At the January 28 meeting where he floated the idea of selling the Palm Harbor golf course, City Council member Charles Gambaro said he wanted to see posted on the city’s website every amenity’s finances, “the Southwest Rec Center, you know, other places,” as he put it, referring to the Southern Recreation Center. “How far in the red are we in those areas when you add all that stuff up?”
City staff was stunned, not just because all those numbers are already on the website, but because of all the council members, Gambaro has the most experience in government and ought to know better: parks, like roads, like fire stations, like cops (like militaries), only cost money. They’re not here to make money. Nothing in government is. If it does, something is amiss.
But the fetish of government as a business has a stranglehold on politicians left or right, in the South especially. The mayor likes to call the city “Palm Coast Inc.” and wants a “CEO” to manage it, which is why he and Gambaro have downplayed the importance of candidates with city or county managing experience. The fetish for a manager plucked out of the military is just as brawny.
It’s a mistake. It will compound Palm Coast’s problems, which for the most part were not created by incompetent management. The city administration, because of its professionalism and deeply credentialed staff, has for years been the last thing standing between chaos and civility, between governing and fiscal, populist irresponsibility. The city’s problems are the result of a string of short-sighted councils enslaved to low property taxes at any price, and councils repeatedly gutless in the face of public opposition to such standard revenue sources as the utility franchise fee, the public service tax, the local-option sales tax.
That’s one of the reasons the better cut of city manager candidates is not applying to Palm Coast. No manager worth his or her ICMA credentials is going to knowingly take a job where ideological blinders set them up for failure. And that’s before accounting for candidates’ trepidations over the recent councils outdoing the Oval Office with performative spectacles.
The sources of most of that embarrassment are gone, and this new council has been surprisingly functional (between Theresa Pontieri’s iconoclasm and Ty Miller’s pragmatism, we may have something). It’s what happens when you trust your administration. Too bad Interim Manager Lauren Johnston has too much sense to want to take the top job permanently. She just got her master’s in emergency management. It would be a perfect fit.
But the stink lingers, and the CEO fetish is standing by as the council desperately dredges for that permanent manager, what would be its fifth to hold the job since the dreadful days of Chairman Landon, when the trains ran on time but Palm Coast felt like a suburb of autocratic Singapore.
Last Tuesday a resident implored the council to hire a “successful businessman on the council who knows how to raise money for the city instead of digging in our pockets all the time.” She did not catch her own irony: that the only way to raise money in government is to raise taxes (or fees, if you like the euphemism).
But who would that executive be? The CEO of Silicon Valley Bank might be looking for work. Maybe Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos? None of the CEOs who contributed so mightily to the housing collapse got indicted so some of them are surely available, not to mention the CEOs retired at Hammock Dunes on the riches they made from the savings and loan collapse–all of which government, that perennial incompetent, bailed out, even in Flagler: the county just finished paying off that $3.2 million debt it was left with after developer Bobby Ginn skipped from the hangar it built for him at the county airport.
FDR said of business leaders “that most of them can’t see farther than the next dividend.” They would be a fish out of water in government, especially if driven exclusively by efficiency and low taxes for the sake of low taxes. They’d probably mistake a comprehensive plan for a layoff strategy and amenities for perks undeserved by a mass of proles.
Why bother with regularly paved roads? Why bother with sumptuous rec centers, a swimming pool or a golf course that attract residents, make them happy and draw new arrivals? Why waste money on culture and the arts or the odd low-income housing subsidy and all those cops and firefighters. It’s not like the city’s geriatrics are running around holding you up with AR-15s (though funding cops has been sacrosanct in this town).
No matter what its Samaritan mission statement may say, a private company’s focus is on maximizing profits, not seeking the public interest. Everything else is marketing. If it fails that test, it’s out of business. If it fails that test with a government on the hook, taxpayers pick up the tab. Always. Government is not the fool, not the incompetent, not the culprit. It’s the savior.
A government is not out to make money or win a war. Its only purpose is the public interest: to keep us safe, enhance our quality of life, ensure our toilets flush, maintain our roads, foster a sustainable environment for students, residents and businesses to prosper. It operates only to collect and spend money to those ends. Wisely, we hope.
You don’t get a dividend check from the city because you get something better: when you sell your home, your capital gains will have improved because property values have improved because the quality of life has improved because the city made sure that it would by “wasting” all that money on amenities and the rest of it. None of it made money. It devoured it. None of it is compatible or even remotely similar to how a business operates, especially in Florida, where governments are open books and companies are their own little Kremlins.
None of these differences are reconcilable because government is not like a business, it’s not like the military. It is its own creature. Only when its leaders understand that will they operate it as it should be operated: as a trust that may apply some management principles from business and leadership (and DEI skills from the military), but that best runs on its own organic and unique methods.
