Every local government has to answer two questions. Who decides what the community should do? And who makes sure it actually gets done? A council-manager city gives those questions two different answers. The elected council decides. A professional manager, hired by the council, carries the decision out. On paper that is simple. In daily practice, the line between deciding and doing runs through nearly every agenda item, email and hallway conversation in city hall. If you work as a clerk, a department head, an analyst or a council aide, you stand on that line more often than almost anyone.
This article starts from the basic idea and builds outward. It covers what each side is responsible for, why the structure was designed that way, how the division shows up in agenda work and staff communication, and where friction tends to start. One caution before we begin: forms of government vary by state, by charter and by local custom. Two council-manager cities in the same county can divide duties quite differently. Treat what follows as a framework, then check it against your own charter, code and rules, and confirm specifics with your city attorney.
Start with the basic idea: deciding and doing
Picture the work of a city as two activities. One is choosing: setting priorities, weighing tradeoffs, deciding where money goes, adopting rules. The other is executing: hiring people, managing contracts, fixing streets, issuing permits, answering the phone. Council-manager government assigns the first activity mainly to the council and the second mainly to the manager.
The council is the representative part of the system. Its members are elected and answer to voters. In most council-manager cities, the council:
- Sets community goals and priorities
- Adopts ordinances and resolutions
- Reviews, amends and adopts the budget
- Approves contracts and other actions above the limits it has delegated
- Hires the manager, evaluates the manager, and can remove the manager
The manager is the administrative part of the system. The manager is appointed for professional training and experience, not elected, and answers to the council as a body. In most council-manager cities, the manager:
- Directs and supervises staff, often including hiring department heads
- Implements the policies the council adopts
- Prepares and proposes the budget, then administers it once adopted
- Provides professional recommendations on items before the council
- Oversees day-to-day service delivery
Why the structure was designed this way
The design rests on two ideas. First, residents should receive services consistently, whether or not they know someone on the council. Keeping elected officials out of daily administrative decisions, such as which street gets plowed first or which applicant gets hired, protects that consistency. Second, the council needs one person it can hold accountable for how the organization performs. Instead of supervising a dozen department heads, the council supervises one manager, who supervises everyone else.
A common comparison is a board of directors and a chief executive. The comparison helps, but it has limits. A city council deliberates in public, follows open meeting and public records laws, and answers to voters rather than shareholders. Those differences matter, as you will see when we get to staff communication.
The line is a shared border, not a wall
Students of public administration learn early that the separation between policy and administration is an ideal, not a description of how things actually work. Managers shape policy all the time, through the options they present, the recommendations they make and the way they frame a problem. Councils care about administration all the time, because residents judge them by whether services work.
A more useful way to think about it: the council leans toward questions of what and why, and the manager leans toward questions of how and who. Both sides cross the border regularly. Healthy organizations are not the ones where nobody crosses it. They are the ones where people know they are crossing it and do so openly, through the proper channels.
Forms of government vary, so start with your own documents
Before applying any general description, find out what form your city or county actually uses and how your own documents divide authority. Common forms include:
- Council-manager. An elected council sets policy and appoints a professional manager to run administration.
- Mayor-council. An elected mayor serves as chief executive. In a "strong mayor" arrangement, the mayor typically has broad administrative authority. In a "weak mayor" arrangement, the council keeps more of that authority. Some mayor-council cities also employ a chief administrative officer who reports to the mayor.
- Commission. Elected commissioners act together as the legislative body and individually oversee specific departments.
- Town meeting and representative town meeting. Voters, or elected representatives, act as the legislative body, often with a select board and an appointed administrator.
Counties have their own structures. Some have an elected county executive, some have a governing board that appoints a county administrator or manager, and some have a board that oversees departments more directly. Many places, city and county alike, blend features of more than one form.
Even within council-manager cities, the mayor's role differs. In some, the mayor is chosen by the council from among its members and mainly presides at meetings. In others, voters elect the mayor directly, and the charter may give the office additional duties. Do not assume. Read your charter.
