PACOG-HB

8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

1/65

Councils of

Governments

Director's

Handbook

Centerfor LocalGovernment

Services

Governors

Commonwealth of PennsylvaniaMark Schweiker, Governor

www.state.pa.us

Department of Community and Economic DevelopmentSam McCullough, Secretary

www.inventpa.com

DCED

IndexHome

County Officials City Officials Township Officials Borough Officials Council of Governmen
http://../Start_Here.pdfhttp://../Start_Here.pdfhttp://../Start_Here.pdfhttp://../Start_Here.pdfhttp://../Start_Here.pdfhttp://../Start_Here.pdfhttp://../Start_Here.pdfhttp://../Start_Here.pdfhttp://../Start_Here.pdfhttp://../Start_Here.pdfhttp://../Start_Here.pdf

8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

2/65

Councils of Governments

Directors H andbook

Second EditionHarrisburg, December 1997

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

3/65

Comments or inquiries on the subject matter of this publication should be addressed to:Governors Center for Local Government ServicesDepartment of Community and Economic Development400 North Street, 4th FloorCommonwealth Keystone BuildingHarrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120-0225

(717) 787-81581-888-223-6837E-mail: [email protected]

Additional copies of this publication may be obtained from:Governors Center for Local Government ServicesDepartment of Community and Economic Development400 North Street, 4th FloorCommonwealth Keystone BuildingHarrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120-0225(717) 783-0176

Publication is available electronically via the Internet:Access www.inventpa.comSelect Communities in PA,select Local Government Services,then select Publications.

No liability is assumed with respect to the use of information contained in this publication. Lawsmay be amended or court rulings made that could affect a particular procedure, issue orinterpretation. The Department of Community & Economic Development assumes noresponsibility for errors and omissions nor any liability for damages resulting from the use ofinformation contained herein. Please contact your local solicitor for legal advise.

Preparation and printing of this edition of theCouncils of Governments Directors Handbook wasfunded from appropriations of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.Copyright 1997, Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development, all rightsreserved.

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

4/65

Table of Contents

Introduction ......................................................................................................................................1

1. Councils of Governments (COG) ....................................................................................................3

Mission of COGs..........................................................................................................3

Service Provision and Production ................................................................................5

Articles of Agreement ..................................................................................................6

2. Office of the Director .......................................................................................................................7

Responsibilities............................................................................................................7

Annual Evaluation........................................................................................................8

Staff Relations..............................................................................................................9

Professional Development..........................................................................................11

3. Meetings ....................................................................................................................................13

Notice.........................................................................................................................13

Physical Arrangements...............................................................................................13

Agendas......................................................................................................................14

Rules of Order............................................................................................................15

Minutes.......................................................................................................................16

Role of the COG Director ..........................................................................................17

4. Communication and Information ...............................................................................................19

Orientation Sessions...................................................................................................19

Reports to Governing Bodies .....................................................................................20

Communications with Municipal Managers/Secretaries............................................21

Relations with the Media ...........................................................................................21

Relations with Other Public Agencies........................................................................21

Relations with the Public ...........................................................................................22

5. Getting Started ..............................................................................................................................23

Rules of the Road.......................................................................................................23

6. Consensus Building ........................................................................................................................26

The Director as Consensus Builder............................................................................26

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

5/65

Ground Rules for Effective Groups ...........................................................................27

7. Budgeting and Finance ..................................................................................................................28

Revenues ....................................................................................................................28

Funding Formulas ......................................................................................................29Budget ........................................................................................................................30

Accounting Systems...................................................................................................31

Internal Controls.........................................................................................................31

Annual Audits ............................................................................................................31

Risk Management.......................................................................................................32

Purchasing..................................................................................................................33

8. New Partnerships ...........................................................................................................................34

Refuse Collection .......................................................................................................34Regional Code Administration...................................................................................36

Regional Fire Protection.............................................................................................38

Intergovernmental Cooperation Law ................................................................................................42

Joint Services ....................................................................................................................................46

Sample Resolution Establishing COG Director Position .................................................................47

Sample Agenda ....................................................................................................................................50

Keystone COG Code Administration Budget ...................................................................................52

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

6/65

1

Introduction

COG directors have one of the most challenging positions in local government. Overcomingthe barriers to intergovernmental cooperation and working with the participating municipalities tocreate a shared vision of the region requires a unique blend of management, negotiation and advocacyskills. Often, the COG director has little or no staff support, uncertain funding streams and tenuousmunicipal commitment. Despite these obstacles, the concept of local governments working togetherthrough regional agencies to develop shared solutions to common problems is at the forefront ofmunicipal governance.

As Pennsylvania local governments look to the future, the changes they confront willnecessitate a rethinking of how public services are produced. In the future, most of the majorproblems confronting local governments will be regional in nature. Environmental concerns relatingto water, air, noise, and land use cut across municipal boundaries and can only be meaningfullyaddressed at the regional level. Social problems -- drugs, crime, homelessness -- are carried acrossjurisdictions with the constant movement of people. This mobility affects the need for human andpublic services which must be planned and delivered on a regional scale. Economic relationships

among local units within a region are numerous and strong. Recent studies indicate that cities andtheir suburbs are not distinct economies, rather they function as an interdependent region -- their fiscalwell-beings are linked together. In addition, roads and highways do not begin or end at municipalboundaries. Instead, they cut across many municipalities to form an integrated network that permitsthe transport of people and goods.

To successfully prepare for this future, local government officials should develop mechanismscapable of addressing the regional issues that affect their communities. COGs and other similarvoluntary associations of local governments create partnerships having this capacity to address issuesthat transcend jurisdictional boundaries. Building on the collective strengths of their membermunicipalities, COGs can coordinate and direct public resources to respond to the regions concerns.In performing this service COGs can coordinate and direct public resources to respond to the regionsconcerns. In performing this service COGs lower the costs of government by eliminating or reducing

duplication and achieving economics of scale. They enhance flexibility by offering the ability to shiftpersonnel from one portion of the region to another, depending on the changing needs of theparticipating municipalities. They improve quality by providing a collective revenue base that issufficient to retain professional staff, purchase necessary equipment and assure uniform servicedelivery throughout the entire region.

These benefits are achieved, not by creating another layer of government or imposing newtaxes, but by encouraging existing public officials to work cooperatively with their colleagues inneighboring communities. This commitment to collective action permits municipalities to lowerexpenditures and provide a high level of service than they could individually achieve.

Past achievements of Pennsylvanias COGs are considerable and the future potential isunlimited. As these regional successes become more well known, elected officials will becomeincreasingly interested in the benefits of regional cooperation. This interest raises the possibility of

more regional programs and higher expectations for the individuals who administer them.Recognizing the great potential for regional cooperation, the two objectives of this handbook are:

=To provide directors and administrators of COGs and other intermunicipal organizationswith an information source that offers guidance in planning, organizing andimplementing regional programs.

