| Summary of Advantages and Disadvantages of Forms of Municipal Government | |
|
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
| Weak Mayor | |
| • Long historical tradition | • Power and responsibility diffused |
|
• Elected representative council
to meet constituents' needs |
• Lack of strong leadership |
| • Has worked well in small and rural localities |
• Political vacuum may lead to
"bossism" and "machine" politics |
| Strong Mayor | |
| • Strong leadership with centralized responsibility | • Too much responsibility for one person |
| • Facilitates policy formulation and implementation | • Mayor may not be a professional administrator |
| Council-Manager | |
| • Professional manager in charge of managing city | • No strong, effective political leadership |
| • Council retains policy control | • Tendency for manager to usurp policy making functions |
|
• City run in business-like
manner |
• Manager may
be a stranger to the city, seeking only to advance his or her own career |
| Commission | |
| • Has worked well in emergency situations | • Legislative and policy functions held by one body |
| • Simple organizational structure | • No checks and balances |
| • Swift direct implementation of policy | • No one person with overall administrative responsibility |
| • Difficult to elect legislators with administrative abilities | |
| Town Meeting/Representative Town Meeting | |
| • "Purest" form of democracy | • Difficult to do long-range planning |
| • Allows all voters a say in how town is run | • Challenging to educate all citizens adequately |
| • Deep historical tradition |
• Preparing
announce of meeting may be cumbersome process |
| • Has worked well in small localities | • Annual meetings poorly attended |
| Source: Julianne Duvall, "Contemporary Choices for Citizens," in Roger L. Kemp, ed. Forms of Local Government: A Handbook on City, County and Regional Options. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Co., 1999, p. 65. | |