Where to look
| Document | What it usually tells you | Who can help you read it |
|---|---|---|
| City charter | The form of government, the powers of the council, mayor and manager, and any limits on individual members directing staff | City attorney, city clerk |
| State statutes | The framework for cities without a charter and many rules that apply to all local governments, including open meetings and records | City attorney, state clerk or municipal association |
| Municipal code | Delegations of authority, such as contract signing limits, purchasing rules and department structure | City attorney, finance director |
| Council rules of procedure | How items get on the agenda, how motions and direction work, how members request information | City clerk |
| Council and staff relations policy | Expectations for communication between elected officials and staff, if your council has adopted one | Manager's office, city clerk |
| Manager's employment agreement | Evaluation timing, duties and reporting expectations | Manager's office, human resources |
| Prior minutes | Standing direction the council has given that still applies | City clerk |
If you are new to a city, reading the charter sections on the council and the manager takes about an hour and will answer more questions than months of asking around.
Who does what: a working map
The table below shows how responsibilities commonly divide in council-manager cities. "Commonly" is doing real work in that sentence. Use the last column to note where your city differs.
| Area | Council (as a body) | Manager | Confirm locally |
|---|---|---|---|
| Goals and priorities | Sets them, often at an annual goal-setting session | Advises, then turns goals into work plans | How often goals are reviewed |
| Budget | Reviews, amends, adopts | Prepares and proposes, then administers | Who can move funds after adoption, and under what limits |
| Ordinances and resolutions | Adopts or rejects | Drafts with legal review and makes recommendations | Readings, notice and effective dates |
| Contracts | Approves those above delegated limits | Negotiates, and signs within delegated authority | Dollar thresholds in your purchasing rules |
| Department heads | Usually no direct role; sometimes confirms appointments | Usually appoints, supervises and evaluates | Whether confirmation is required |
| The manager | Hires, evaluates, can remove | Reports to the council as a whole | Evaluation process and timing |
| Staff assignments | Gives direction through majority action | Assigns and supervises the work | Rules for individual member requests |
| Resident concerns | Hears them and refers them | Makes sure they are handled consistently | Whether a referral process exists |
| Agenda | Adds items by rule or majority | Prepares items and staff reports, often with the clerk | How members request new items |
The council acts as a body
This is the single most important principle in council-manager government, and the one most often misunderstood. The council's authority belongs to the council acting together, by majority, at a properly noticed meeting. An individual council member, outside that setting, usually has no authority to direct staff.
That does not make individual members powerless. They vote, propose items, ask questions, represent constituents and persuade colleagues. But persuasion and direction are different things. Many charters make this explicit through what is often called a noninterference provision, which limits individual members from directing staff or interfering in personnel decisions. The wording and enforcement vary, so read yours.
The mayor in a council-manager city is often in the same position as other members on this point, even though the mayor presides and represents the city publicly. Again, the charter controls.
The manager is the single channel
Staff take direction from the manager, through the chain of supervision, and the manager takes direction from the council as a body. This "one boss" arrangement protects staff. If seven council members could each assign work, a department head would be forced to choose between competing elected officials, and whoever lost would remember. Routing direction through the manager means staff can do their jobs without picking political sides.
Where the clerk and the attorney fit
Two positions sit in an unusual spot. The city clerk may be appointed by the manager, appointed by the council or elected by voters, depending on the city. Regardless of who appoints the clerk, the clerk's core duties (agendas, minutes, records, elections in many places) serve the council as a whole and the public. Clerks are expected to stay neutral among members.
The city attorney may be on staff or under contract, and may be appointed by the council or by the manager. In general, the attorney represents the city as an organization, which acts through its council, rather than any individual official. Ask your attorney how they understand their client relationship, because it shapes how they will respond when members ask for individual legal advice.
How the division shows up in agenda work
The agenda is where deciding and doing meet in public. Each step of agenda work reflects the split between council and manager, sometimes in ways staff do not notice until something goes wrong.
Getting an item on the agenda
In many cities, the manager's office and the clerk assemble the agenda from departmental items, contracts that need approval and required public hearings. Council members and the mayor can usually add items too, but the rules for doing so vary. Some councils let any member place an item. Others require a second member's support, or a majority vote at a prior meeting, before staff spend time preparing a full report.
These rules exist for a reason that goes back to first principles: staff time is an administrative resource the manager is responsible for. A rule requiring majority support before staff research a new idea protects that resource while still giving every member a path to raise an issue. If your rules are unclear on this, the clerk is usually the right person to propose clarifying language.
The staff recommendation belongs to staff
A staff report carries the manager's professional recommendation, prepared by the department under the manager's authority. The council is free to disagree, and often does. That is the system working as intended. Staff provide their best analysis, the council weighs it alongside community values and political judgment, and the council decides.
