Before the ballots are counted, candidates spend a great deal of time convincing people they are the right person for the job. They attend meetings, answer questions, share their vision, and ask for trust. Whether it is a volunteer board, a municipal council, or a higher level of government, the foundation of any election is the same: voters place their confidence in someone they believe will represent their interests.
What seems to get lost too often is that this responsibility does not end on election day.
I was at a meeting recently where some difficult questions were directed at a board of directors. At one point, a board member became visibly frustrated by what he perceived as a lack of trust from the very people who had voted him into the position.
I found the reaction surprising, particularly because it came from someone I respect and someone, I had personally supported. It reminded me of a conversation I once had with an elected government representative when I called as a constituent – not as a member of the media, but simply as a citizen concerned about an issue.
The response began with the unforgettable phrase, “Little lady…”
The rest of the conversation did not improve. I was informed that my opinion did not matter because he was the one who had been elected and therefore only his opinion counted.
It was a stunning misunderstanding of what elected positions are supposed to represent.
To be fair, those who are elected or appointed to boards and councils must be afforded a certain level of trust. It is impossible to hold a referendum on every decision. Board members and elected officials are chosen because people believe they possess the judgment, experience, and commitment necessary to make informed decisions.
That trust is especially important on volunteer boards. Recruiting volunteers has become increasingly difficult, and one reason is the prevalence of armchair critics who are quick to complain but reluctant to contribute. It is easy to sit in the audience, on social media, or around a coffee table and criticize decisions without accepting any of the responsibility that comes with making them.
Yet accountability and trust are not opposing concepts. In fact, they depend on one another.
Being elected does not mean receiving a blank cheque. It does not mean questions are unwelcome or that criticism is inappropriate. It certainly does not mean the opinions of those who cast the ballots suddenly become irrelevant.
People vote for candidates because they believe those individuals will advocate for their interests and values. They choose the person they believe is most likely to represent them effectively. That relationship does not disappear once the votes are counted and the positions are filled.
The reality is that elected representatives – whether on a volunteer board or in government – remain accountable to those they serve. Questions are not a sign of disrespect. Requests for explanation are not evidence of distrust. They are part of the democratic process and a necessary component of good governance.
Strong leaders should welcome scrutiny, even when it is uncomfortable. They should understand that accountability is not an obstacle to leadership but a requirement of it.
Trust is earned through transparency, communication, and a willingness to answer difficult questions. The people who elected you are not your opponents. They are the reason you hold the position in the first place.
And while voters should extend trust to those they elect, elected representatives should never forget that trust is not ownership. It is stewardship. It is also extremely fragile. Once broken, almost impossible to get back.
The ballots may determine who sits at the table, but they do not silence the voices of those who put them there.