Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: If we do decide to revisit the size of our Town Board should we also

  1. #1
    Member dtwarren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    West Seneca, New York, United States
    Posts
    4,636

    If we do decide to revisit the size of our Town Board should we also

    consider going to a ward system of governance?

    Previously all board members were considered at-large meaning that the town has a whole voted for each of them. In a ward system of governance the town would be split into 4 wards and apportioned by population every 10 years after the census. Each ward would then select its own council member, much like the Buffalo has its districts or Lackawanna has its wards. It should be noted that we can only go to a ward system if we have a minimum of 4 board members.

    This would prevent people from one neighborhood from controlling the Town Board.

    This would also reduce what is needed to run to be on the Town Board and perhaps encourage people who would not consider running because of the daunting task of running a town-wide campaign.
    “We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,643
    If people from one neighborhood control your town board shame on the rest of your town. And going to a ward system won't fix it because the elections in the wards with lazy voters will almost certainly be won by lowlifes who can conger a few votes with promises to friends. A town is small enough that it can have an at large representation. So is Buffalo for that matter but it won't happen because the district council members will never put it before the people. They have de facto veto power over development in their districts allowing them to exact tribute as a condition of their approval. When the Empire Zone program was first developed each councilman got a share of the city's empire zone credit to dole out to friends and family and the program was a failure in the city. In the burbs, not not only were at large boards able to take a townwide approach to Empire Zones but even sometimes a regional approach. Hence Tonawanda contributed Empie Zone credits to Amherst to help make GEICO a reality, along with the thousands of jobs it has created and continues to create. Meanwhile, we're still waiting for the idiotic solar panel plant to create even one job; well, not counting all the legal positions created defending against the various corruption charges. But after all, that project is only on its 4th owner without making a product. We should be more patient.

  3. #3
    Tony Fracasso - Admin
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Buffalo, New York, United States
    Posts
    64,948
    Quote Originally Posted by dtwarren View Post

    This would prevent people from one neighborhood from controlling the Town Board..
    I don't think that would be any worse than one "social club" controlling a town.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Is it time once again to revisit the size of our Town Board?
    By dtwarren in forum West Seneca Politics
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: October 19th, 2017, 12:46 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •