Part-Time Politicians, Full-Time Budgets: Rethinking Pay, Power, and Roles in Small Communities

7 min read

Local democracy often runs on a paradox: voters want citizen representatives who feel their everyday struggles, yet they also demand professionally crafted budgets that can withstand legal, fiscal, and political scrutiny. When stipends are kept low and positions are technically “part-time,” oversight of multimillion-dollar budgets quietly drifts to full-time staff, raising fears of unaccountable bureaucrats and opaque decisions. This article explores how tools like a budget officer reporting directly to an elected mayor, intensive but time-bounded budget committees, and transparent performance-based budgeting can preserve democratic control without turning every council seat into a full-time career. By examining real-world practices in places like Austin and Madison, along with guidance from the National League of Cities and GFOA, we’ll map out a practical, politically realistic path that keeps budgets both accountable to voters and grounded in professional expertise.

The suggestion to have a budget officer directly accountable to an elected executive strikes a practical balance between democratic accountability and administrative efficiency. This approach allows elected officials to retain oversight of budget priorities without requiring them to become full-time bureaucrats. By hiring a professional budget officer as part of the executive's staff, the elected leader can ensure that technical expertise is applied to the budgeting process while maintaining political accountability to constituents. This method is particularly effective in smaller jurisdictions where the budget process is complex enough to require professional attention but not so large as to demand a full department of analysts.

A well-structured reporting relationship between the budget officer and the elected executive can also serve as an internal check on spending priorities. For example, the City of Austin, Texas uses a model where the City Manager, appointed by the elected City Council, oversees the budget office but remains accountable through regular public hearings and council workshops². Adapting this model to make the budget officer report directly to an elected mayor or county judge (rather than an appointed manager) keeps the process grounded in voter preferences while leveraging technical skills necessary for compliance with state and federal regulations.

Challenges in Reducing Legislative Compensation

While the principle of part-time legislative service is rooted in the ideal of a citizen-led government, reducing or eliminating compensation beyond travel and lodging presents serious operational challenges. Most local elected officials already receive modest stipends, and reducing compensation further can inadvertently restrict public office to those with independent wealth or highly flexible professional schedules. This can reduce the diversity of backgrounds and experiences represented in local governance, which contradicts the goal of responsive representation. According to the National League of Cities, 71 percent of city councilmembers in populations under 25,000 serve on a part-time basis and receive less than $10,000 annually³.

Even in part-time roles, elected officials are expected to attend public meetings, review complex policy documents, meet with constituents, and respond to emergencies. These responsibilities often extend beyond occasional travel and lodging, and without adequate compensation, the pool of qualified candidates may shrink. Practical reforms could include clear term limits, transparent financial disclosures, and performance audits to reduce the risk of entrenched incumbency and self-serving behavior, while still providing the resources necessary for elected officials to fulfill their duties effectively.

Reforming Budget Development Without Full-Time Legislators

When elected officials lack the time or expertise to develop comprehensive budgets, the responsibility often shifts to full-time staff, which can dilute democratic control. However, there are methods to maintain oversight without requiring legislators to become full-time employees. One effective approach is the use of structured budget committees composed of elected officials who meet intensively during key parts of the fiscal cycle. These committees can work closely with the budget officer to set priorities, review proposals, and assess performance metrics. The City of Madison, Wisconsin, for example, uses a Finance Committee composed of elected councilmembers to provide budget direction throughout the year⁴.

Another strategy is the implementation of a formal budget calendar that aligns with the availability of elected officials. A well-organized calendar, with deadlines for departmental submissions, public hearings, and final adoption votes, can help part-time officials stay engaged in the process. Transparent public workshops and digital tools for data visualization can also equip elected leaders and citizens alike to understand and influence fiscal decisions. These techniques help bridge the gap between professional administration and public accountability.

Ensuring Transparency in Budget Oversight

Transparency is essential in any budget process, particularly when full-time staff are involved. To address concerns about unaccountable bureaucrats pursuing expensive or unnecessary projects, local governments should adopt practices such as publishing detailed budget justifications, holding open budget hearings, and integrating performance-based budgeting. These steps allow elected officials and the public to scrutinize spending decisions and evaluate whether programs are achieving intended outcomes. The Government Finance Officers Association recommends the use of performance measures and citizen engagement tools to enhance legitimacy and trust in budget decisions⁵.

In addition, governments can require department heads and budget staff to present proposed changes publicly and respond directly to questions from elected officials. This fosters a culture of accountability and encourages collaboration between staff and policymakers. When elected officials are well-informed through these mechanisms, they are better positioned to challenge or redirect budget proposals that do not align with constituent needs or values. This approach strengthens democratic governance without requiring officials to abandon their primary careers.

Designing Sustainable Governance Structures

Long-term solutions must focus on structural reforms that balance efficiency, accountability, and citizen participation. One effective model is the council-executive system, where policy direction is set by an elected council and day-to-day administration is handled by an elected or appointed executive with a dedicated staff. This structure allows elected officials to set policy and retain oversight without becoming burdened by daily operational tasks. When paired with strong internal controls, auditing functions, and citizen advisory boards, this model can help prevent the concentration of power and reduce the risk of wasteful spending.

Another component of sustainable governance is civic education and engagement. When voters understand the limitations and responsibilities of elected officials, they are better equipped to evaluate performance and advocate for reforms. Local governments can invest in public budgeting academies, participatory budgeting initiatives, and digital platforms that allow residents to provide input on spending priorities. These tools not only inform the public but also reduce the burden on elected officials by creating a more informed and engaged electorate.

Conclusion: A Balanced Path Forward

The tension between maintaining a citizen-led government and ensuring professional fiscal management is a legitimate concern in local governance. While it may not be feasible to eliminate all forms of compensation or expect part-time legislators to develop complex budgets unaided, there are practical ways to ensure accountability and responsiveness. Hiring a budget officer directly accountable to an elected executive offers a viable solution that preserves both democratic oversight and administrative competence.

By integrating transparent procedures, structured oversight, and civic participation, local governments can maintain public trust while delivering essential services effectively. The goal should not be to eliminate professional administration, but to align it closely with the will of the people through elected leadership. This balanced approach fosters a responsive, efficient, and ethical system of governance that reflects the best of democratic ideals and professional standards.

Bibliography

National League of Cities. "Local Elected Officials: Compensation and Time Requirements." Accessed April 2024. https://www.nlc.org/resource/local-elected-officials-compensation-and-time-requirements.
City of Austin, Texas. "Budget Process Overview." Accessed April 2024. https://www.austintexas.gov/department/budget.
National League of Cities. "City Councils: Structure and Responsibilities." Accessed April 2024. https://www.nlc.org/resource/city-councils-structure-and-responsibilities.
City of Madison, Wisconsin. "Finance Committee." Accessed April 2024. https://www.cityofmadison.com/council/financecommittee.
Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). "Best Practices in Public Budgeting." Accessed April 2024. https://www.gfoa.org/materials/budget-award.