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

7/65

2

=To provide municipal elected officials with guidance in establishing a Council ofGovernments, selecting an administrator and becoming an active participant in regionalgovernance.

The handbooks underlying premises is that the critical key to a COGs success is theinvolvement of the elected and appointed officials in the COG decision making process. Theemphasis will be on securing the active participation of all the municipal officials -- not just the few

who may be members of the COG legislative body. Regardless of the activity -- proposing newprograms, establishing budgets or evaluating performance -- the principal task of the COG director isto encourage active leadership by the municipal elected officials in the governance of the COG. Whenthis involvement is not encouraged, or is limited to a small group, or relinquished to paid staff, theCOG is in danger because the municipal officials participation and support will eventually diminish.

Cultivating this broad-based support requires patient persistence. Historical conflicts andsuspicion among municipalities within the COG create obstacles that take time to overcome. However,these barriers must be dismantled if Pennsylvanias municipalities are to be viable in the future. Thecurrent service-delivery arrangement in which each municipality produces a variety of programsindependently from its neighboring communities, will be overcome by regional challenges, whetherthey be environmental, demographic or economic in character. By their interjurisdictional nature theseregional concerns are not readily amenable to mitigation or resolution by uncoordinated action by

some of the affected municipalities. In most cases individual municipalities lack the resources,geographic area and political clout to control regional issues. Instead solutions flow from cooperativepartnerships, often guided by a regional consensus decision achieved through significant opendialogue among the elected officials. COGs provide tools that elected officials can use to establish thisregional dialogue and implement the shared solution. Underlying the elected officials participation inthe COG should be the common desire to create solutions that are not only good for each governmentbut also will yield the desired benefits to the regional. Reaching new levels of cooperation entailsmoving beyond the limits imposed by jurisdictional boundary lines to a larger vision of the region.

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

8/65

1

1. Councils of Governments

The statutory foundation for Councils of Governments (COGs) is the IntergovernmentalCooperation Law, Act 180 of 1972. This legislation permits municipal governments to jointlycooperate with other municipalities in the exercise of their governmental functions, powers, orresponsibilities. Considering that Act 180 is one of the most liberal grants of authority forintergovernmental cooperation in the United States, it is amazingly brief. Yet it has generatedhundreds of cooperative activities including Councils of Governments, municipal leagues, regionalpolice departments, joint purchasing agreements, and many other forms of municipal cooperation.Interestingly, Act 180 which has been amended several times, does not mention Councils ofGovernments or any other specific form of intergovernmental cooperation in its text. This exclusionhas both advantages and disadvantages for COGs. The main problem is that it does not providespecific guidance to municipalities in establishing and operating COGs. Consequently, there are manygray areas in dealing with the legal status of COGs. The main advantage is that municipalities havethe flexibility to tailor the COG organization to the needs and preferences of the local community.

Some COGs are incorporated as nonprofit corporations, and others are classified asgovernments that are instrumentalities of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. A variation of thesecond option is for the COG to exist as a subunit of a member municipality for insurance andemployee pension purposes, but to function as a political instrumentality for all other activities. Thechoice is the prerogative of the elected officials of the participating municipalities.

Despite the variations in organizational charters all Pennsylvania COGs share the followingcharacteristics:

=They have no taxing powers.=They organizational structure, including voting representation, is a matter of localchoice.=They are established by adoption of ordinances by the member municipalities.

Mission of COGs

COGs are generally defined as voluntary associations of elected public officials from most orall of the governments in a region, formed to accomplish some regional mission(s). Reasons whymunicipalities form COGs may include the following:

=To produce local government services on a regional basis.=To coordinate planning and regulatory activities.=To provide a neutral forum to discuss issues of common concern.=To articulate common positions on major issues.=To spread costs of local programs or equipment among a number of users.

As producers of public services, COGs have two main advantages over typical municipallyoperated departments: lower cost and more service. COGs may lower the cost of producing publicservices by reducing redundancy and overlap. By cooperating through a COG, a municipality canavoid duplicating personnel, facilities and equipment available in neighboring jurisdictions. Forexample, consider a case where four municipalities operate individual code administration programs.Each one requires a code official, office space and vehicles. In contrast, a COG program serving thesame four communities requires a single code official, one office and one vehicle. Additional savings

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

9/65

2

may be attributable to the economies of scale that COGs can achieve by increasing the area served.By creating a larger market for suppliers, COGs have the leverage to negotiate a lower price for goodsand services. For instance, one COG reduced the monthly cost of residential refuse collection by over25% when the service area changed from individual municipalities to a region covering fourtownships. Concurrent with lower costs, COG programs may also offer more service to the residents.Because regional COG programs are typically larger in terms of personnel and resources than those

offered by a single municipality, the residents' accessibility to a service is increased. For instance, aCOG recreation office is typically able to offer a wider variety of specialized programs (such as thosedirected to children or senior citizens) than could be provided by any of the individual municipalitiesparticipating in the COG. Or in another example, a building code administration program of a smallmunicipality may have only one part-time employee who is only available to the public a few hoursper week. In contrast, a regional program could justify several full-time employees, giving residentsmore opportunity to schedule inspections. Often the services offered by a COG are of higher qualitybecause the larger service base can support more competent and well-trained staff.

As coordinators of planning and regulatory activities among geographic neighbors, the COGassists with the development and adoption of compatible ordinances and planning documents such asthe following:

= Model municipal ordinances for regulating false emergency alarms, managingstormwater, protecting well fields and groundwater and adopting building and firecode standards. Variations in these ordinances among neighboring governments in asingle economic trading area often results in higher housing costs. Model ordinancesdeveloped by a COG establish a single uniform standard which may lowerdevelopment costs by eliminating variations in construction designs and material dueto conflicting municipal codes. By adopting uniform regional codes, enforcementactivities are more readily accomplished.

= Regional plans for controlling land use and development, such as regionalcomprehensive plans, Act 537 Sewage Facility Plans and TransportationManagement Plans.

= Regional plans for providing emergency services, such as emergency managementplans, fire apparatus replacement schedules and fire company reorganization

proposals.

As forums for discussion, COGs offer a neutral arena where elected officials can meet and startto build the professional relationships that are essential for successful intergovernmental programs. Inaddition they provide an opportunity to discuss mutual and regional problems and policies to addressconcerns. COGs serve to inform officials about regional problems, or state or national issues that mayaffect the region (such as tax reform or cable television regulation). Depending on the topic, theseforums can and should be expanded to include representatives from other affected agencies, such asmunicipal authorities, county governments, school districts and other agencies.

