Cities are the Most Accessible and Effective Level of Government.
Most everyone associated with local government agrees in one way or another that local government, primarily cities, delivers services to residents most effectively and efficiently. Cities and city-like communities are the most accessible form of government within the United States. Residents of these entities can attend meetings of their local elected representatives right in their community. Their elected representatives live in the community they were elected to serve, shop at the local grocery store, belong to the local service clubs, and even utilize many of the services they approve.
Similarly, folks who study government or even think about it a bit, generally identify state government as being remote, disassociated from those they serve, and unaware of and/or insensitive to local needs and service priorities. In California it is much worse: the Governor fights with the Legislature. The respective administrative branches of the state government (Governor, Treasurer, Attorney General, and Controller) are often engaged in confrontational behavior. The two houses of the Legislature disagree and often act in redundant and inefficient ways. And, the two political parties cannot find any common ground at any level.
Most local governments act with transparency in adherence to the “Brown Act”. Meetings are held at a time and place most convenient to the population being governed; and are noticed in a timely and transparent manner. Cities are required to approve a balanced budget by a specified time each calendar year or suffer stiff penalties. State government, on the other hand, works behind closed doors, develops and passes legislation with no notice and often in the literal dark of night. The Legislature and the Governor fail to adopt any budget at all, leaving government workers without salaries, critical programs without supplies and needed resources, and constituents without vital, even life-saving services awash in uncertainty and fear.
With the above in mind, the current intrusion into and usurping of local control by all elements of State government is mind-blowing. The same state governance structure that can’t pass a balanced budget and refuses to operate with transparency and in an inclusive manner is now going to have greater say over how local government conducts business: interaction with their respective bargaining groups (Assembly Bill 646); contracting with their executive employees (Assembly Bill 1344) ; determining prudent fiscal actions to protect the local budget (Assembly Bill 438 and Assembly Bill 506 ); and financial transparency (Assembly Bill 1344 ). One would hope the folks responsible for state government would spend more time getting their own house in order before interfering in the duties and responsibilities of others at the local level.
When campaigning for Governor, Jerry Brown campaigned on (1) simplifying layers of government, (2) returning control to local government – closest to the people, and (3) balancing the State budget. Clearly, the bills identified above are not designed to allow local elected and appointed officials the ability to make decisions in the best interests of their communities and their organizations. As evidenced by the above and many other recent state actions, both he and the State Legislature appear headed mindlessly in the opposite direction. One can only ask “why?” What might be the motivation?
originally posted – October 10, 2011