Submitted by admin on Wed, 03/18/2009 - 09:11
By G. JEFFREY HABER
First published: Saturday, February 28, 2009
Local government consolidation has recently been embraced by academicians and some politicians as the remedy for high property taxes, despite the absence of evidence to suggest that the larger the government, the more efficient or less expensive it is.
There are, however, many popular misconceptions that permeate the dialogue regarding the efficiency and consolidation of local governments. I would like to address three in particular.
First, it is not inherently better to have those who "arguably have a less vested interest than local officials" to initiate consolidation (see the Times Union editorial "Mr. Cuomo's Big Small Idea," Feb. 11.)
Local officials are considered "vested" as they are the officials closest and most accountable to their electorate. By enabling those less vested to make the decision to consolidate, the voices of the residents in the local governments affected are diluted, since each resident's vote carries more weight at the local level than it does at the county or state level. Allowing the less vested to initiate this process will result in less democracy for the residents of New York's towns and villages.
- Login to post comments
