The traditional view of the city as a densely populated urban center where people work in factories, offices, and can walk to shops that surround their homes has witnessed radical changes in the urban landscape of America. People’s lives are now predominantly based in the suburbs. American cities are now plagued with old infrastructure, failing school systems, poverty, drugs, crime, and a whole host of other policy related challenges.
One of the reasons that these challenges exist in cities can be traced to the governmental structure in urbanized regions and poor regional planning. The idea of a city as a collection of institutions, businesses, and transportation center will be a permanent feature of American life – even though how we traditionally define cities may be changing. Although many American’s lives are rooted in suburbia, there is still an allure about “going downtown,” that will always remain a fixture of American life. What we are increasingly witnessing is throughout America the city-suburb relationship is symbiotic; both are contributing to the overall economic health and fabric of a metropolitan area.
We have also seen the development of an enormously fragmented government. I got thinking about this after reading an article from my hometown of Syracuse, NY. Just outside of the City lies the village of Camillus, which will be voting to dissolve. The Mayor of Camillus, Michael Montero, announced to village residents that a vote to dissolve will take place this fall. Montero will be moving out of the village and moving to Pennsylvania in December to be closer to family. Stripped of any political motives, Montero is likely making the right decision for the village residents. The village has about 1,200 residents, and the services would be taken over by the town of Camillus.
The Syracuse Post Standard reports:
“Village officials started looking into the possibility of dissolving last year, Montero said. The village, like other municipalities, has been stripped of sales tax revenue and has seen a drop in state aid while still facing increasing costs. Other costs, such as repairs to buildings and roads, also can add up, the mayor said.”
Residents showed up to local meeting wearing shirts that said “Save our Village,” and some felt that the vote to dissolve was not representative of the village. There is a strong connection to local government, and the decision to consolidate services is always controversial, and never an easy choice.
What will happen to the village of Camillus if the vote to dissolve passes? The Town of Camillus would receive $1 million annually, and $700,000 must be used for property tax relief across the town. Mayor Montero will be holding sessions for village residents to explain the impacts. Essentially, the town will take over services, village board would no longer exist, the village would still get representation in the county, and the town will hire some of the workers.
So is consolidation an answer to local government financial woes? There are a lot factors that come into play, and seems like in the case of Camillus, it works. In such tight fiscal times, maybe the move is to start thinking about local government in terms of metropolitan areas, not arbitrarily defined city boundaries, that in many cases are outdated and remnants of a different urban era and created based on political motivations. Whether they like it or not, suburbs are closely linked to the city and an economically viable city will be enormously beneficial to surrounding suburbs.
What’s your opinion? Is government too fragmented? Is consolidation an answer?