Palm Coast is not a barrack or a board room, just as we’re not its troops, its employees or its customers. The city is our representative government, balancing our myriad interests for the benefit of the whole. We only expect, and are owed, its services. Let it govern accordingly, with the only kind of leader fit for the job: not a soldier, not a CEO, not an entrepreneur with a moussed resume, but a city manager with the record to prove it.
Pierre Tristam is the editor of FlaglerLive. A version of this piece airs on WNZF.
bill romano says
This long winded dissertation is off base and typical of a liberal Marxist rant.
Government should be run like a business! What President Trump is doing with the federal government budget is to make it responsible to the people. Having a CEO to run the City of Palm Coast makes perfect sense!
The professional bureaucrats that head each department are doing what they should —- to manage according to budget, which needs to be overseen by the Council and the Manager.
Governments need to be responsible and accountable and a city manager needs to be able to do both! A CEO background for the City Manager would be ideal!
Jim says
Well said. I hope the council reads this and at least thinks about it.
I’ve worked for ex-military in civilian management leadership positions and very few of them can translate from military to civilian leadership and management positions.
And a CEO manages to the bottom line. How do you make that happen? Cut costs, put off projects and pressure employees to “do more with less”. It’s a short term way to manage and it is not sustainable.
Why would we not want someone who is familiar with city management? I can’t understand that. If a candidate has proven themselves in this environment, it’s a pretty good indicator.
Dakota Brooks says
When people say they want a “business person” in office, I take that to mean someone who can move things along efficiently and maintain a certain level of professionalism. Business leaders are often seen as decisive thinkers, capable of problem-solving and making informed choices—qualities that, when balanced with a genuine commitment to public needs, can serve a city well.
The author’s points are valid and fair, but using metrics to guide decision-making isn’t inherently a bad thing—they can be customized to fit the needs of any organization, including a city. You can absolutely measure whether a city is a good place to live based on whatever standards the community values, and a skilled businessperson would work toward achieving those objectives.
Unfortunately, that level of effectiveness and professionalism hasn’t always been reflected in local government, which makes it difficult to trust the person’s decision-making process [and motives]. At times, it’s felt less like leadership and more like watching a committee try to assemble IKEA furniture—without the instructions! 😉
Tony says
Sounds to me that we need Pierre as our city manager !!!
Pierre Tristam says
I can barely manage my four cats’ shitboxes and I’m a CEO (you know, of this little FlaglerLive enterprise and its staff of 600) so that disqualifies me right there. Plus city staff would have me shot by sundown and shredded into that gruel they’re spreading on our streets because the council won’t appropriate money for real asphalt.
Rolfe says
A very good read.
Dennis C Rathsam says
AS you all know, Pierre & I have different views on many things> BUT I agree with him 100% ! He is spot on, this is a clusterfuck of magnificant proporetion,s….. Boy are we screwed
David W Ferguson says
Interesting perspective Mr. Tristam. The current “ interim “ nature of the City Manager role coupled with the past Council’s dynamic within the Bevin era have encouraged City Council to pursue micromanaging initiatives reflecting a seeming lack of trust with staff and rank/ file employees. Hopefully, this trend will evolve back into “ big picture “ oversight and prudent policy making priorities once a permanent City Manager is hired
John Q, CEO, EIEIO says
Know what it takes to be a CEO of a corporation? $87.50
At least in Florida. Give yourself any title you want at sunbiz.org.
85% of all corporations fail within the first five years. So let’s not all get too gimpy when some former CEO wants to run our government. As the article suggests – that’s the last thing you’d want.
Sherry says
Excellent editorial Pierre! We have the same exact problem at the federal level. Governments should ever be run as businesses!
This from the Harvard Business Review:
Donald Trump ran his campaign with the promise to manage the U.S. government like a business. In fact, he just announced that his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, will head up a “SWAT team” dedicated to making this happen.
Trump assumes, as do many Americans, that the country’s major problem is too much government. In my view, the United States is not suffering from too much government so much as from too much business all over the government. This president came into office to challenge “the establishment,” only to ensconce the country’s powerful business establishment in his cabinet, at the expense of Washington’s weaker political establishment.
Should government even be run like a business, let alone by businesspeople? No more than business should be run like a government by civil servants. Each in its own place, thank you. Governments experience all kinds of pressures that cannot be imagined in many enterprises, especially the entrepreneurial kind run by Trump.
Consider this: Business has a convenient bottom line, called “profit,” which can readily be measured. What is the bottom line for terrorism: The number of countries on a list, or of immigrants deported, or of walls built? How about the number of attacks that don’t happen? Many activities are in the public sector precisely because their intricate results are difficult to measure.