As an advocate for regional positions, COGs can articulate the concerns or recommendationsthat have been identified at the regional forums to county, state and federal elected officials orregulatory agencies. By presenting the regional position as a united front, the COG strengthens

communications to other governments on such major issues as infrastructure planning, proposedlegislation or budget appropriations and taxing policies. When legislators receive conflictingrecommendations from municipalities, the impact of the recommendation is weakened. The legislatoris unable to promote one community's position without diminishing another jurisdiction'srecommendation, often resulting in stalemate. A regional position representing a number ofmunicipalities expressed in unison by a COG sends a clear and strong message which may enhancethe probability of a positive outcome for the municipalities.

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

10/65

3

The role of the COG director varies with the mission(s) of the COG. If the COG is a producerof local government services, the director is an administrator responsible for providing quality, costeffective programs to the public. In promoting coordinated planning, the COG director assists inachieving regional cohesion and creating an overall vision for the region. When the COG functions asa public forum, the director is an educator and facilitator who encourages the exchange of informationto solve regional problems and identify consensual solutions to those concerns. As an advocate forregional positions, the COG director is a regional representative who seeks to use communicationskills to affect the policy decisions of outside agencies.

Appendix B provides an example of services COGs provide and some ideas for COG programs.

Service Provision and Production

COGs offset the fragmentation of local government within a region while maintaining theindividual municipality's ability to select which services it will provide to the public. This capacity isinherent in the difference between providing and producing a public service. According to theAdvisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, providers decide whether to make a serviceavailable through public means. If a service is to be provided, the provider determines the quality andquantity, how funding will be obtained, and the appropriate unit(s) to produce the service.Municipalities are providers when they decide what services should be produced. For instance, aprovision decision would be whether a municipality should have a building code enforcementprogram. In contrast, producers transform resource inputs into service outputs. COGs are producerswhen they organize the personnel, materials and equipment necessary to create a given service, suchas building code enforcement.

Once the elected officials decide to provide a service, the municipality has various options toproduce it, including: assigning the service to a new or existing municipal department; contractingwith a private company; creating a private/public partnership with shared responsibility for theservice; or assigning the service to a regional agency. Increasingly, municipalities are opting toproduce the service regionally or through a private/public partnership that is regionally based (for an

example, see the chapter on New Partnerships - Refuse).

Regional production of a service is a form of functional consolidation. This means thegeographic area for the service is not confined to a single jurisdiction. Instead it is a combination ofall the participating municipalities in a region. Functional consolidation does not affect jurisdictionalboundaries, however. Each of the participating municipalities retains its separate identity. The largerservice area is able to lower the production costs, while increasing the quality and quantity of theproduct. Additionally, the ability to contract with private companies is enhanced when services arecoordinated regionally. For instance, bidding specifications for a regional refuse contract coveringfive municipalities is likely to generate more competition and lower customer collection rates than asingle municipal bid.

By participating in COGs, municipalities have the flexibility to decide whether they want toprovide a specific service. Once they decide to do so, municipalities have the option of producing

services regionally through the COG, thereby gaining the benefit of a larger service without sacrificinglocal autonomy. Thus, COGs allow municipalities to provide a service without having to produce iton an inefficient scale, which increases costs and lowers quality and quantity. This flexibility is alsoconsistent with the public's interest in low cost services and the desire to maintain the local identityassociated with the existing units of local government.

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

11/65

4

Articles of Agreement

To create a COG, each of the municipalities that want to join must adopt by ordinance, at apublicly advertised meeting, an intergovernmental agreement which addresses the following issues:

= Conditions of the agreement.= Duration of the agreement.= Purpose and objectives of the agreement, including the powers and scope of authority

delegated in the agreement.

= Manner and extent of financing the agreement.= Organizational structure necessary to implement the agreement.= Manner in which property, real or personal, shall be acquired, licensed or disposed

of.

= Statement empowering the COG to enter into contracts for group insurance andemployee benefits, including social security, for its employees.

These items can be covered in the ordinance itself, but usually they are addressed in theagreement (often called Articles of Agreement), and incorporated into the ordinance by reference (asan attachment to the ordinance). The Articles of Agreement act as the constitution of the COG,defining its scope of responsibility and establishing its organizational structure. As such, thedocument is of primary importance to the COG director. The Articles of Agreement determinewhether the COG can own property, title vehicles, provide health and medical insurance to itsemployees or hire a director.

The COG's Articles of Agreement should be periodically reviewed to assure that they areconsistent with the current operation of the organization and the values of the municipalities in termsof how they believe the COG should function. Changes to the Articles of Agreement are approved inthe same manner as the original document. Sources for sample Articles of Agreement include: the

Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development, the Pennsylvania Associationof Councils of Governments, or by contacting other COGs.

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

12/65

1

2. Office of the Director

COG directors are unique among local government officials in terms of their relationship tomunicipal codes or state laws. Unlike city clerks, borough secretaries or township managers, theposition of COG director is not mentioned in any state statute. The duties of the position, methods ofappointment or dismissal and qualifications are purely a matter of local choice.

In some COGs, the director is a full-time employee whose main duties are to provide overalladministrative, financial and personnel management necessary for the organization to function. Moreoften, the COG director is a part-time employee or an existing municipal or county employee whosejob responsibilities include the administration of COG programs. In these cases, the COG director is ajack-of-all-trades, being responsible for all the management duties plus all other staff functions,including typing communications, duplicating reports and mailing agenda packages. The scope of theposition's responsibilities is reflective of the COG's role in the region. A COG with few programs maybe adequately staffed with a single part-time employee, but as the participating municipalities requestadditional services, additional full-time employees may be required.

It is important to be realistic in setting the expectations for a part-time COG director position.Recording, transcribing, duplicating and mailing meeting minutes may be the principal jobresponsibility for a part-time position. When this occurs, the participating municipalities may bedisappointed when new regional programs do not emerge or the COG is not successful in buildingmunicipal consensus on an important issue. Expectations must be commensurate with the resourcescommitted to the COG.

The establishment of the position of COG director is handled in a variety of ways. In someCOGs the legislative body adopts a resolution which defines the position's responsibilities. Lessformal, but still acceptable, is for the legislative body to approve a motion which establishes a jobdescription for the position.

ResponsibilitiesGiven the absence of state guidance in defining the duties of a COG director, it is left to elected

officials to prepare a document that formally describes the position's responsibilities, qualificationsand reporting arrangements. There is no single model for explaining the COG director's duties.Rather, a large number of variables determine how the COG director's position should be defined.Whether the duties of the COG director are of a managerial, secretarial or administrative nature is amatter of the size of the COG, its programs, its economic structure, its traditions and the politicalclimate.

A resolution or job description for the COG director is essential for assuring the successfulimplementation and maintenance of the position. It sets the limits of the COG director's powers,articulates duties and identifies the lines of reporting. Given the possibilities for changingmembership on the COG legislative body as a result of municipal elections, the document provides a

clear understanding of the position. This understanding protects both the elected officials and theCOG director during periods of organizational change and it reduces potential areas of conflict.

