Mike Tuckey Senior’s Weblog

I opened my Springfield Republican today, to the Local Section The headlines says; The Springfield City Council is debating ethics. Hopefully, they’ll determine; that, ethics in government is a good thing!

I am strongly committed to democracy. I believe; it was Benjamin Franklin, who said; Democracy is a bad form of government; but all the others are so much worse. However, a strong democracy has certain requirements, among them are; a committed and education populace, a strong economic base, a loyal opposition, and elected officials must be accountable and loyal. In ancient Athens, where democracy was to have started, they made provisions to insure some of these requirements existed.

Now, for certain, ancient Athens had some serious problems, such as; pedophilia, the killing of newborn infants that didn’t meet standard, there were more slaves than citizens, women weren’t allowed to participate in government. But, participation was not a choice. If you were citizens, participation was considered to be a responsibility. Every citizen was, not only, expected to participate in voting; also, during their lifetime, they were expected to serve. But, Athens had an interesting provision in their government. They could, not only, vote to elect; but they could vote to remove someone from office. This sounds a little like impeachment; but, it goes much further. During a term of office and during a general meeting of the electorate, a vote could be held to remove an individual from office. If the person was removed from office, they would, not only be removed from their office; but, they would be banished from Athens for ten (10) years. Banishment from Athens was not like leaving Springfield and moving to Worcester.

At the time of the Golden Era of Athens, Alexander the Great had not yet unified all of Greece. There was no national “Greek” identity. Each “polis,” “city state” was the equivalent of an independent country. When the banished person left Athens, they did not bring with them their power or influence. They lived in a foreign environment. They could not participate in Athenian society or government FOR TEN YEARS! When I first learned this, I thought it to be incredibly harsh. After the last few years of Springfield politics, I wonder?

I wonder if our elected and appointed officials faced banishment to some other country, if they failed to fulfill the desire of the citizenry, would they be more concerned about what we think? What the citizen needed and wanted? Do WE have a response to the consolidation of power? The only alternative to banishment, I can think of, is; full participation.

Some of the figures I have read, say; only about 50% of those eligible to register to vote, do. The figures, we are given for percentage of voter turn out, are based on registered voters. In the last citywide election, the turn out was only approximately 25%. If only 50% of eligible citizens registered, about 10% of Springfield eligible population was making the decisions for the other 90%. More importantly, the other 90% gave them that power. That 90% gave away their responsibility to their children, their elderly, their grand children. We have people in every corner of this city, this state, and this country complaining about services, immigration, the war, the deterioration of the economy. The city is facing incredibly difficult times; and, 90% of our citizens STAY AWAY!

I have, and will continue to, express my concern and dismay for the conditions of this city; but, my greatest disappointment is in those individuals who have left the future of their city, their children, their jobs, their safety, to people who care enough to participate.

Hey, I would love your comments, Besides me, do you have any one else, who you believe; may be a candidate, if we had banishment! I know; I’ll get some votes; but, don’t limit yourself.

This may be a little more frivolous an event than I usually discuss; but, today and tomorrow (6/21 & 6/22), the residents of Mattoon Street are having a tag sale. Mattoon Street, itself, is a Pearl of Our city. The residents, I have met, make it even more so. If you want to spend a little relaxing time on this wonderful early Summer, later Spring, weekend, stroll down Mattoon Street, see some wonderful architecture, meet some great people. and, at least Erica Walch would appreciate it, if you purchased some of the many items for sale. I will tell you, the people you meet, will be worth the trip.

Recently, at the announcement  of the  selected developer  for  13-31 Elm Street,  Mayor Sarno said; the development of the Court Square area is a “public safety issue.” I was so pleased to finally hear someone say so! The economic redevelopment of downtown is the single best way to reduce crime downtown. It is also, the strongest indication; that, the phrase, often quoted by some elected officials; that, “Any economic development is good economic development; is DEAD WRONG AND DANGEROUS! We need a plan of action to attract businesses to Springfield from surrounding states. Businesses that bring young professionals. I believe; that is why the city department is called Planning & Economic Development. We should be cautious not to call the beautification of our empty office space. economic development.

I have heard estimates ranging from 60% to 89% of the Springfield budget coming from the Commonwealth. With the realization; Boston only notices Springfield, when its in trouble and the state is in ALMOST as much financial trouble as our city, cannibalizing industry from other parts of the state is, simply put, “moving the deck chairs on the Titanic.” Creating a self sufficient Federal Court house that, neither pays taxes or adds to the local economy, although prettier, doesn’t do much to add to the economic viability of Springfield’s future. To restructure the South End, makes the entry to our city prettier; but, we need people to enter the city.

We have great amenities. We have great benefits. We have a newly sound city. We are poised to move forward. Let’s start moving.

After about twenty-five years of debate, we are finally getting Ward representation; but, along with that, it has been proposed; that, we reduced the influence of the City Council and School Board, increase the influence of the “Strong Mayor,” extend the term of the Mayor from two (2) years to four (4) years, and insulate the Mayor from accountability and scrutiny.  I think; we should be very cautious with this proposal.

Our City Council has had very limited power since it was instituted in the 60’s. Essentially, it can cut proposed budget dollars, (yea, that’s going to happen), and approve zoning recommendations. Now, the new zoning ordinance suggest, it be stripped of the zoning ordinance power. This power would go to the Planning Board, appointed by the Mayor. What great benefit did the residents of the different neighborhoods gain with ward representation to a powerless board?

The pending legislation would also include the extension of the Mayor’s term to four (4) years. With this extension, the legislation proposes a new “appointed” position, similar to that of the Executive Director of the Financial Control Board, possibly, further insulating the Mayor

Another part of this recommendation, is to consolidate the budgeting process between the city as a whole and the school department.

The argument for these changes is expediancy and efficiency in city  government; and, its a very strong argument, in light of our recent financial problems; but, I am nervous.

Throughout history, two things have been certain; Democracy is benefited by deliberation and debate; and, the elimination of the consolidation of power negatively affects Democracy. With a more powerful Mayor, insulted by an appointed Executive, with a less influential City Council, we are consolidating power in the Mayor’s office. It appears; the Mayor will have little or no accountability to the citizens, except every four years. But, during that four year period, the Mayor will have incredible opportunity to structure city government to his/her re-election advantage. I believe; we should be far more cautious of these changes, as they move forward.

Why not?

* Elect the new executive position; or,

* Have the City Council president serve as the Executive to the Mayor. We will have eleven (11) councilors now. The president could vote to break a tie. It works in the U.S. Senate.

*Enhance “advise and consent” of the City Council for ALL department head position

I am generally in favor of changes to make government more efficient; but, we must be careful. I would really appreciate your comments and suggestions; but, please don’t give up your democracy.

*Consider an elected planning board, versus an appointed one. Could be elected by ward also, enhancing the participation of the neighborhoods in the efffects on their area.