The Evolution of Public Service: A Conversation with Michael Fenn

Michael Fenn is a seasoned public servant with a distinguished career spanning municipal and provincial government. He has served as Deputy Minister in Ontario, led major ministries, and played a key role in shaping municipal governance and infrastructure policy. With expertise in public administration, regional planning, and fiscal strategy, Fenn continues to provide insights into the evolving role of municipalities and public service leadership.

You’ve had a long career in public service, spanning municipal and provincial government. How has the role of public servants evolved over the years?

One of the most notable changes I’ve observed is the increasing professionalism of public servants. When I started in municipal government, particularly at the local level, compensation wasn’t competitive, and people often grew into the job rather than arriving with specialized expertise. Over time, we’ve seen a shift—municipal government has attracted professionals from diverse fields, raising the overall competence of public administration.

However, at the same time, the exclusive advisory role that public servants once held has diminished. When I began, municipal staff were often the only available experts advising elected officials, especially in smaller municipalities. Now, that space is shared with political staff, government relations firms, think tanks, academics, and industry associations. Public servants remain central, but their influence is increasingly distributed across a broader spectrum of voices.

Another major shift is the specialization within government. Early on, municipal officials handled everything—policy, administration, implementation. Over time, government structures have evolved to include dedicated policy experts, operational managers, and communications professionals. Communications, in particular, has become an independent field with significant influence over public policy and governance. And, of course, the media landscape has changed dramatically—when I started, a two-week turnaround was considered fast; today, immediate responses are expected.

Ontario has 444 municipalities. Do you see an appetite or benefit for further consolidation, or is the current structure working?

Consolidation has always been politically challenging. People closely identify their municipality with their community, and restructuring local government is often met with resistance. However, the reality is that many services—water, transportation, land-use planning—don’t neatly align with municipal boundaries.  We live our lives ‘regionally’, for everything from employment and higher education to cultural activities, recreation and social interaction.

In some cases, bigger is better. Regional cooperation can create efficiencies, especially for complex services like transit or policing. But consolidation isn’t a universal solution—sometimes, larger governments lose the responsiveness and innovation found in smaller municipalities. The key is recognizing where regional service delivery makes sense and where local governance should remain independent. Even if municipalities themselves aren’t merged, many services will increasingly need to be delivered at a regional scale.

What about the role of Chief Administrative Officers (CAOs) in municipalities? How has it evolved?

When I started in municipal government, the concept of a city manager—common in the U.S.—was rare in Canada. Most department heads reported directly to council, even in major cities like Toronto and Montreal. The city manager or chief administrative officer (CAO) role in Canada emerged out of a need for professional management, ensuring that municipal administration functions smoothly and that there’s a central figure coordinating policy and operations.

Today, CAOs play a critical role in managing increasingly complex municipalities. They provide a unified voice for staff, reconcile competing policy perspectives, and ensure that councils receive consolidated advice. However, they also face the same challenge as public servants more broadly: while they are more professional and capable than ever, their influence has diminished somewhat due to the increasing number of competing voices in municipal decision-making.

Many municipalities face financial pressures. If you were advising a CAO today, what would you recommend?

Municipalities argue—rightly, in many cases—that the fiscal framework established at Confederation no longer makes sense. Municipalities are responsible for about 60% of Canada’s public infrastructure but collect only 10% of total tax revenue. That’s an enormous gap.

One of the biggest financial pressures on municipalities is infrastructure. The cost of building, maintaining, and operating public assets—from roads to transit to water treatment plants—is significant. We need to rethink how infrastructure is funded.

One approach is shifting away from expecting upfront payments through development charges and instead financing infrastructure over its lifespan. Other jurisdictions spread costs over time through area-rated property taxes or user fees, while still expecting new growth to pay its way. Another option is leveraging public debt more effectively—treating infrastructure investments like mortgages rather than requiring full payment upfront.

One idea worth exploring is tax-exempt municipal bonds, which are widely used in the U.S. They allow municipalities to finance infrastructure at a lower cost while providing a stable investment option for residents. While some argue these bonds disproportionately benefit wealthier individuals, the alternative—failing to build critical infrastructure—is far worse.

If you were tapped to be a provincial minister for a day, which portfolio would you choose?

I spent years as a deputy minister, working with three premiers across major ministries, including municipal affairs and housing. But if I wanted to get things done, I’d go straight to finance.

The Ministry of Finance holds the real power in government decision-making. Treasury Board plays a role, as do the Premier’s Office and Cabinet Office, but finance is where policy ambitions meet fiscal reality. If I wanted to advance ideas like user-pay infrastructure, tax-exempt municipal bonds, or a more sustainable municipal funding model, that’s the door I’d want to walk through.