A resolution or job description needs to have the following elements:

=Identify the position or committee responsible for supervising the COG director.=Define whether the position is full- or part-time, or a component of an existing position.

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

13/65

2

=Set the minimum qualifications for selecting the COG director.=Provide sample duties.

As a provision in either document or as a separate policy statement, there should be anexplanation of the procedures used in appointing, compensating and dismissing the COG director.Appendix C provides a model resolution for a COG director's position which addresses these issues.

The appointment of the COG director is one of the most important decisions COG officialsmake. It is a task requiring careful planning, perceptive evaluation of the candidates and a clearunderstanding of the region's current and future needs. To attract a large pool of applicants, COGsshould advertise the position as widely as possible to attract the best candidates. An activerecruitment program is also highly compatible with the goals of the equal opportunity and affirmativeaction programs. The three most useful methods of recruitment are listed below.

= Employment advertisement in regional newspapers.= General publicity in professional journals such as the ICMA Newsletter,

Pennsylvania Township News, and The Pennsylvanian.

= Personal invitations to selected individuals.Annual Evaluation

The individual(s) who supervise the COG director should conduct an annual performanceevaluation of the person holding the job. The term performance appraisal in personneladministration traditionally refers to a systematic evaluation of the job performance of an individualemployee to assess whether predetermined objectives have been achieved.

Ordinarily, the objectives of a performance evaluation are one or more of the following:

= To provide feedback to the director and the supervising individual(s) or committee onjob performance.

= To establish guidelines and recommendations for employe training and developmentto improve performance.

= To clarify or develop mutual goals, objectives and evaluation criteria.Annual performance evaluations of COG directors are especially important, given the COG's

complex political environment and changing membership. Often COG directors report to asubcommittee or executive committee of the main COG legislative group. Members of thissupervisory committee bring varying perspectives on the objectives of the position and will tend tojudge the director's performance according to those values. For instance, an elected official whoplaces a high priority on joint purchasing may view the director's work performance as unsatisfactorywhen progress is slow in instituting a cooperative purchasing program. By contrast, another officialwho places a high priority on developing model ordinances for the municipalities may judge the samedirector's work performance as outstanding when progress is made in this area. Performanceevaluations are a way of reconciling these conflicting assessments into a coherent evaluation of

activities that identifies acceptable behavior, as well as behavior that needs to be improved. Thisuniform statement gives the director an overall rating of performance against the expectations of theorganization. This knowledge offers security, thereby encouraging the director to be more committedand innovative in serving the member municipalities.

The annual evaluation process for the COG director is also an effective tool for implementing the COG'swork objectives. Prior to the start of the evaluation period, there should be an interview between the COGdirector and the supervisory committee to set standards and organizational objectives for the upcoming year.

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

14/65

3

These items define the municipal officials' expectations for the position and can range from developing orimproving job skills to specific task accomplishments, such as drafting a model ordinance or initiating a newregional program. Ideally, the municipal officials' expectations should be linked to the COG's work program, asestablished in the COG's annual budget or other document which describes the objectives the COG wants toattain. This connection -municipal officials' expectations, budget statement, director's performance evaluation-assures that both policy makers and staff have the same understanding of the COG's objectives. When the COG

has other staff, this relationship should be expanded to include those employees. For instance, should the COGwith a code administration agency desire to add a fire prevention program, that objective would be stated in thebudget document and in the performance objectives for the COG director and the code official.

Staff Relations

Most COGs have small staffs and in some cases the director is the only employee. Where COG directorsare fortunate to have staff support, then management style becomes an important skill. The relationshipbetween the COG director and other staff must encourage teamwork among employees. This team approach isadaptable to changing situations and inspires commitment to the successful operation of the COG. With fewemployees and limited budgets, COG directors lack the flexibility to use promotions or monetary incentives toreward outstanding employees or to transfer or demote employees whose work does not meet organizational

standards. Each employee must be motivated to help the COG become a high performance organization. Tosuccessfully encourage this motivation, the COG director must understand the rewards that employees seekfrom their jobs. Following is a rank-order listing of the top six rewards people want from their jobs:

1.A sense of accomplishment.

2.Doing meaningful work.

3.Pay.

4.Recognition for good work.

5.Job security.

6.Doing challenging work.

Five of the six rewards concern the employee's sense of personal worth and not compensation issues. To

enable the employee to achieve these rewards, the COG director must adopt a management style that empowersemployees to strive toward reaching their full potential. Employees are more likely to feel empowered andcommitted to the COG when the following occur:

Their tasks are interesting and varied and involve learning, challenge and responsibility.

They have enough information, support and authority to get the job accomplished.

They help make decisions that affect their jobs.

They understand how their own work fits into the larger picture.

They are treated as individuals who are personally important to the organization.

These assumptions have important implications for determining a COG director's relationship to staff.

They mean that COG directors should adopt a management style that supports and enables, rather than directsand controls. Generally, a director's relationship with staff can be characterized as authoritative, benevolent,consultive or participatory. Here are the features of these relationships:

Authoritative. Communication and goal setting are top down. No teamwork among employeesand municipal officials. Staff behavior is motivated by security and money and theirattitude is hostile. Output is typically mediocre.

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

15/65

4

Benevolent. Communication and goal setting are mostly top down. Teamwork among employeesand municipal officials is minimal. Staff behavior is motivated by status and their attitudeis mixed often toward negative. Output is typically fair to good.

Consultive. Communication is up and down with goal setting made at top after consultationwith employees. There is some teamwork among employees and municipal officials.Staff behavior is motivated by growth in job responsibilities and recognition of jobaccomplishments, and their attitude is typically mixed often toward positive. Output istypically good.

Participative. Communication is up, down and sideways with goal setting occurring with groupparticipation. There is significant teamwork among employees and municipal officials.Staff behavior is motivated by individual identity, commitment to achieving the regionalgoal and the ability to influence the decision-making excellent.

Recognizing that maximum work performance occurs when employees are actively involved inthe development, implementation and evaluation of the programs that affect them, staff relationsbetween the COG director and other personnel should be consultive and, ideally, participatory. Thisinfers that many COG activities, reports, grant applications and proposals are not made by one

individual, but by teams comprised of COG elected and appointed municipal officials, staff and otherindividuals with specialized knowledge of the issue such as authority personnel, state or federalofficials or community representatives. The intent is to be inclusive rather than exclusive. Themembers of the team will, by necessity, vary in accordance with the issue and the expertise orknowledge required. For instance, the team for developing a proposal to create a joint purchasingprogram will be different than one assembled to outline a regional fire company. Regardless of theteam's composition, each member should be encouraged to openly express his recommendations andconcerns.

