Philosophy on Local Government

While local government should borrow best practices from the business sector, I do not believe that Natick should be run like a business for several reasons. Governments and for-profit businesses are driven by fundamentally different goals and values. A for-profit business exists primarily to generate revenue and maximize profits for its shareholders or owners. The ultimate measure of success in a business is financial performance, with decisions often guided by market demands and profitability. 

 

In contrast, the government’s main objective is to serve the public interest and ensure the well-being of its residents. This involves managing services such as education, healthcare, infrastructure, and public safety, which are not always profitable but are vital for the function of society. As such, the focus of government is more on equitable distribution of resources and maintaining social stability rather than maximizing financial returns.

Another key distinction lies in accountability. While businesses are primarily accountable to their owners, investors, and consumers, local government is accountable to its residents. Natick must answer to a wide range of stakeholders, from voters and business owners to parents of children in our schools. This accountability requires town administration to make decisions such as enacting policies for environmental protection, promoting affordable housing or public health initiatives, even if they don't produce immediate financial returns. In contrast, businesses have the flexibility to pursue strategies that align with profit margins, even if they exclude certain demographics or markets.

Additionally, governments operate under a different set of constraints and regulations than businesses. Public sector entities must adhere to laws, constitutions, and checks and balances that often slow down decision-making processes, ensuring that power is not concentrated in the hands of a few individuals. Businesses, however, have the autonomy to innovate, invest, and adapt quickly in ways that governments cannot. Public policies are typically more rigid and require public support and oversight, which can delay or complicate decision-making. This structure is designed to ensure fairness and transparency; businesses, driven by competition, typically operate with more flexibility and speed to maximize profits.

That being said, I support Natick adopting best practices from the private sector that can make it more accountable, more fiscally responsible and more nimble. For example, I think that town administration should adopt Google's OKR framework to set objectives with measurable key outcomes. This method of evaluation prioritizes ambitious goals, provides a framework for accountability, and making the OKRs publicly available promotes transparency. 

 

Where possible, town administration should review operations with an eye towards outsourcing services. As we ramp up the tax collection efforts after a hiatus during Covid, the Finance Department should hire a temp to handle the likely increased phone call volume and visits from residents rather than add a position, even though the cost for a temp for a year will likely be more in the short term than hiring an employee. This approach does not add to our pension obligations. Moreover, town administration should review operations with an eye towards outsourcing services. Beyond that, I support the town's move to regionalizing services such as 911-dispatch; Natick should continue to seek opportunities for regionalization.  These and other efforts undertaken over the past four years will yield a more financially resilient Natick while providing high quality services that our residents and business owners have come to expect.