A rich literature explores the potential benefits of public management directly engaged with the public to develop and implement programs with emphasis on the enhanced quality of public programs and the strengthening of democratic practices. Yet the two dominant models of public management over the past century have distanced public managers and the public. The “principal agent model” emphasizes direct accountability to elected officials, while the “expertise” model emphasizes the application of professional judgment on behalf of the public. The important dimensions of democratic governance—direct accountability to elected officials, the exercise of professional judgment, and direct public participation—are not mutually exclusive. This paper develops an alternative model of public management, “inclusive management,” that demonstrates all three concerns.