The council-manager form of government has a long and storied history in Illinois. The village of Glencoe adopted (by ordinance) the first council-manager government in the state in 1914, only the thirteenth community to do so in the nation at that time. After Glencoe, dozens of communities and counties across Illinois have embraced the form, either by ordinance or referendum.

In the past two years, Illinois has seen a uniquely large number of communities (nine since 2022) either questioning the efficacy of the council-manager form or seeking to embrace it. Because of this, both the Illinois City/County Management Association (ILCMA) and ICMA have joined together to advocate for the council-manager form.

Our combined efforts have been largely successful. The council-manager form was successfully defended in Bensenville, Evanston, Freeport, Maywood, and Orland Park. In Mattoon and Oregon, residents voted to adopt the council-manager form. While unsuccessful, efforts to adopt the council-manager form in Waukegan and Oglesby generated significant public engagement, perhaps setting them up for future attempts. While each case across the state was different, the shared vision and willingness to accept the call to action to support the council-manager form showcased the importance of ILCMA’s and ICMA’s shared advocacy efforts.

Before joining ILCMA’s board and later becoming president, I had limited understanding of the depth and breadth of ICMA’s advocacy work. What I’ve since seen firsthand is the power of a strong partnership: ILCMA’s dedicated network of senior advisors (seven in all) combined with ICMA’s national platform to create a model for effective local advocacy.

The following are a few examples of how this partnership moved forward in Illinois.

A Tight Timeline to Preserve the Council-Manager Form in Bensenville

ICMA and ILCMA acted quickly in November 2024 after Bensenville fired its well-respected village manager and placed a referendum to change from the council-manager to mayor-council form of government on the April 1, 2025 ballot. With little time and only fledgling local support, ICMA staff and nearly all ILCMA’s senior advisors (led by Brad Townsend) quickly reached out to find connections with residents. The Vote Yes Bensenville campaign took root online and in person, and senior advisors and ICMA staff participated in town hall meetings and other face-to-face engagements. 

ILCMA Executive Director Dawn Peters and I drafted a letter that was shared widely with grassroots community organizers. For its part, once the grassroots Vote Yes Bensenville organization was formed, ICMA provided organizers with print materials, including graphic design and content development support, and sent staff to present information on the council-manager form (including pertinent research backing up the presentations) and engage with community stakeholders. These efforts combined to result in over 66% of voters choosing to retain the council-manager form.

Council-Manager Form Gets Across the Finish Line in Mattoon

While there had been previous efforts to consider a change from the commission form to council-manager in downstate Mattoon, it wasn’t until 2024 that those efforts really started to build momentum. Years of thoughtful strategic planning (and successful city administrators) gave the mayor and council reason to support the effort, and Citizens to Advance Mattoon Prosperity circulated petitions to place a referendum on the ballot in November 2024. 

Senior advisors Steve Carter and Scot Wrighton dialogued with city leaders throughout and participated in a public information session with ICMA staff in the lead-up to the election. ICMA’s resources were put to work, highlighting research and real-world examples of success in council-manager communities versus other forms. Ultimately, the referendum changing to council-manager was approved by over 55% of voters.

Challenging Established Council-Manager Forms in Freeport and Evanston

In Freeport and Evanston, calls to consider a change from council-manager to mayor-council form ceased once the elected bodies called upon ICMA and ILCMA to help inform their communities of the distinctions between the two forms of government. In both cases, elected leaders agreed that the council-manager form was the best way to serve the people, and public support for mayor-council systems quickly waned.

Lessons Learned

If the paths to success in these examples seem similar, that’s not a coincidence. Each succeeded because of the pairing of ILCMA’s local resources with ICMA’s extensive advocacy toolkit.

ICMA offers a national lens, providing data, media outreach, and structured dialogue to empower informed decisions. ICMA’s Future of Professional Management Fund helps fuel these efforts, providing the resources needed to produce something as simple as photocopies of articles or as comprehensive as ICMA staff developing and presenting extensive presentations at in-person events. The ICMA team’s experience and depth of knowledge pairs exceptionally well with our local resources.

ILCMA contributes critical local context, things like real-world examples and success stories from within our state, while leveraging the expertise of senior advisors. Illinois’s seven senior advisors, each a retired manager with careers spanning decades, have dedicated countless hours to council-manager advocacy over the past few years. Their voices were some of the most persuasive. This hands-on, collaborative support gives communities the tools to make thoughtful, informed choices about their future.

The many opportunities we had in Illinois to engage with communities about the council-manager form provided some important takeaways.

Change

The drive to question governance is often rooted in local leadership and public sentiment. The success or failure of any attempt to change a form of government frequently depends on the political will of current officials.

In Maywood, it was the mayor and council who led the charge to transition away from the council-manager form. However, their efforts fell short. Residents voiced concerns about the increasing risk of political corruption and weakening the delivery of essential services. Among other things, those fears led voters to retain the council-manager form. Conversely, in Oglesby and Waukegan, elected officials advocated moving to the council-manager form, yet the public hesitated. Skepticism about the return on investment of a manager’s salary and doubts about whether an appointed manager could truly understand the community stood in the way. It takes time and trust to build broad support for professional management in places where the benefits may not be clear.

Leadership

A recurring theme in many communities was the question of leadership and control. Should the mayor hold most of the authority, or is the community better served by a team of elected officials who appoint an experienced manager to oversee daily operations? Bringing clear information, data, and real examples into the conversation can help ease fears and clarify what the council-manager form really looks like in practice.

Trust

Helping voters grasp the difference between elected and appointed leadership is an important step. Sometimes, residents see the city manager as a mayor by another name, only worse, since they hold authority without being directly elected. That concern showed up in Evanston and Freeport, where some opponents suggested the manager had too much power with too little accountability. Obviously, that perception isn’t accurate.

Educating the public on the distinct roles and powers of a mayor versus a professional manager is critical. When residents understand these differences, they are more likely to support the form of government they believe will be most responsive. Ultimately, it comes down to trust in both elected representatives and the professionals they hire. This trust is not easily earned, but it is central to shaping public dialogue.

Data

Across communities, common concerns emerged: reducing corruption, increasing efficiency, controlling costs, and improving performance. Extensive research presented by ICMA staff demonstrated that council-manager governments outperform other systems in these areas. Even in places where voters opted to retain another form, the data wasn’t disputed; it simply wasn’t compelling enough to prompt change. The lesson? We need both facts and relatable stories. When data is paired with real-world examples and trusted local voices, it becomes much more powerful.

Standing Together

Advocating for the council-manager form of government is a team sport, and central to ILCMA’s and ICMA’s shared mission to uphold and support professional local government leadership. Because we worked together—sharing resources, building relationships, spending time—we had significant success in preserving the council-manager form where it was in jeopardy and creating opportunity where it was sought. In doing so, we fostered a more informed electorate, supported community-led advocacy, and ultimately strengthened local government’s ability to serve residents with integrity, expertise, and accountability.

Too few ICMA members are aware of the association’s advocacy efforts, often because many of them take place quietly and behind the scenes. But these efforts are critically important. As challenges to the council-manager form get louder and stronger, pairing our local resources with those of ICMA will be critical to ensuring the strength and standing of professional local government everywhere.

The Future of Professional Management Fund supports ICMA’s myriad advocacy efforts in support of the council-manager form of government. Member support and donations ensure resources are readily available when they are needed, as they were in Illinois. Learn more about supporting the fund here.

PHILIP A. KIRALY, ICMA-CM, is village manager of Glencoe, Illinois, USA.