One of the more conventional forms of city governance is the Mayor-Council structure, which comprises a directly elected mayor serving as the chief executive officer and a city council serving as the legislative body. The mayor’s role involves enforcing laws, supervising city departments, and making policy recommendations to the council. On the other hand, the council is responsible for passing ordinances, approving budgets, and making policy decisions, creating a burst of activity from both parties.
The Strong-Mayor government has a mayor with heightened authority over the council’s decisions. It can appoint and remove department heads without council approval, creating a high burstiness. Similarly, the Council-Manager government differs from the previous two forms, involving a professional manager or administrator in charge of day-to-day operations (Krebs & Fleischmann, 2020). The council hires the manager or administrator, and they are responsible for implementing the council’s policies and managing the city’s departments, adding to the complexity of the governance system.
Another type is the Traditional County Commission Structure. The county is governed by a board of commissioners, who serve as both the legislative and executive branches of government and are elected by the people (Krebs & Fleischmann, 2020). This arrangement can lead to confusion about the line of authority and accountability, resulting in a more perplexing and less effective governance structure.
Similarly, the County Administrator Structure is comparable to the Council-Manager government, where the county commissioners hire a professional administrator to manage the county’s everyday operations. The administrator is responsible for implementing the commission’s policies and managing the county’s departments, leading to a complex and dynamic burst of activity. Lastly, the Elected County Executive Structure, similar to the Strong-Mayor government, is a form of governance where an elected executive governs the county with more authority than the county commission (Krebs & Fleischmann, 2020). The executive is responsible for implementing policies, managing departments, and preparing the budget, which can add to the complexity and burstiness of the system.
Choosing the best form of city governance for Orlando involves considering several factors. The Strong-Mayor or Council-Manager systems may be more effective, as they provide clear authority and accountability. The Strong-Mayor system works for a city needing a strong leader, while the Council-Manager system is suitable for a professional manager to handle daily operations, creating diverse roles. In contrast, the Traditional County Commission Structure is the least effective option, as it creates confusion and inefficiency with commissioners serving as both the legislative and executive branches (Krebs & Fleischmann, 2020). Ultimately, the chosen governance system should suit the city’s unique needs, creating a dynamic structure for growth.
In conclusion, selecting the most effective form of city governance for Orlando depends on the specific needs and circumstances of the city. It is vital to weigh the strengths and weaknesses of each form and select the one best suited to the city’s needs, leading to a complex and dynamic governance structure that fosters burstiness and growth.
Reference
Krebs, T. B., & Fleischmann, A. (2020). Understanding urban politics: institutions, representation, and policies. Rowman & Littlefield.