Building government center, ignoring electorate could result in voter apathy
Do we need a centralized municipal government center? Some say “yes;” others are skeptical.
Does our municipal government ever have enough office space? I am a fan of getting by.
I am more concerned with the peripheral issues. Let’s consider some basics.
Government is a reflection of you and me. Just look in the mirror for a moment and clearly peer into the face of government. Government is most responsive at the local level. Each successive level represents more people and more geographic area.
Literally, government is more and more removed from the lives of the people it is organized to serve as you ascend the ladder of authority.
As you peer into that mirror, successive back steps reveal fewer details and less clarity. So to it is easier to become hostile, negative and downright nasty when you no longer recognize yourself in the mirror.
Funding for the proposed Municipal Government Center has been rejected twice. What is a government official to do when the chieftains of the purse strings steadfastly oppose well-intended progress?
Former City Manager Ray Beck, along with his able protégé, Bill Watkins, declare that a city such as Columbia should have a centralized administrative hub. It would serve to consolidate the location of offices and in a sense be a proclamation to the world that we have arrived. To their credit, they have crafted a process to pay for the multi-million dollar project without raising taxes.
Admirable, yes, but do not forget the mirror — be proud of their ingenuity; they work for you and me. Ingenuity of this caliber is equally useful as our able administrators deal with other municipal complexities. Let us not complain.
Cash availability is not the question. What then is the consequence of subverting the will of the people?
In the previous votes, did we reject a new municipal government center in total, or did we simply state we did not want to raise taxes for the project? I do not presume to hold the answer.
However, I believe the credibility of the Columbia City Council, in particular the mayor and the fire chief, is strained. Let’s consider the fire chief first. Bill Markgraff is as fine a fire chief as a person could ask for. Bill is professional, a visionary and amply prepared for the worst-case scenario.
However, if his comments about the Daniel Building being a “fire trap” are accurate rather than the excited utterance of an adrenaline junky, perhaps the building should be razed. We could then start anew with a safe, state-of-the-art building that is a testament to our great community.
Mayor Darwin Hindman has a greater problem. Unintentionally, I am sure, he has whisked aside the pesky Grass Roots Organization along with the Ridgeway Neighborhood Association as inconsequential.
If these were south-of-Broadway bluebloods, you can bet your sweet bippy that the mayor’s response to citizen complaints would not be “that is what you elected us to do” — sorry.
When we look in the mirror we expect to see the same face over and over. Consistency and fairness are what we count on. Questions of need, funding priorities, image and convenience take a back seat when citizens are not treated even-handedly.
Popular projects require redoubled efforts at objectivity when the will of voters is disregarded for whatever reason. Reputations are easily sullied yet repaired with great difficulty.
My first toe-to-toe exchange with Ray Beck can be summarized by the political adage that perception is reality. If a large block of voters feels ignored or trivialized, then voter apathy will flourish. Voter apathy cannot become a benchmark of the fine place we call home. A vote of confidence from the electorate in regard to this project would be wholly welcome.
Geez, how many times did we vote on the can ban anyway?