Consultive or participatory staff relations do not mean the COG director relinquishes theauthority and responsibility for making the final decision. With both approaches, the COG directorcontinues to be the organization's chief appointed officer and retains the power to accept or reject theteam's proposal. In cases where the director chooses an alternative to the team's proposal, it is essentialthat the reasons for this decision be openly explained to the team members in a manner that providesthe opportunity to express opposition. Most issues considered by the COG relate to public services andare, therefore, acceptable subjects for team problem solving; however, some confidential issues such aspersonnel problems or litigation are not appropriate for open discussion.

The shared responsibility for problem solving should be reflected in the proposal that ispresented to the COG legislative body. This means the individual who presents the proposal to theelected officials is not necessarily the COG director. Instead, the report could be made by anotherCOG employee or another member of the team. Providing other employees the opportunity to makepublic presentations reinforces their position as partners in the operation of the COG. Employees whoare publicly acknowledged for their participation in the development of a proposal are committed to itssuccessful implementation should the concept be approved by the COG legislative body.

Another dimension of staff relations is leadership. The director ensures that a clear andcompelling -even inspiring- shared vision is articulated clearly, stating where the COG is going andwhy. Thus, a crucial element of leadership for the director is communication with the staff. The intentof this communication is to provide each employee with a clear understanding of the COG's mission,organization and funding.

The one consistent pattern true for all leaders is the ability to behave in ways that demonstrateintegrity. Integrity is demonstrated by COG directors in their contact with officials, employees and thepublic, when based upon the following characteristics:

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

16/65

5

= Truth telling= Promise keeping= Fairness/justice= Respect for the individual

In dealing with employees, it is essential that the director walk the walk. The director's behaviorshould be consistent with the actions necessary for consultive or participatory problem solving.

Professional Development

One of a COG's best investments is the professional development of its staff. Traditionally,training programs teach competencies that improve the quality and quantity of the work product. Mosttraining programs are oriented around a particular job or set of duties, for instance word processingcourses for a secretary or plan review procedures for a building inspector. In addition to these direct

organizational benefits there are important but less tangible reasons for a COG to encourage itsemployees to pursue professional development. Through attendance at training programs, employeeshave the opportunity to learn how other regions deal with problems that are similar to the ones theyconfront. This informal communication enhances the employees' knowledge of which solutions to aregional problem work and which do not. It also provides a valuable information network for the COGas a source for sample ordinances, special reports and estimates for program expenses and revenues.

Professional development for the director is essential and should be financed and activelysupported by the participating municipalities. There are three areas of training needs for COGdirectors: management, program activity and community problem solving.

As administrators of their organizations, COG directors should attend management trainingprograms to improve their skills in organizational leadership, budgeting and finance, personnelmanagement, grant preparation and communications. Program training involves instruction on specific

topics which affect the services, such as recreation or code administration programs, produced by theCOG. Community problem solving is an emerging responsibility of COG directors and will necessitatethe development of special facilitation and mediation skills.

As intergovernmental cooperation increases in its scope and responsibility, COG directors willbecome a resource to facilitate the resolution of regional problems. In this role COG directors areagents of change for their regions. Change in a variety of forms -economic, demographic, social- isinevitable. It not a matter of whether or not municipalities desire change, rather the issue is how tocontrol it in a rational and advantageous manner. The COG director's position in the region affordscertain strengths that are conducive to an active role in facilitating community discussion. Often COGdirectors are perceived by municipal officials to have knowledge of the region, familiarity with themain decision makers and neutrality on issues. It is likely that future regional discussions will occur ina complex environment involving multiple local governments, elected and appointed officials, special

interests such as developer or environmental groups and active public participation. To manage thisprocess the COG director must possess a nontraditional set of managerial skills for community problemsolving. These community problem solving skills include negotiation, consensus-building, intergroupproblem solving, organizational behavior and the effective use of legitimate authority. Mastering theseskills involves a significant commitment of the COG director's time and organizational funding.However, the return to the region on this investment can be very advantageous. The first litigationavoided or new regional program implemented because of the COG director's involvement will pay for

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

17/65

6

the training many times over.

Possible sources of training for COG directors and their staff can be obtained through:

Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic DevelopmentCenter For Local Government Services

325 Forum BuildingHarrisburg, PA 171201-888-2CENTER

Association Pennsylvania Municipal Managers (APMM)*414 North Second StreetHarrisburg, PA 17101(717) 236-9469(800) 352-2766

Pennsylvania Association of Councils of Governments2941 North Front Street

Harrisburg, PA 17110(717) 236-9526

Senior Executive Institute (SEI)**University of VirginiaCenter for Public ServiceP.O. Box 5627Charlottesville, VA 22905(804) 924-3396

*The APMM offers a municipal manager certification program and annual conferences

which offer COG directors the opportunity to personally interact with managers to becomefamiliar with issues confronting municipal managers.

**SEI offers one- or two-week Executive Development Programs.

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

18/65

1

3. Meetings

The majority of the COG director's time is spent preparing for, attending and implementingaction taken at meetings with municipal officials. This commitment of staff time is natural, giventhe consensual nature of the COG's decision-making process. Although meetings are a necessityfor the COG, they should only be held when it is important to do so. Meetings with weak agendasare often viewed as a waste of time by the municipal officials and undermine the officials'willingness to attend future sessions. Weak agendas are comprised of agenda items that areincomplete (missing a piece of crucial information), unnecessary (the issue could be resolved bystaff) or untimely (consideration of the item could be postponed until a later meeting). In thosecases, the meeting should either be canceled or the agenda expanded to include discussion ofmore significant items to justify the time commitment made by the volunteer elected andappointed officials. When meetings are convened, they should be organized in a manner thatallows all participants an opportunity to express their thoughts, while at the same time moving thediscussion to closure. The intent of this section is to provide the COG director with guidelines for

advertising, organizing and structuring meetings.

Notice

Under the Sunshine Law, all deliberations of elected officials must be done at a publicmeeting and at a time and place advertised in advance. Public notice must be given by publishingthe meeting announcement at least once in a newspaper of general circulation within the regionand by posting a copy where the meeting is to be held. Public notice of the first regular meetingof each calendar year must be given not less than three days in advance of the meeting and mustinclude a schedule of the remaining regular meetings for the calendar year. The meeting noticeshould also comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act by offering to make special meetingarrangements for individuals who may require them.

COG legislative bodies may hold executive sessions, but only under certain circumstances.These exceptions to the open meeting requirements include consideration of the following:

= Personnel matters= Collective bargaining issues= Real estate issues= Litigation matters= Other business protected by the confidentiality provisions of various laws and

court decisions

The chair must announce the reason for holding an executive session at the public meetingheld immediately prior to or subsequent to the executive session. No vote may be taken on anymotion, proposal, resolution, rule, regulation or order during an executive session.