Running government like a business has been tried again and again, only to fail again and again. In the 1960s, Robert McNamara introduced the Planning-Programming-Budgeting System as a “one-best-way,” businesslike approach to government. The obsessive measuring led to the infamous body counts of the Vietnam War. Later came new public management, a 1980s euphemism for old corporate managing: Isolate activities, put a manager in charge of each one, and hold them responsible for the measurable results. That might work for the state lottery, but how about foreign relations or education, let alone, dare I say, health care? People in government tell me that new public management is still promoted, though now it might better be called “old public management.”
Then there’s the question of customers. “Our hope is that we can achieve successes and efficiencies for our customers, who are the citizens,” Kushner told the Washington Post, echoing a misguided, overworked metaphor. (When he was vice president, Al Gore also referred to the American people as customers.) As I discussed in my Harvard Business Review article, “Managing Government, Governing Management,” I am not a mere “customer” of my government, buying some service at arm’s length. I am a proud and involved citizen of my country.
Business is essential – in its place. So is government, in its place. The place of business is in the competitive marketplace, to supply us with goods and services. The place of government, aside from protecting us from threats, is to help keep that marketplace competitive and responsible. In Washington, which government in recent years has been fighting vigorously for competition and responsibility?
A healthy society balances the power of respected governments in the public sector with both responsible businesses in the private sector and robust communities in what I call the plural sector — the clubs, religions, community hospitals, foundations, NGOs, and cooperatives with which so many of us engage. The plural sector, although the least recognized of the three, is large and diverse. Many of us may work in businesses and most of us may vote for governments, but all of us live much of our lives in the community associations of the plural sector. (The United States has more cooperative memberships than people.) This is the sector that can offset the destructive effects of the pendulum politics that keep so many countries swinging back and forth between public government controls and private market forces. Especially today, we may well have to rely on this sector to restore the balance that has been lost in the polarized, outdated politics of left versus right.
The most democratic nations in the world get closest to balancing themselves across these three sectors — for example, Canada, Germany, and the countries of Scandinavia. During the decades following World War II, the U.S. was closer to that balance. Recall the era’s prosperity and development, social as well as economic, despite high taxes and generous welfare programs.
Then the Berlin Wall fell. Arguably, it landed on the democracies of the West. That is because we misunderstood what brought it down. Western pundits, reflecting the bias that is now so prominent, claimed that capitalism had triumphed. Not at all. Balance had triumphed. While the communist states of Eastern Europe were utterly out of balance, in favor of their public sectors, the successful countries of the West retained a certain balance across all three sectors.
With this misunderstanding, a narrow form of capitalism has been triumphing ever since, throwing America, along with many other countries, out of balance the other way, in favor of private-sector interests. Seen this way, Trump himself is not the problem so much as an extreme manifestation of the larger problem: imbalance in favor of private interests, with too much business involvement in government.
In the United States, this problem has been developing for a long time. The Republic was barely a quarter-century old when Thomas Jefferson expressed the hope that “we shall…crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength.” In the last century, trustbuster Theodore Roosevelt spoke of the “real and grave evils” of too-powerful corporations, arguing that “it should be as much the aim of those who seek for social betterment to rid the business world of crimes of cunning as to rid the entire body politic of crimes of violence.” A few decades later, Dwight Eisenhower warned that “in the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.”
A skeptic might say, “If we’ve always been worried about something and it hasn’t happened yet, maybe it’s time to stop worrying.” But, in fact, the risks have been escalating steadily for some time, and they have sharply increased since capitalism’s triumph in the 1990s.
The Supreme Court granted corporations the right to personhood in 1886, and more recently extended that right to the funding of political campaigns — arguably a tipping point in two centuries of shifting toward private sector power in American society. Look around at the scandal of income disparities, at climate change, exacerbated by excessive consumption, and at the unregulated forces of globalization that are undermining the national sovereignty, and thus the democratic institutions, of so many nations. No wonder voters around the world are demanding change, even if some of the consequences are ill-considered. The valid side of their concerns will have to be addressed.
The relationship between business and government, a separation of powers no less vital than that within government itself, has become so confounded that it threatens American democracy itself. When free enterprise in an economy becomes the freedom of enterprises-as-people in a society, to paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, government of the real people, by the real people, and for the real people shall perish from the Earth.
Leadership Development
The 4 Types of Thinking Leaders Need to Practice-and Teach
Career Transitions
How to Get Hired When AI Does the Screening
John R says
Thank you Pierre.
celia pugliese says
Exactly! Government is not for profiteering is to properly use the taxes they collect from us to first and foremost give us the services we pay for, something that this county and city don’t due as intended. All our amenities( sports, swimming, golf, pickle ball, tennis , socker, football, basketball and other sport are needed to preserve our health, quality of life and value of our city and whether fee user sustained or tax sustained are not to produce a profit just content if brake even which they don’t yet (maybe over inflated expenses). Our sport courts or any amenities are not supposed to be for sale. Is a shame that the school board closed the use of the Belle Terre Swim Club pool use to 1,100 paying Palmcoasters members and city did nothing so far to prevent it. Our residents with disabilties, elderly, children and families been stripped of a very healthy amenity that ITT made available to them since 1980’s specially in Palm Coast hot long summers. Shameful to denied the use of the only second pool to the elder, disable and children of Palm Coast a service denied for the taxes we pay. And yes I agree government is not for profit but to give us not take away the services we pay for to them.
