Who knows better than local folks what policies best suit local issues? What appears to be a logical and straightforward argument for local control of policies was briefly addressed at a recent Fremont City Council meeting. A review of the “2022 Legislative Guiding Principles and Priorities” included the statement:
Protect Local Control The City values its ability and authority to exercise local control, enable excellent public services and protect and enhance the quality of life for Fremont residents and businesses, and supports efforts to streamline regulations that simplify the job of running the City and opposes efforts that erode the City’s authority to control its own affairs.
At first glance, it is obvious that residents and officials closest to a local issue would have the benefit of first-hand knowledge and ability to use resources in the most efficient and best manner to meet local problems and challenges. However, a final comment by Councilmember Kassan that sometimes other considerations are more important adds a note of caution that the ethical boundary between local and broader government, i.e., regional, state, federal, is not always so clear.
For example, Civil Rights has been, and remains, a hotly debated topic that has engulfed the moral and legal landscape of this country since its founding. When should – and does – local control yield to higher authority? While it is important for government to closely respond to the needs, wants and desires of the constituency, elected officials are often charged with the responsibility to do what is ethical and just even in the face of vocal, vociferous and determined opposition.
In the current political climate, expediency and election (or re-election) efforts have often resulted in subjugation and subversion of the greater good that recognizes the value of all, rather than a select few. Our country was founded on the principle of individual liberty AND the strength of common purpose despite regional and social differences. Issues that transcend local boundaries may impose restrictions and regulations when the greater good is achieved through superseding authority. However, it is the responsibility of those who ascend to higher office to honor and remember their roots and local political challenges. Too often, in the limelight of political favors and deference, values and ethical considerations become collateral damage of campaigns and personal ambition.
It is inevitable that some of our local politicians will ask voters to elect them to regional, state and federal office. There is nothing wrong with this, but as responsibilities and focus broaden to include a greater constituency, it becomes more difficult to approach issues from a local perspective. Even through problems such as housing, homelessness, transportation and a plethora of additional critical issues transcend local boundaries, ultimately, they are either solved or fail at the local level. Wide-ranging policies and financial considerations by national and state authorities can form a framework for solutions, but practical and real-world solutions reside at the local level. It is here that the rubber meets the road and success or failure is realized.
While it is important to recognize the value of representation at regional, state and federal levels, the basis and strength of our democratic system lies at the local level. For those who choose to serve our cities and counties, guarding a governmental balance, constituent gratitude may be sparse at times, but the role of protecting the common good is appreciated and vital to our democratic values.