Physical Arrangements

The physical arrangements for a meeting set the tone and can contribute or detract from thediscussions. These are items to keep in mind when arranging a meeting:

= Agreeable meeting site. The location of the meeting site should be agreeable to all

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

19/65

2

the participating municipalities and should not offer one community an advantageover another. Some COGs use municipal buildings, while other COGs opt forneutral sites such as hotel meeting rooms, schools, colleges or churches. Theroom should also comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act to assure thatall municipal officials and residents have access to the meeting and can participatein the discussions. The site selected should be centrally located; however, a few

COGs rotate meeting locations among the member municipalities. Although thisapproach achieves meeting neutrality, it requires the COG director to provide theCOG officials with maps to various meeting sites and a clear announcement of thechange. Attaching a special notice to the first page of the agenda is an effectiveway of calling attention to the new meeting site.

= A properly sized room, with adequate heating and air conditioning equipment.Rooms that are too large or small or are equipped with noisy air conditioners orinadequate heating do not foster an atmosphere conducive to effectivecommunications, and often are very distracting.

= Avoid scheduling conflicts. Establish an annual meeting schedule approved by allthe participating officials.

= Use name plates. Most of the officials invited to the meeting may already knoweach other, but often there are people who do not know everyone or are not knownby everyone attending the meeting. Name plates help each person recognizeothers they may not have met. Distributing a list of officials scheduled to attendthe COG meeting is also a helpful device to make people feel comfortable.Adding office addresses and telephone numbers to this list encourages informalcontact among elected officials and contributes to establishing an atmosphere oftrust.

= Arrange seating in a circle or square formation. Sitting around tables arranged ina square or circle large enough to accommodate all those attending will greatlyenhance the officials' sense of full participation in the meeting. Symbolically, thetable formation sends a message about the equality among the municipalities.Circular or square configurations emphasize that all jurisdictions are equal

regardless of population or wealth.

Agendas

The COG director's most powerful tool in making the meeting effective is the agenda, thewritten plan of order for conducting the meeting. Agendas determine the issues to be consideredby the COG legislative body and, just as important, those that will not. Agendas also set thecontext for discussion of an issue. A poorly worded agenda item can initiate hostility andopposition, while a positively written text can evoke openness and willingness to cooperate. Asample agenda is included as Appendix C.

Preparing the agenda for upcoming meetings is usually the responsibility of the COGdirector. The procedure for determining the actual contents of the agenda and the order of

business should be established by the COG's legislative body. A typical process is for the COGdirector to prepare a draft agenda and refer it to the chair of the COG`s legislative body for reviewand comment. Nothing on the final agenda should be a surprise to the chair. After thepreliminary agenda is revised to reflect the chair's recommendations, the final version of thedocument should be distributed to the elected officials and a copy posted in the COG office.

The format of the agenda should clearly indicate the location, date and time of the meeting.

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

20/65

3

Time should be provided at the beginning of the meeting to receive comments from the public.Amendments to the Sunshine Law require that time be provided at each advertised and specialmeeting of a municipal public body for taxpayers and residents to offer comments. It is suggestedthat the COG's legislative body adopt written policies for providing comment periods at meetings.

Agenda items should provide the following information:

= A summary background of the issue, including a definition of the problem, anhistorical context and an indication of the groups or individuals that havepreviously discussed the item. More detailed information should be provided in aseparate report or correspondence included in the agenda package. All suchenclosures should be referenced on the agenda.

= A recommendation for action when appropriate. This recommendation should notbe considered as cast in stone, but as a starting point for further deliberations. Ifthe agenda item does not require action by the elected officials, then that should beindicated. It is important that each agenda item indicate what the COG legislativebody needs to do (such as make a decision, refer information, take no action).

All agendas should include a section entitled Other Business to offer the opportunity for

individual members of the legislative body to bring concerns or issues not on the agenda to thefloor. This flexibility to hear other issues provides a vent to release concerns that may be buildingup.

Agendas should be mailed to the legislative body in advance of the meeting to give eachindividual several days to read through the material. It is unfair to expect elected officials whohave full-time jobs and are volunteering their services to the COG to thoroughly review andunderstand an agenda package received one day prior to a meeting.

Rules of Order

Following parliamentary procedure is essential for an effective meeting. Without groundrules, the meeting has the potential to degenerate into undirected competing discussions which

will leave the municipal officials unsatisfied and unwilling to return. A copy ofRobert's Rules ofOrderor some other guide on parliamentary procedure is an important item in the COG director'slibrary. Robert's is not necessarily the only or best answer; it is important to have establishedrules, approved by the body. To conduct an organized meeting, any chair needs to have a clearunderstanding of their role as the facilitator of the meeting.

During the meeting the chair acts as a traffic copdirecting the discussion in a manner thatgives all participants an opportunity to express their views. Should the chair not encouragediscussion or unduly limit comments from others, municipal officials will feel frustrated and loseinterest in attending future meetings. While discussion should be encouraged, the chair needs toavoid needless repetition of the same argument. Keeping the meeting moving toward a conclusionsometimes means placing reasonable time limits on the debate.

COG directors should recognize that some officials have extensive knowledge of

parliamentary procedures while others do not. To foster a minimum level of understandingamong all members of COG's legislative body, the COG director should consider distributinginformation regarding the procedures for moving, amending or tabling motions to the COG'slegislative body when it is reorganized after each municipal election.

Outside the formal meeting context, it is important to recognize that personal relationshipsamong the municipal officials can be developed during the informal discussions occurring prior toconvening the meeting and following adjournment. The COG director should encourage these

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

21/65

4

discussions and not hurry to move the individuals out the door in an effort to get home. Theseinformal exchanges among the elected officials are excellent tools in creating understanding andtrust among the elected officials, the essential element in intergovernmental cooperation.

Minutes

In most COGs the director is responsible either for personally preparing meeting minutes orfor assuring that minutes are produced by another employe. The Sunshine Act requires writtenminutes to be taken at all public meetings. The minutes are open to public inspection. There is nolegal requirement for minutes to be taken in executive sessions. The reason for holding anyexecutive session must be announced at the public meeting held immediately before orimmediately after the executive session. This announcement should be included in the minutes ofthe relevant public meeting. Sometimes notes are made of discussions in executive sessions, butoften there is no written record of any kind. Use of formal written minutes is restricted to publicmeetings.

The Sunshine Act requires a minimum of four items to be included in the minutes for eachmeeting. These are the mandated items:

= Date, time and place of meeting.= Names of persons present.= Substance of all official actions and a record by individual member of the roll call

votes taken.

= Names of all citizens who appeared officially and the subject of their testimony.The municipal codes provide little real guidance to the COG director in determining what

information should be included in the minutes. Requirements for inclusion of material in theminutes can be outlined in the procedural rules or bylaws of the COG's legislative body, althoughfew COGs have actually done this. COG directors should understand the role of the minutes aslegal evidence and should consider their historical value. One criterion to use in determining thecontents of meeting minutes is the extent to which they provide direction for regional programs. It

is always better to err on the side of including too much rather than leaving out essential elements.When in doubt about the level of detail, the director should ask the elected officials for guidance.Some of the basic elements of minutes are listed below.