Problems start when staff adjust a recommendation to match the expected vote, or when a council member pressures staff to change a report before it is published. Either way, the council loses an honest professional opinion, which is one of the main things the council-manager form is supposed to provide. If a department head is uneasy about a recommendation, that conversation belongs with the manager, not with individual council members.
Direction from the dais
During meetings, council members often say things like "I'd like staff to look into this." Whether that comment is direction depends on your rules and on whether a majority supports it. A comment from one member is not, by itself, an instruction to staff in most council-manager cities. Direction generally comes from a motion that passes, or in some councils from a clear expression of majority consensus that the chair confirms on the record.
Clerks play a quiet but important role here. When direction is ambiguous, a presiding officer or the manager can ask, before moving on, whether there is majority support. Minutes then record what the council actually directed. Without that clarity, staff end up guessing, and different departments may guess differently.
Study sessions and workshops
Study sessions are where the council and manager most openly share the border. The council explores options without taking final action, and staff explain tradeoffs, costs and implementation realities. These sessions work best when staff present options rather than a single answer, and when the council's goal is to give general direction rather than to design the details. The details of implementation are the manager's job. The goals and limits are the council's.
How it shows up in everyday staff communication
Most friction in council-manager cities does not happen at meetings. It happens in email, phone calls and quick conversations in the hallway. Here is how the division of roles applies to the communication you handle every week.
Information versus direction
A council member asking for information is usually within bounds. A council member asking for work, or for a change in how work is done, is usually asking for direction, which belongs with the manager. The distinction is not always obvious, so here is a rough guide:
- Usually information: What is the status of a project? When is the next public hearing on an item? How many permits were issued last quarter? What does the adopted budget include for a program?
- Usually direction: Please prepare an analysis of a new option. Please change the schedule for a project. Please hold off on issuing a contract. Please assign someone to a specific neighborhood issue.
When a request falls in the second category, a respectful reply acknowledges the member and routes the request. Something like: "Thank you for raising this. I've shared your request with the City Manager's office so it can be considered with our other priorities, and they'll follow up with you." That reply is neither a refusal nor a commitment. It puts the request where the system expects it to go.
Equal information for all members
A second principle sits beside the first. When one council member receives substantive information that could affect a decision, the other members generally should receive it too. Unequal information erodes trust quickly, because members who learn later that a colleague was briefed privately may conclude that staff are playing favorites.
Many cities handle this by having the manager's office send informational memos to the full council, or by maintaining a shared log of questions and answers. Routine scheduling details do not need this treatment. Anything that bears on an upcoming vote probably does.
Constituent concerns forwarded by a council member
Council members hear from residents constantly, and forwarding a concern to staff is a normal part of representation. The administrative question is how staff treat that concern. The principle of consistent service suggests treating a forwarded concern like any other service request: logged, prioritized and handled under the same standards. A pothole reported through a council member should not jump ahead of a pothole reported through the city's service line simply because of who forwarded it.
Staff can still close the loop with the council member, which is courteous and helps the member answer their constituent. The goal is responsiveness without preferential treatment.
Open meeting and public records cautions
Two legal areas shape staff communication with council members, and both vary significantly by state:
- Open meeting laws. In many states, a series of private communications among council members can add up to an improper meeting if a quorum discusses or deliberates on public business outside a noticed meeting. Staff can unintentionally become the link, for example by relaying one member's position to others, or by sending an email to the full council that invites reply-all discussion. Ask your city attorney how your state treats these situations and whether your office should use blind copies or one-way informational memos.
- Public records laws. Communications between staff and council members about city business are often public records, even when sent from personal devices or accounts. Retention rules and exemptions differ by state. Write every message as if it may be read aloud at a meeting, and follow your records retention schedule.
Common friction points and what helps
Friction in council-manager government is normal. Elected officials feel pressure from residents, staff feel pressure from deadlines, and both are working with limited time and money. The friction points below come up again and again. Recognizing them early makes them easier to handle.
One member giving direction
What it looks like: A council member calls a department head and asks them to change a project schedule or start new research.
Why it happens: The member is responding to constituents and may not know, or may not accept, the limits on individual direction. New members in particular often come from settings where asking the person who does the work is the obvious move.
What helps: A consistent, polite routing practice that every department follows, plus orientation for new members that explains the reasoning, not just the rule.
The small favor
What it looks like: A request to expedite a permit, waive a fee or check on a specific resident's case.
