A Part-Time Job----With More than Full Time Hours and Commitment

There is a debate afoot: Some folks believe only retirees, business-owners, or those that are independently wealthy should be able to serve on Boards, Councils, and Commissions.  That would unfairly inhibit the potential service of working-class, working-age candidates, though.  It is for this reason that the vast majority of non-wealthy, working-age Board, Commission, and Council Members maintain their careers through their years of public service.  To demand otherwise would simply serve as a punishment for public service.

Lately there has been some rumblings online about the level of engagement a commissioner, a board member of the Escambia County Commission, should have.  Specifically--is the position of a County Commissioner a full-time, or a part-time position?

Because I am entering my 13th year as a member of a locally-elected public board of directors (Escambia County School Board-2006 until 2016, Escambia County Commissioner 2016-present)  I know the answer from my perspective--based upon my own experience and also based upon the inputs I gleaned from meeting peers from around the country at statewide and national conferences over the past 13 years.

If an individual is truly serious about being effective and knowing his/her role in the hierarchy-I believe the answer to the Part-Time/Full Time question about board membership is this:

It is a part-time job that requires more than full-time hours and commitment to the position .

 But what does that mean, you ask?  Well, I will explain it from my perspective but first I would encourage the readers to look at this nicely done, easy to read two-pager from the National Association of Counties (NACO).  And then this interesting piece from the Association of County Commissioners of Georgia (ACCG).

Interestingly--both of these publications refer to the job as "part-time" with the caveat that the position is actually "on-call" 24-7, 365--which I can attest to being a true statement.

So here is my philosophy on this issue.  A person that steps up and takes on the challenge to run for an office, win an election, and serve his community should not be "punished" for his public service by having to quit his/her business or resign from his/her career.

Most rational folks understand this.   Yes, the pay for our work is excellent.  But it is set by the state--just as the salaries for School Board Members, Sheriff's, Property Appraisers, and other constitutional offices are set by formula set in statutes.  Candidates are well aware of the pay before they run.  If they win, they get the emoluments of the position--including the paycheck...with neither the expectation that they resign from their careers nor the requirement to do so-which is as it should be.

And this is why the majority of the folks of working-age that serve their communities on Councils, Boards, and Commissions work a regular job as well or own their own business, or are independently wealthy.  Looking at the two county area (Escambia and Santa Rosa)  seven of the ten currently-seated County Commissioners derive income from work outside of their BCC seats (Attorney, Auto Mechanic, Financial Planner, RE Salesman, Navy Contractor Employee, Navy Reservist, Construction Company Owner), two are retired and earn pensions (USAF and Gulf Power), and ONLY ONE (10%) is a true full-time County Commissioner--only deriving income from his BCC salary.

So should a person who has a career or an income from employment outside his elected seat with an employer that is willing to support such an employee's public service be shamed into "quitting" his career for for a 4-year job that does not require the presence of that official from 8-5PM M-F?  Of course not--because to have that mindset would 1.)


limit the candidates for office to only those who are wealthy, self-employed, or retired. and 2.) have the negative effect of punishing a public servant for his/her public service.

And the job of county commissioner, especially locally in Escambia County, does not lend itself to longevity.  (I'd encourage anyone who does not believe this to look at the wall of commissioners on the 2nd floor of the County Admin Bldg. on Palafox Place.  It appears, using rough math, that the average consecutive term in office lifespan of an incumbent BCC member locally has actually been  less than two terms historically.)  Check my math on that if you don't believe me...  And entering my third year in this office I see the reasons why.

We do good things daily--but we also make people angry with most decisions we make which has the ancillary effect of creating enemies with long memories.  This, combined with our peculiar practice of engaging in district-specific elections creating an exceptionally small pool of actual voters who participate in closed primary elections locally--and --voila!  The recipe for razor-thin elections with lots of turnover in these elected offices is perfected....

So, in closing, I think (my opinion based upon my 13 years experience) the measure of an effective representative on a local board/commission/council should be discerned by the regularity of his/her attendance at meetings and workshops, his/her willingness to bring ideas/solutions to the board, his/her ability to lead the board, his/her creativity, his/her ability to work well with staff, and his/her openness/transparency with constituents and counterparts alike.  And if a representative is doing that----trust me on this:  They won't be only working "part-time"----even if they have a "day job."

Weekends, evenings and other times will be consumed with study, research, meetings, events, outreach, media, attending community functions, communicating with citizens, etc. etc..

Yes, this is a job with lots of responsibilities that requires much.  What it should not and does not require is that an officeholder voluntarily leave his/her career. 

And that's why the ones who have things going on and have careers and can hold jobs--do both.

 Nothing wrong with that at all--in my opinion--and this is why most of the officeholders derive income from outside work while serving.