Valley View vs. Greenville
Cars and Parts Springfield Swap Meet
Carroll Commencement
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2011 > March > 19 > Entry
Guest column: Big government isn’t better
This commentary was written by Judy Cook, a former mayor of Oakwood.
The May 17 editorial (“Forcing local tax increases not solution”) raises important issues involving the difficulties of making insufficient funds fill the needs of so many.
The argument that the Local Government Fund better serves the majority than the estate tax is certainly true. Regarding the estate tax repeal effort, however, the communities that are heavily dependent on estate tax revenue are seeking primarily to have a gradual removal of that tax, if it is to be removed, so that they can cope with the deficits that would be created. That’s the explanation for the “slow down” alluded to in the article.
Regarding the statement that Oakwood “doesn’t have to be its own city”: There are efforts being made to transform our region into a mega-metropolis, following the lead of such cities as Louisville. We would no longer have small or medium-sized communities but a countywide, single entity run from the county.
Strong arguments are offered regarding the benefits of such an arrangement to the bottom line. There is some truth to that argument, although the change would not be as euphoric as it is portrayed. Attention is concentrated on cost reductions that may result through consolidation, often ignoring cost increases that would be required to make a consolidation plan work.
What is missing and must be included in the discussion regarding consolidation are personal choice and quality-of-life issues — the human side. I infer from promoters of consolidation that everyone would prefer to live in an Oakwood, but not everyone has that option.
I disagree. Citizens of cities and townships live there because they choose to do so. They have ties to their communities that are important to their lives. They identify with their community and their neighbors, and they take pride in being a resident. Removing that would be a significant loss.
Unintended negative consequences also need to be considered. There is great risk that when people lose their community and become faceless members of a mega-metropolis, they lose a sense of civic responsibility and community participation. Interest in citizen concerns is lost.
Is bigger always better? What price do we pay for citizen involvement? We need to ponder these things.
We cannot continue with business as usual. There are many cooperative efforts, such as countywide delivery of human services, that need to take place for the economic rewards they offer. If citizens want to keep their communities intact, they must be willing to accept changes necessary to reduce cost. If we do not, our communities probably will be forcibly removed.
TweetGo to our facebook page and Like us to comment.
