It was kind of a slow night for news at the City Council meeting tonight. We reviewed the 2010 budget again, with limited interruptions for questions from the councilors. There was some brief banter about cutting jobs and adding jobs, but no decisions were made. All of the public comments were made by the Usual Suspects.

So, I’ve decided instead to offer the councilors a handy guide to surviving the vicious attacks I’ve unleashed, which are slowly tearing the city apart (if you believe my bad press).

<><><><><><><><><><> CLIP HERE <><><><><><><><><><><>

Councilor’s Guide to Surviving Public Criticism from Ryan

The first advice I’ll offer is the old adage, “keep your friends close, and your enemies closer”. It doesn’t hurt to buddy-up to the people who criticize you, and sophisticated politicians know this very well. You’ve got to outmaneuver your critic, schmooze him or her a bit, and help them see your perspective. You can agree to disagree, but still have a healthy respect for the opposition. This simple civility will reduce direct attacks, since your critic now understands you and knows you personally. Many people claim to hate George Bush or Barack Obama, but if they ever met them in person and spent five minutes with them, they’d sing a different tune for sure.

Digging your heels in and trying to ignore it never works. Your critic will only continue to score points while you try to pretend you’re not playing the game. I don’t mean to say that you should always respond directly, but you have to find opportunities to get your point across (online, letters to the editor, etc.). The critic doesn’t have the burden of decision-making, so you can only counter the criticisms. Attacking the critic rarely works, unless the critic is way off-base.

Image is everything in politics. Citizens want to know that you have their interests in mind, and you’ve got to show them that you really do care. You can cover up the times you don’t care by employing some of these time-tested responses to criticism:
CRITICISM #1: Councilor Spendthrift voted to buy something stupid and is wasting money.

Good Response: “This was a long-term decision, and we won’t see the benefits right away. However, this was the best decision we could make at the time, given the information we had. With today’s information, I would have made a different decision.”

Bad Response 1: “Ryan is just misinformed.”
Bad Response 2: “The city staff screwed up again.”
Bad Response 3: Ignore it completely; hope it will go away.

CRITICISM #2: Councilor Meanie is mean to the city staff.

Good Response: “At times, the discussions between the council and the staff can get heated. We’re really all working towards the same goals, and sometimes we have different ideas on how to get there.”

Bad Response 1: “Ryan is just misinformed again.”
Bad Response 2: “The staff has their own hidden agenda. We can’t let them be in control.”
Bad Response 3: Ignore it completely; hope it will go away.

CRITICISM #3: Councilor Dingdong is indecisive and doesn’t think proactively.

Good Response: “Running a city government is different from private enterprise. We’re restricted from taking reckless, unplanned actions because they impact so many people. For example, we can’t just throw down a road anytime somebody wants one. It could cause massive traffic headaches that would cripple the city. Careful planning is required to make a city that will run smoothly for decades.”

Bad Response 1: “Ryan has only been around 6 months. He doesn’t know anything.”
Bad Response 2: “I know you spent a year on this report, but can you do it again?”
Bad Response 3: Ignore it completely; hope it will go away.

These are just a few examples of suggested responses, and are not meant to be a complete guide. There are many other areas of criticism I’ve left out, such as passive-aggression, excessive attention to meaningless details, bullying, sloppy record-keeping, always saying “no”, etc. If you have a particular criticism you need help with, just message me on Facebook, and I’ll help you draft a response (seriously).

One thing that hasn’t been asked of me is WHY I’m picking on the council. Let’s face it; Maple Valley is a pretty ordinary city, and in some cases we’re below average. We don’t have delegations from cities around the world coming to Maple Valley to see how wonderfully we do things here. We’re not a model for other cities to follow. Rather, we’re waiting to see what happens in other cities first.

Regionally, we’re regarded with disdain and shaking heads. I know, because I’ve heard from regional leaders who’ve said as much (if you’d like a suggested response to this criticism, just let me know).

Very soon, we’ll be a city of 25,000 people, and the rules will change. We’ll have to start paying for things like roads that we didn’t have to completely cover before. After 12 years as a smaller city, we’re entering adolescence, and the transition to a grown-up city will be difficult.

So, why do I bother with this? Our time here on Earth is brief, and I’m not content with being ordinary during my short tenure. We can all live extraordinary lives and create something worth talking about, if we are willing to overcome our fears of failure. I want Maple Valley to be the greatest city of its size, and to be a model for other cities to admire and envy. We can be remarkable, but we can’t half-ass it.

Thanks for reading. See you next week.