= Legal Verification. The minutes should show conformance to legal requirementsby establishing the date, hour and place of the meeting and whether it is a regularor special meeting or a public hearing.

= Attendance. The minutes should record the attendance of members and officialsand the time for appearance or departure of any member not present throughoutthe entire meeting.

= Approval of previous minutes. The minutes should record official approval of theminutes of the preceding meeting, together with any additions or corrections made

by members.= Communications. Minutes should note the identity of persons appearing to make

oral presentations to the legislative body and their subject matter. Petitions andother written communications should be noted by source, subject, date anddisposition.

= Reports. Reports to the legislative body should be identified by the presenter,subject, date and manner of disposition. The full text of oral or written reports is

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

22/65

5

not included in the minutes.

= Approval to pay bills. In some COGs, bills are presented to the legislative bodyfor approval before payment. These are most often presented in a bills payablelist, including the name of the creditor, the object of expenditure and the amount.Including the entire list in the minutes is not necessary.

= Resolutions. Resolutions should be identified by number and title. Unlessspecifically required by the COG solicitor, it is unnecessary to enter the full text ofthe resolution in the minutes.

= Contracts. Minute entries on awarding contracts should include the subject of thepurchase, identification of all bidders and amounts and statements establishing thefulfillment of legal requirements.

= Oral statements. Minutes should accurately reflect what occurs at a meeting, butunless the legislative body desires a verbatim record, oral expressions of opinions,remarks or statements should not be included on a word-for-word basis. The COGdirector should prepare or have prepared a summary of the discussion in sufficientdetail to provide the reader with a general understanding of the various points ofview and their major proponents.

= Motions. Actions of the legislative body should be made by motion. The minutesshould state the motion and who moved and seconded it. Because many motionsare incomplete, the COG director should not hesitate to read the proposed motionto the legislative body before a vote is taken.

Since minutes of COG meetings have been used by courts as evidence when a lawsuitarises COG directors should take minutes carefully, retain them in a minute book, and ensure thatthey accurately reflect the actions taken at the meeting.

Role of the COG Director

During meetings of the COG's legislative body, the overall role of the COG director is to

encourage elected officials' participation in the decision-making process and to offerrecommendations on issues affecting the COG or the region. The form of this encouragementvaries with the type of meeting and agenda item under discussion. Often at meetings ofsubcommittees of the COG's legislative body, the COG director has a more active role. In theseinformal settings, the COG director may be more free to express recommendations anddemonstrate leadership in articulating potential regional goals. Formal meetings of the COGlegislative body provide the opportunity for elected officials to interact with each other. Thus, therole of the COG director should be more circumspect. Often at these legislative meetings, theideas expressed by the COG director during the subcommittee meetings will surface either by amunicipal official's reference to them or through a direct question to the COG director to providea report to the entire body.

When the COG legislative body discusses policy issues such as voting representation,

funding formulas or general governance, the COG director should not be a main participant, butshould be an active listener who may offer to conduct research, generate alternatives for resolvingthe issue or perform other tasks requested by the officials. When specific programming issues arediscussed, the COG director should actively participate but not dominate the debate. Again, thegoal is to encourage, not stifle, the consensual decision-making process; however, in some casesthe role of the COG director may be one of advocacy for a proposal. It is appropriate whenprogram issues are being discussed, for the director to express a professional opinion on the

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

23/65

6

matter under consideration. Often this assessment will be in opposition to the position of somemembers of the legislative body; however, a COG director's willingness to voice an opinionestablishes a leadership role and earns respect from the municipal officials, whether or not theyagree with the assessment. In these situations, the director's comments should be presented in amanner that is never insulting or demeaning to the municipal officials.

Questions from the officials or the public should be answered in a clear, courteous and

prompt manner. If the question requires research after the meeting adjourns, the answer should beprepared in a timely manner and distributed to all interested parties.

A secondary but important function of the COG director is to confirm meeting logistics.Confirming attendance and determining whether the regular municipal representative is able toattend, or an alternate municipal representative is needed, are often functions of the COG director.Arranging for alternates could be the difference between obtaining a quorum or canceling thesession because of lack of attendance. If an alternate representative is needed, the director shouldassure that the individual is provided with a complete agenda package, preferably in advance ofthe meeting. When alternates attend a meeting, the COG director should clearly understand thatindividual's voting privilege and refer that information to the chair. To avoid confusion on thealternate's voting status some COG's ask each municipality for a written policy on this issue at thebeginning of every year.

On a periodic basis, it is beneficial for the director to survey the members of the COG'slegislative body to assess how the membership views the manner in which meetings are structuredand to determine whether they feel their information needs as elected officials are being met.

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

24/65

1

4. Communication and Information

A major role of the COG director is to serve as a point of contact for information andcommunication on regional issues. Communication occurs between the COG and municipal

officials, the public and other agencies, such as county, state and federal agencies, authorities andschool districts. The quality of this communication, in large measure, determines the success ofthe COG and the number of programs and services it provides to its members. For instance, thefailure to inform the community that the COG is not another layer of government, but a voluntaryassociation of existing municipalities that have joined together to provide improved and lessexpensive public services, is a major reason why many COGs fail. Without this communityunderstanding of why the COG was created, what the limits of its power are and what benefits itcan offer, elected officials will be suspicious of its activities and reluctant to commit significantfinancial resources.

Whether the COG is large or small, a crucial role of the COG director is to communicatethis information in a clear and understandable way. This knowledge strengthens communitysupport for the COG and fosters the community's willingness to use intergovernmental

cooperation as a method of producing public services and coordinating planning activities.Positive relations between the COG director and municipal officials are not a matter of luck.They are a result of a calculated strategy and a consistent professional approach.

Orientation Sessions

Communication between the elected officials and the COG director should beginimmediately after the election. A congratulatory letter should be mailed acknowledging newlyelected officials' achievement, and advising them of the new responsibilities of their positions asboth municipal and COG officials. The COG director should coordinate this notification with thesecretary or manager of each member municipality. The time period between the Novemberelection and the municipalities' reorganization meetings (the first Monday in January) provides the

opportunity for relaying information to new officials. During these two months, elected officialsare not yet inundated with information from their municipalities and may have more time andfewer distractions. These factors provide a suitable atmosphere for learning about the COG.

