Winston
Churchill once said, "democracy is the worst form of Government except for
all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." And so it may be said of our direct
democracy, the Town Meeting form of government rooted in the very founding of
this town.
In a May 19
interview on LCTV, Select Board member Mark Barowsky put forth a different
idea, a mayoral form of government in order to put an end to Town Meeting. He further stated he wanted to put the
School Committee under the mayor. By
changing our form of government, this idea would concentrate power in the hands of a single individual, with the
Select Board essentially becoming like a city council. The town manager would be gone. The mayor, armed with a bare majority on the
Select Board, could re-make the town every few years, with the voters having no
direct say over anything.
This call
for an elected mayor comes on the heels of the voters' overwhelming rejection
of the Select Board's annual budget at Town Meeting. This call for a subservient school committee comes at a time when
it is clear that the elected representatives of the School Committee have minds
of their own, and that they are prepared to make their case to the voters, and
not just to three members of the Select Board.
Barowsky's
idea does address the momentary political problem of the voters exercising
autonomous will and not following the policies favored by Barowsky. Putting the School Committee to heel under a
mayor would also solve the problem of that pesky board trying to stop cuts that
would increase class sizes and diminish the quality of education in
Longmeadow's schools. These benefits
are, at best, dubious. The costs of
that kind of change to our town charter, on that other hand, are fundamental.
In 1774,
the tradition of town meetings was considered so sacred that Parliament's act
of forbidding them within Massachusetts (part of the "Intolerable
Acts") helped lead to the American Revolution. That act is even referenced in the Declaration of Independence as
one of the grievances that justified separation from England.
To be sure,
times and circumstances change, and Town Meeting democracy has been abolished
in large cities in New England. And it
never took hold in the same way in the South and the West the way it did here
in New England. But a tradition as
longlasting as our form of town government does deserve respect, having proven
its worth in different eras and in crises more grave than any problem currently
facing Longmeadow.
More
problematic is the notion that we must take power away from the people because
the people cannot be trusted to make decisions on matters of the town budget
and taxation. It is certainly true that
voters do sometimes make bad decisions, but there is no greater discipline than
having to live with one’s own decisions.
Town Meeting has its faults, but there are ways to make its
deliberations most robust and more meaningful.
Democracy is, and ever will be, an imperfection.
The alternative form of government, one with
a strong mayor, is not better, as it depends on the strengths and frailties of
a single human being, rather than the checks and balances contained in our town
charter. A mayor, as Holyoke learned,
can reverse course on an important issue like casinos, and suddenly, a casino
is on the table. And who exactly would
be this mayor? Is there any town
politician in recent memory whose wisdom and judgment was so esteemed that he
or she would be worthy of such a powerful office? If none comes to mind, then this mayor idea should give town
residents pause.
The
experience of our larger neighbors in western Massachusetts proves that mayors
can be a hit-or-miss proposition. A
recent mayor of Agawam made more headlines for extra-matrimonial scuffles than
for forward-thinking policies. A single
bad Select Board member can do little lasting damage.
A strong
mayor with a school committee in his or her back pocket is an extreme solution
for extreme problems, like when Chicago turned to Richard Daley as its
savior. Taking such an exceptional
step, and in the process, overturning centuries of political experience, is
hardly warranted for losing a vote on a town budget.
No comments:
Post a Comment