression it is in currently?

I too agree with Mr. Kemp that the access would create a problem that would erode your effectiveness. You can maintain your effective schedule and give access through organized appointment process (you set the standards your people give your time away with, so if you want to make sure that everyone has access you can do so) which allows you to control how much someone can abuse your time with bs. You can be very visibile and accessable in the various departments and to the public they serve by sitting in on department meetings, walking through the departments....giving both employees and citizens the opportunity to "bend your ear".

I, unfortunately, also agree somewhat with the concept that a Mayor is somewhat powerless. However, as has been demonstrated by Bart Peterson in Indianapolis, the Mayor has a very powerful pulpit from which to pronounce, cajole and encourage. It doesn't matter if a Mayor knows everything about how everything in the city works....that is what you surround yourself with competant advisors and department heads for. The Mayor is (or should be since that is not the case currently) a visible and accessible leader who cares about the community and has a vision about where they want to take their community. There are plenty of experts who can fill in the blanks and the details......a Mayor needs not know everything about IT to have a great, responsive, informative website to serve the citizens...there are lots of very good computer wizards available (such as Chris and his staff at Summersault) to make that happen. Someone just has to want to make it happen.

Thomas and Eric: part of the point of my list was that, as a city that's really dependent on the decisions of the council, a good Mayor can be a focusing point for the interests and needs of the community, in an effort to bring more weight to bear on those issues when they do come before the council. I agree completely that too much access is a burden to the office and to efficient government, but I also have a sense that if you ask the average citizen how they feel about how well their elected representatives communicate with them about A) what's going on in local government, and B) why, they would say "not well enough."

Of course, it's always fun to discuss hypotheticals of governing; I'm sure the day-to-day reality presents its own unique set of challenges and needs - possibly quite distant from the ones I was thinking of when I wrote the original post.

However, I think you can have too much availability. Being open to all takers at any time of the day means that your time will be primarily consumed by a handful of "squeaky wheels" in town. The bulk of the citizenry have a generalized need for competent local governmental services, but no specific concern that needs to be addressed. There are, however, a few folks who are consumed with the performance of city government, making it their daily task to note and complain about things like the time of day the trash guys come. You would not do the community at large much good spending your time listening and handling the complaints of this vocal minority.

I think the big thing is to open up the records of government, making them available online, and providing an easy means for folks to find pertinent information quickly. It took the city law office almost a decade to get the city code online (during which time, they were not even putting out the code in print form, so only a few select insiders even know what the law was).

I think putting up meeting minutes within 24 hours of a meeting should be required. Also, the text of any rule made by a government board should be available online. There is almost no way to research those determinations now, other than paging through the entire file (hopefully you can start with a timeframe).

But the real answer to the question "what would you do if you were mayor" is "not much," as the position carries little real power. Yes you have "the office" and that gives you a voice. You can makes some appointments, hire and fire a few department heads, change the way your office does business, but most real change goes through council.

Thomas