My answer is YES
Time for ward system in Schenectady?
By Sara Foss
Thursday, December 17, 2015
Share | 1 comment
Should Schenectady adopt a ward system of government?
That’s what one letter writer to The Gazette proposed earlier this week.
The author, Schenectady resident Graham Higgins, believes that electing council members who represent specific districts, rather than the entire city, would make the Electric City more democratic.
Higgins’ letter caught my eye because just a few weeks ago, for reasons I can no longer recall, I found myself puzzling over Schenectady’s system for choosing its City Council representatives.
I live in Albany, you see, where we do elect people by districts that represent specific neighborhoods. Before moving to the Capital Region, I lived in Birmingham, Alabama, where city council members also represent specific neighborhoods.
So the way Schenectady does things strikes me as a little odd, because I’m unaccustomed to it.
Prompted perhaps by the election, I recently considered whether I would prefer to elect council members at large, rather than by district.
Would it be better, I wondered, to vote for council members who represent the entire city, rather than a much narrower slice of it? How would I feel if the council didn’t include a representative from my neighborhood? Would I trust an at-large council to look out for the interests of my neighborhood?
Ultimately, I concluded that I like the district system — that I like having my own representative, who hails from my neighborhood, to look out for my interests.
I like receiving updates on city news from my council member — updates that often mention zoning issues and other matters that are especially relevant to my neighborhood. I like that each neighborhood in my community has an equal voice, and must work with other neighborhoods — and their representatives — to get things done.
Of course, this system doesn’t work perfectly.
No system does.
One of Higgins’ issues with the at-large system is that it leads to one-party rule and corrupt governing, and that “in Schenectady, where Democrats outnumber Republicans by more than 2 to 1, it amounts to a rubber stamp for the mayor instead of an effective system of checks and balances. Also, city services and funds are distributed unequally to areas that have the most political clout on the council.”
There’s some truth to this, and while a district system might lead to certain improvements, it won’t magically solve the problems of one-party rule or political favoritism. Albany is a one-party town, where most council members are loyal supporters of the mayor. Birmingham has its own history of machine politics. Pork funding and cronyism are both problems that occur in district systems.
It would be nice to think that a different system of municipal governance would lead to more political engagement and voter turnout, but apathy is a problem everywhere and I don’t see switching to a ward system changing things much.
According to the National League of Cities, both systems have pros and cons.
The at-large system often draws better candidates, because the candidate pool is larger, and can make council members more impartial, because they’re not beholden to any particular group of constituents. One concern is that “at-large elections can weaken the representation of particular groups, especially if the group does not have a citywide base of operations or is an ethnic or racial group concentrated in a specific ward.”
The ward system, in contrast, gives all groups in a city, especially those with a specific geographic base, a better chance of being represented on a council. Council members are also more likely to be sensitive to small but important issues, “like waste disposal.” That said, “councils elected by wards experience more infighting and are less likely to prioritize the good of the city over the good of their district.”
Another possibility is a mixed system, where some council members are elected at large and others by ward.
I like this idea, although I don’t have any firsthand experience with it. Maybe it would offer the best of both worlds — better neighborhood representation combined with a more impartial perspective.
At the end of the day, it’s up to Schenectady residents to decide what system of governance they want.
If people are happy with the status quo, then the system should remain as is. If people want to consider other options — and maybe make a change — they should do it. |
Logged