Why it happens: It rarely feels like interference to the person asking. It feels like helping a constituent.
What helps: Treating the request as a service inquiry, applying the normal standard and telling the member what that standard is. Staff should document these requests in the usual way.
Council drifting into administration
What it looks like: Council discussion at a meeting turns to which employee should handle a task, which vendor should be chosen when the decision was delegated, or how a department should schedule its crews.
Why it happens: Residents hold council members responsible for results, so members reach for the levers that seem closest to the problem.
What helps: Managers and presiding officers can redirect the conversation toward goals and performance measures. "What outcome would the council like to see?" invites policy discussion instead of operational detail.
Staff drifting into policy
What it looks like: A real policy choice gets made quietly during implementation, such as narrowing eligibility for a program or changing a service level, without bringing the choice to the council.
Why it happens: Staff are trying to move quickly or avoid a contentious meeting.
What helps: A habit of asking, "Would a reasonable council member expect to decide this?" If the answer is yes, the item belongs on an agenda. This friction point gets less attention than council overreach, but it damages trust just as much.
Uneven information
What it looks like: Members who meet often with the manager or department heads know more than members who do not.
What helps: Routine informational updates sent to the whole council, and a manager's practice of offering the same briefing to every member before major items.
Personnel pressure
What it looks like: A council member pushes for a particular hire, promotion or discipline below the manager level.
Why it matters: Personnel decisions below the manager are among the clearest administrative responsibilities in most charters, and interference can create legal exposure for the city. Staff who receive this kind of pressure should notify the manager or human resources promptly.
Transitions
Elections, a new mayor, a new manager or a council majority that has shifted can all reset expectations. What one council accepted, the next may not. Use transitions as a reason to revisit your council and staff relations policy rather than assuming the old understanding carries over.
Habits that keep the roles clear
Clear roles do not maintain themselves. They depend on small habits practiced across the organization. Here is what each group of staff can do.
Manager's office
- Propose, and periodically ask the council to review, a written council and staff relations policy
- Offer the same briefing to every member before significant items
- Track requests from individual members so patterns become visible
- Bring real policy choices to the council instead of settling them administratively
City clerk
- Keep the agenda rules current and explain them to new members
- Record direction in the minutes clearly, noting whether it came from a motion or from confirmed consensus
- Flag ambiguous direction to the presiding officer or the manager before the meeting moves on
- Coordinate with the city attorney on open meeting cautions for council communications
Department heads and staff
- Answer simple information requests, copy the manager's office and route anything that looks like direction
- Treat constituent concerns forwarded by members like any other service request
- Write staff reports that present an honest professional recommendation
- Raise disagreements about recommendations with the manager, not with individual members
Council support staff and aides
- Help members frame requests as questions or proposed agenda items rather than as instructions to departments
- Send member questions through the agreed channel
- Keep track of which answers should be shared with the full council
A quick role-clarity checklist
Use this checklist when reviewing your organization's practices, perhaps once a year or after an election.
- We have read the charter sections on the council, mayor and manager within the past year
- Our council rules explain how members add agenda items and request staff research
- We have a written council and staff relations policy, or a plan to propose one
- New council members receive an orientation that explains the division of roles and the reasons behind it
- Departments use a consistent practice for routing member requests
- Substantive information given to one member is shared with all
- Minutes clearly record what direction the council gave and how
- Our city attorney has advised us on open meeting risks in staff communication with council members
- Constituent concerns from members follow the normal service request process
- Policy choices discovered during implementation come back to the council
Next steps
You do not need to fix everything at once. Start with what you can control this month.
- Read your charter. Find the sections on the council, mayor and manager, and note any noninterference language. Write down anything that surprised you.
- Ask your city attorney two questions. How does our state's open meeting law affect staff communication with council members? And what does our charter allow individual members to request from staff?
- Check your routing practice. Ask three departments how they handle a direct email from a council member. If the answers differ, that is your first conversation with the manager's office.
- Review your minutes. Look at the last few meetings and see whether council direction is recorded clearly enough that staff know what they were asked to do.
- Plan for the next transition. If an election is coming, start preparing orientation material on roles now rather than after new members are seated.
Shared records help everyone stay on the same page. Some cities use tools such as Govera to track commitments made in minutes and prepare per-item council briefings drawn from their own records, with staff reviewing every output. Whatever tools you use, the underlying habits matter most: direction comes from the council as a body, administration runs through the manager, and everyone gets the same information.
