Mayor-Manager Relationships in Large Council-Manager Cities

A Reinterpretation

Bibliographic Data

ID6446584
AuthorsRobert Paul Boynton, Deil S Wright
Year1971
Volume31
Issue1
Pages28-28
Publication date1971-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenuePublic Administration Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0033-3352 • E-ISSN: 1540-6210
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.2307/974954
OpenAlexW2314992028
LanguageEN
Citations received17

American mayor and the city manager found in the literature of public administration and political science are related to the realities of those offices in much the same way as Smokey the Bear is related to the grizzly bear of the Northwest. The literary figures are benign, simplified caricatures of complex and not completely tameable realities. It is true that in recent years some recognition of the potential power of these offices has begun to filter into the literature. The manager was recognized as a community leader by his own code of ethics.1 The code, however, makes no positive suggestion on how the manager is to express that leadership role. Officially, the mayor is still limited to presiding over council meetings and ceremonially representing the city.2 The realities of the mayors' leadership roles are beginning to be investigated.3 This article sketches some of the authors' preliminary findings on the interrelationships of mayors and managers in 45 council-manager cities with populations greater than 100,000, and some of the conceptions of managers and mayors suggested by an interpretation of the information collected. In the summer of 1965, a 34-page questionnaire was mailed to the city managers of the 55 cities and one urban county function

Art · Business · Economics · Management · Political science · Reinterpretation · Public Administration · Public Policy and Administration Research

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub