Same goal - (in)consistent/(in)compatible results? Accountability mechanisms in Polish municipalities

Research problem. Elections are not only a mechanism for selecting public authorities, they are also a mechanism to hold them accountable for decisions and actions taken during their previous term of office. However, elections are a very imperfect way to hold public officials accountable; citizens and politicians are therefore looking for other means. Since 2019, the report and debate on the state of a municipality (hereafter: report and debate), which concludes with the vote of confidence to the mayor (or refuse to do so), has been practiced annually as an accountability tool in Polish municipalities. The aim of the study is to investigate whether the report and debate on the state of the municipality improve the accountability of the municipal executive during its term of office; and whether its results are consistent with the results of the elections to be held in April 2024. In particular, did the mayors win the elections who received a vote of confidence from the municipal council; and those who did not lost the elections? Are there discrepancies in the results of the report and the discussion procedure and the election results?; and, if so, why? Theoretical framework. The authors refer to the Bovens definition that accountability is ‘a relationship between an actor [mayor] and a forum [municipal council and citizens], in which the actor has an obligation to explain and to justify his or her conduct, the forum can pose questions and pass judgement, and the actor may face consequences’ (2007, p. 450). Brandsma and Schillemans’ accountability cube (2013) serves as a research tool for the authors to investigate the report and debate procedure. The leading research method is multiple case studies to analyze the report and debate considering the context and results of its application throughout the term (2018-2023, extended until 2024) of local authorities. Fourteen municipalities were selected for the study. They are: rural, urban-rural municipalities, towns (below 20,000 and above 20,000 inhabitants), and cities; municipalities where the council majority supports the mayor and municipalities where the council majority is in opposition to the mayor. The cases selected for the study are investigated in regard of: a) information, i.e., the report on the state of the municipality, quality of its content and accessibility for citizens, and; b) discussion, i.e., the debate on the report with participation of councilors and possible participation of citizens; c) consequences, i.e., granting or refusing to grant vote of confidence to the mayor, and possible recall election; d) results of the municipal elections in 2024. At the conclusion of the study, the report and the debate procedure will be assessed as a mechanism for accountability of local officials in relation to the results of local elections.