RFP Staff
♦ In yesterday’s introduction to this three part series “City Manager’s Use of GFOA Playbook for Spinning Crises and Creating an Aura of Success”, we mentioned we were going to examine Mr. Paris’s responses to a number of major crises the city is undergoing, either downplayed or kept out of public awareness, and the manufacture of so-called success out of what would be a reasonably deemed failure. This spinning and success creation fits the patterns suggested in the Government Financial Officers Association (GFOA) Playbook. We will illuminate the “reinterpretation of reality” carried on in our city manager’s office because of its wide-ranging affects on the city’s financial future. A sinking ship is made to look like a cruise vessel in calm and sunny waters.
DISTINGUISHED BUDGET PRESENTATION AWARD
On page 3 of the proposed City Budget for 2014-2015, the City Manager has inserted a page showing his Distinguished Budget Presentation Award, as issued by the Government Finance Officers Association. https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2E5Ew6OLdElOXcxdUVrRWQ5TTQ/edit
Impressive. We did a bit of research on the award, and found the following link:
http://www.gfoa.org/distinguished-budget-presentation-awards-program-budget-awards-program-2
From the Association’s award page, “To receive the award, a budget document must be rated either proficient or outstanding by at least two of the three reviewers for all four basic categories, as well as for 14 of the 27 specific criteria identified as ‘mandatory’.”
So in order to get the Award, my city only needs to pay their dues to join, get a minimal rating of ‘proficient’ by 2 out of 3 reviewers for each of four basic categories, and then get at least a proficient rating on 14 of 27 of the ‘mandatory’ criteria? So a city can be “distinguished” if they score 51.8% on the “mandatory” criteria? Even this state’s public school students must have better scores on mandatory subjects in order to pass the grade—let alone to consider themselves “distinguished”.
What does the award tell Salisbury’s constituents? Maybe that Salisbury paid their dues to the GFOA, and that 2/3 of their judges found that Salisbury scored at least 51.8% on mandatory budget criteria.
CRISIS MANAGEMENT
This section from GFOA’s website tells managers to assertively reassure constituents and elected officials in a “structured and guided format”. This is critical a PR tool to gain the upper hand, politically. “Framing the perception of others is critical,” acknowledges that manipulation of public opinion is essential, in order to convince stakeholders’ collective perception that the crisis was avoidable or at least foreseeable. Just look at Doug Paris’s press releases concerning Moody’s downgrading of the city’s bonds due to Fibrant’s failure to pay back money owed to the reserve funds and Fibrant’s inability to break even. Here you will see the city manager’s sense of superiority about the crisis was designed to manipulate opinion, in order to emerge as “a more credible interpreter of what is occurring,” even when a major Wall Street bond-rating agency says the city’s creditworthiness was a mere two points above junk-bond status.
Read this section from the GFOA’s website, and note the excerpts below. Salisbury is a member of the Government Finance Officers Association, which gives the city an annual Distinguished Budget Award as shown on page 3 of this year’s budget online.
http://www.gfoa.org/use-crisis-your-advantage
“Use a Crisis to your Advantage
The leader of the recovery process can use special events that are viewed as “crises” by stakeholders as a tool to drive change. Such crises might include:
Bond rating downgrade
Closure of major employer/taxpayer
Change in elected or appointed leadership.
Using a Crisis is Not without Risk
The recovery leader that considers using crises as a lever for change should be aware that:
A crisis can mask the depth and breadth of the true causes of distress. A crisis is frequently just the most visible symptom of distress, rather than the root cause.
The nature of the crisis can color the responses people will want to take to recovery. For example, the closure of a major employer could lead stakeholders to focus on economic development issues, when in fact the current fiscal distress is caused by an unrelated factor.
People might adopt a “siege” or “bunker” mentality, making change and innovation less likely.
Overplaying a crisis may reduce confidence in management if stakeholders perceive that the crisis was avoidable or at least foreseeable.
Reduce Risk by Framing Perceptions
Framing the perception of others is crucial.
Carefully analyze the “crisis” event. If the recovery leader is knowledgeable about the crisis, then he or she will be a more credible interpreter of what is occurring. The leader can then frame the crisis as a call-to-action, and others will be less likely to interpret it as a panic-inducing disaster.
Share information about the event. Making information available can reduce feelings of uncertainty among stakeholders and constituents.
Provide information in a structured, guided format. This makes it easier for others to understand, allows it to reach a broader audience, and increases leader credibility.
BRING IN OUTSIDERS
Here is how “Fibrant” was sold to Salisbury’s leadership and its rank and file constituents without a huge push-back. When you bring in outside “experts”, members of the public are denigrated for their comparative lack of knowledge or expertise, as are council members. So they comply with the agenda being promoted. Read the following section from the GFOA’s website:
http://www.gfoa.org/bring-outsiders
Outsiders can be used in to confirm or validate that there is a problem. Often perceived as more neutral or detached, outside experts may bring additional credibility to the table. They can also bring new and valuable perspectives to bear. Experts can be found in the local business community, nearby universities, or a consulting firm. One particularly good role for experts is to validate key financial forecast assumptions, thereby making data visualizations more convincing.
Outsiders also offer the opportunity to present a citizen perspective and thus provide political momentum for making difficult decisions. For example, a special citizens’ committee might be able to talk openly about seemingly obvious structural problems that are otherwise difficult to talk about – or sometimes even to see – by people inside the organization.”