In addition to providing written information, another mechanism for informing newlyelected officials about the COG is to invite them to an orientation session. The purpose of thisinformal session is to meet COG staff and learn about the organization. Invitations to theorientation session are more effective when offered in person or over the telephone, especiallywhen this is the COG director's first contact with a newly elected official. If it is not possible forall the newly elected officials to attend a single orientation session, it may be necessary toschedule additional sessions. The orientation session should stress the importance of electedofficial involvement in the COG's decision-making process and identify specific examples of howintergovernmental cooperation does and could benefit the municipality. Topics covered during an

orientation session should include at least the following:= History of the COG.= COG organization and structure.= Decision-making process.= COG finances.= Role of elected officials.

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

25/65

2

= Committee assignments.= Time commitment for COG meetings.= How to suggest items for agendas.= Benefits of municipal participation in the COG.= Future issues and challenges before the COG.= Issues of special concern to the newly elected officials.

Orientation sessions should begin with a brief introduction of each elected official. At themeeting's conclusion, each elected official should be provided with an information packageincluding the COG budget, meeting calendar, organizational chart, articles of agreement andgeneral background about COGs and intergovernmental cooperation such as DCEDsIntergovernmental Cooperation Handbook.

Orientation sessions for new municipal managers/secretaries should be scheduled when itis convenient for those individuals. When new appointments in these offices occur, the COGdirector should consider personally visiting the municipal building to be introduced to theindividual and to schedule an orientation session at a time convenient to the newmanager/secretary.

Reports to Governing Bodies

Board/council members must be kept informed to govern well. Elected officials who arekept current on a problem as it develops are more likely to positively respond to a staff proposalfor resolving the situation. Surprises often produce negative results and could leave theimpression that staff is inept or reluctant about sharing information. There are a variety ofmethods for keeping municipal officials informed. The COG director's choice is limited byfactors such as available time, personnel and budget.

A common approach is to provide monthly reports to all the elected officials and municipalmanagers/secretaries who participate in the COG. These reports could include informationrelating to program activities such as number of building permits issued, joint purchases made orrecreation program participation, future concerns and items of regional interest. Regular monthlycommunication with all the municipal officials develops a role for the COG as an importantsource for local government information. Mailing and duplicating costs for the monthly reportsmay require increased COG expenditures; however, the benefits of having knowledgeable andsupportive municipal officials is worth the investment.

Another approach for encouraging communication to assure that each municipalityparticipating in the COG has an item on its regular meeting agenda entitled COG Reports. Underthis item, the municipal representative to the COG or its committees can provide the entiregoverning board/council with an update of current COG activities. The COG director can assistthe representatives by providing a written summary report or a set of the COG meeting minuteswith important items highlighted.

Other options for communicating with the participating municipalities include thefollowing:

= Preparing articles relating to COG programs for publication in municipalnewsletters.

= Expanding the COG budget format to be an annual report detailing programactivity.

= Attending municipal meetings on a periodic basis to report on current activities.

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

26/65

3

Communications with Municipal Managers/Secretaries

Municipal managers/secretaries are valuable resources for the COG director. Theseindividuals are excellent sources of ideas for regional programs and are reliable barometers of

elected officials' concerns and attitudes. Often they are instrumental in shaping the electedofficials' attitudes and trust in the COG. Cultivating positive working relationships with themunicipal managers/secretaries should be a high priority for the COG director.

The basis for this relationship is trust built upon honest, open and regular communication.There are a variety of options for providing communication between municipal and COG staffs.In some regions, the COG director coordinates monthly meetings of the municipalmanagers/secretaries. Arrangements vary, but one successful approach is to schedule earlymorning breakfast or midday lunch meetings, with the cost and location rotating among theparticipating organizations. These meetings offer a regular forum to discuss and sometimesdefuse intermunicipal concerns. Once strong communication links are established, the municipalmanagers/secretaries should be encouraged to be formally and informally involved in developingand implementing COG programs. Formal involvement includes participating on COG

committees, reviewing reports and proposals and providing comments on COG staff and programperformance. Informal involvement includes personal contacts to solicit guidance and support.

Relations with the Media

Media coverage of COG activities is essential for the public to be knowledgeable ofregional programs. The primary factor in shaping the public's perception of the COG is mediareporting. Typically when the media ignores the COG, there is a corresponding lack of publicknowledge about the organization which translates into ambivalent support from elected officials.Conversely, when the media actively reports on COG activities, the level of communityknowledge and municipal interest increases.

COG directors can utilize the media as an effective tool to inform the community about the

COG and its activities; however, before this can occur, the media must understand how the COGworks and what it does. Media representatives (newspaper, television, radio) should be providedwith an agenda for each regular meeting of the COG's legislative body. Media support can be apowerful ally in informing the public about the COG. Copies of reports should be made availableto the media after distribution to the elected officials. The practice of providing source documentspromotes more accurate and comprehensive reporting. Some COGs have taken advantage ofgovernment/education access channels on cable television networks to broadcast their meetings.

A COG public information program can be greatly enhanced by local media support. Tocultivate such a program, newspapers, radio and television stations should be included on mailinglists for agendas. COG directors should personally advise the media of pending important issuesthat will be considered by the COG legislative body. To strengthen coverage the COG directorshould be willing to provide background information to the media and, as appropriate, supply

them with the resource documents they need including reports and copies of budgets. Whenarranging interviews with the media, it is important that COG directors assure that the reporter hascontacted the appropriate elected official(s) for comment. High profile interviews are best doneby elected officials.

Relations with Other Public Agencies

IndexHome


8/3/2019 PACOG-HB

27/65

4

Meetings of the COG legislative body offer an excellent forum for important public orprivate agencies like authorities, school boards, county commissioners and environmental groupsto discuss issues of shared concern with municipal officials. For the public agency, a COGmeeting provides the opportunity to convey the same information to all the elected officials at thesame time. This reduces the need to attend multiple municipal meetings and reduces thepossibility for misunderstanding. For the municipalities, the COG meeting provides the chance to

discuss an issue with the public agency and exchange views with colleagues about regionalconcerns. Often these forums serve an educational function by encouraging the exchange ofinformation and elevating municipal officials' understanding of an issue. When these forums arereported by the media, the benefits expand to the region.

The ability of the COG to function as a forum for discussing regional issues of sharedconcern is often overlooked. Members of county or authority boards appreciate the opportunity toaddress all the elected officials at one time during a COG meeting rather than attend manyindividual municipal meetings.

Relations with the Public

Positive communication with the public is important for building community support for

regional programs. A major problem for many COGs is a lack of public understanding of how theorganization works and why it benefits the municipalities to participate. Public understandingprovides the foundation for the support of the elected officials. COG directors need to developand strengthen this foundation by enhancing public awareness of the COG. To help inform thepublic, some COGs have developed well-planned and well-executed public relations programs.Common elements usually include annual financial and service reports, leaflets and brochuresexplaining how the COG works and what services it provides, use of radio and television toannounce and cover meetings, open houses and appearances before community groups and atschools.

Conflicts with some citizens are unavoidable. Conflicts can have pos

PACOG-HB

Documents

Transcript of PACOG-HB