Metro Redux

The Democrat and Chronicle is in full agenda mode. As I wrote in a March post, the D&C is on a mission to resurrect Metro government as part of its campaign to damage Maggie Brooks and "save" the City of Rochester.

We have seen a parade of articles on the wasteful, duplicative, and costly nature of local governments. First the article on tax rates, then the attacks on special districts, especially fire districts. Now we have the article on Town auto fleets and "take-home" cars. The purpose of all of these articles is the same; to convince us that we should give up our nostalgic but out-dated affinity for local government.

I am sure that reasonable people would agree that consolidation of some local government services makes sense. There are a number of examples of this type of inter-municipal cooperation in Monroe County. But the D&C and their "expert" friends at the Center for Governmental Research are suggesting something much more far-reaching. They want to eliminate Towns entirely in favor of Metro government. This is their big solution to our problem of over-taxation in New York.

The problem with this theory is simple. The main cause of over-taxation in New York emanates from our State government in Albany, not our local governments. It is clear to anyone paying attention that the State Government is dysfunctional and out-of-control. It is certainly beyond the control of average citizens like us. The State Legislature has gerrymandered itself into fiefdoms making incumbency a virtual guaranty of victory in November. These entrenched politicos have no need to restrain themselves from voting to spend as much as possible to try to further ensure their re-election.

But, do we read a series of articles critical of the State government. No, instead we have a sustained effort to convince us that the one level of government we do control should be done away with. It stands logic on its head!

Can most of us name more than a handful of State programs which we really want or we believe are efficient and beneficial? On the other hand, we all know the specific services provided by our local governments as well as the costs of those services. We have all been to Town meetings where this or that program or issue was debated. The will of the people carries the day most of the time in that setting. Can we say the same for our State government? Is it a good idea to eliminate local government in favor of a larger, more distant, less personal, regional or metro government? I certainly don't think so.

So why, then, does the D&C push the metro agenda? There appear to be three reasons.

First, the editorial board of the D&C is a basically liberal group. Liberals always support bigger government. Bigger government can "take care" of all of our problems (at least in liberals' minds).

Second, the D&C knows that the City of Rochester is broken, perhaps beyond repair. The only way to save the City is to bring in new resources of people and tax revenue. Since the efforts to bring new residents into the city have failed, the D&C's solution is to "take the city to the people". A metro government would, by necessity, be a City focused government, drawing resources out of the former suburbs into the central city where years of mis-management and neglect have left vast and largely intractable problems.

Finally, there is the political aspect. A metro government would break down the City-suburb political barriers. This would allow the Democrats to take control of the entire County of Monroe. I hope I'm not surprising you readers by suggesting that the D&C favors Democrats!

Thirty-odd years ago, the voters of Monroe County rejected the first try at metro government by voting down a metro police plan. The D&C has been firing the opening salvos of the next metro battle. I can only hope that people see through the agenda and vote to keep the government they want.