I HAVE had extensive exposure with local politics all over the country both as consultant and senior executive. And while there are as many kinds of leaders as there are as many politicians, I have seen common pitfalls local leaders encounter in forging development in their respective areas.
While it is safe to assume that all those in power genuinely want progress in their jurisdiction and during their term, it is not an assurance of success. The reasons are varied though as some make business out of their positions, others wanted to preserve their other vested interests and sphere of influence while still others genuinely love to help their community. Still it is always clear that every elected official wants to propel development in his or her place. And that is good.
Having pointed that out, all good intentions are never enough. As I mentioned, those are not assurances that things will work the way they envisioned them to their desired phasing. This is mostly due to a lot of factors such as polarized politics, red tape, and lack of skills and knowledge on innovations.
Yet if we really dig in deep and check the causes of most failures in local governance, we would see that it's really because almost all LGUs do not have a good roadmap to progress. Politicians that do not have background in public administration love to showcase pet projects more than sustainable programs. This is very dangerous. Grand but empty.
You see, all politicians made promises to their constituents, and most of these promises are infrastructure in nature. The moment they win, they carry this sense of obligation to deliver their promises even if the said projects may not be what the community needs. And since they do not have a good master plan on how to transform their LGUs then they end up implementing all these infrastructures without looking at the bigger picture. It ends up as a hit and miss which answers why certain programs, projects and activities have very little impact in the lives of the people.
Forging real development is more than just implementing pet projects and popular programs. It involves comprehensive assessment and inventory of assets both land and human as well as crafting of a blueprint or a roadmap to the desired state with both short term and long term targets.
For a mayor to effectively manage and bring progress to his LGU, he has to know first his assets in land and water and with the help of expert urban planners he has to decide where to put industries, agriculture, and residences.
Terrible traffic woes, flood problems, water and power shortages, and high crimes on certain areas are all indicators of poorly planned city or even absence of planning at all. For instance, if urban centers are situated in relatively elevated areas, clustered by economic activities, and with better connectivity, no traffic or flooding will ever be experienced regardless of how many people live in the area.
After a well-planned categorization of land, the mayor has to have comprehensive inventory of his people and their skills. This way, livelihood programs and career plotting are tailor-fitted to the capacity and readiness of the people as well as to the desired positioning and direction of development being decided. It would be easy now to decide if certain areas really need roads, health centers, or even what kind of school should be set up at a given time considering the limited budget the LGU has.
Simply put, for the mayor to be very successful in his job, he first and foremost has to have a well-designed comprehensive land use plan (Clup) and a comprehensive development plan (CDP).
If he jumps straight to his pet projects and his promised programs, chances are he will just be wasting resources and he will not be of real help.