JC says
bill romano says
MARCH 6, 2025 AT 3:46 PM
This long winded dissertation is off base and typical of a liberal Marxist rant.
NO OFFENSE, but where the hell the article said anything about Marxism?
Harriet says
I am beginning to think the City of PC as well as this new mayor are totally clueless on how to run the government agency.
It is time to get someone in there that knows what their doing because right now you all are making total fools of yourselves.
Pogo says
@James Joyce
…with a degree in gender studies.
Related
The whole conversation (US), aka, the rest of the story.
https://theconversation.com/us
Cheers
https://www.google.com/search?q=1st+amendment
Skibum says
I think it is certainly true as the article states that Palm Coast has been derailed more often by it’s city council members than anything else. I believe we would be well served if the professional city department heads and agency staff were given more say so, while council members were more of an “ideas” group that took citizens suggestions and tried to reach consensus of overarching strategies, but left the final, hard decisions up to the professional leadership rather than those who just want to play politics. I don’t know if that is possible or not, but something definitely needs to change in light of the fact that so many good employees as well as experienced leadership AND citizens continue to get frustrated, offended and discouraged by the damaging antics of idiots who get elected on the council and then enjoy creating chaos rather than working together to improve the city and our lives.
Nancy N. says
Eh, Bill doesn’t even know what Marxism is. He’s just been propagandized to think that anything he disagrees with is big bad boogeyman Marxism.
celia pugliese says
Sorry that I could only give you one like Sherry!! Excellent post! We are witnessing the fateful trial and error desicions of a so called business man in the WH now, that is only accelerating inflation so pernicious to us all (eggs and gas and all that was so mouthed during election campaign weapons) and tumble Wall Street hundreds of points in last and this week alone. https://apnews.com/article/stocks-markets-rates-tariffs-trump-1ca865fa6abcca716b5e7c9281ea6e07 further mire we better brace for could be coming to us: https://apnews.com/article/trudeau-trump-canada-tariffs-921138ff86144357b36610475d37801e. We better start growing our own food…
Endless dark money says
This is why our empire died. People think everything should be ran like a business for money. Governments are supposed to provide services to their citizens to improve their lives not make a profit for shareholders. They sold your representation then sold off your country for scraps. Who would guessed a logging ceo now in charge of the forest service is gonna clear cut millions of acres of national forests. Who does that help? It helps him make more money that’s all. If there is a hell and you voted for this stain you deserve go there and burn baby burn!!! amerikkka sucks it only benefits the billionaires, burn it down! By the way how many billions in contracts has Elon got of our tax money now 40000000000?
James says
“…Neither a borrower nor lender be, For loan oft loses both itself and friend, And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry. …”
Sage words for someone to give to ones own child starting out on their own. But for government?
My current opinion… a government should be run like a business that neither shows a profit nor a loss. Or perhaps, if it could be accomplished sensibly, with just the smallest of surplus.
“… Costly thy habit as thy purse can buy, But not expressed in fancy; …”
Just an opinion.
Sherry says
Thanks Celia. . . Right Back to Ya!
Those who are Fox addicted and repeat the “talking points” that only private business CEOs (BTW that should be C”F”Os) know how to balance a budget should be looking to “Congress” for their culpability in our national debt.
Consider the (highly unlikely) possibility that if ALL the Billionaires actually stopped using the many “loopholes” in the tax code to AVOID paying their “Fair Share” of taxes, the budget could be much more easily balanced. Go back and study President Bill Clinton’s time as President for an example of how such a thing is possible.
Unfortunately, so many Republicans only see “ONE” way of balancing a budget= “Cut Costs”
It seems their self interested GREED keeps them from looking for ways to= “Increase Revenue/Tax Collecting”
The Republicans will point to the “Tax Chart” to dupe you into thinking the wealthy pay more. However is an enormous disparity between that tax chart and what is “actually paid”! Many members of Congress are guilty of using those “tax loophole” themselves. Yep, “the fox guarding the hen house”!
Certainly, DOGE (illegally?) firing IRA employees, and trump’s tax cuts for the wealthy will NOT help “Balance The Budget”. . . although Fox and the Republicans will tell you otherwise. In Maga world, maybe 2+2 really does equal 16!