What's Old is New Again

The five meetings held by the City last month to introduce its new Office of Neighborhood Initiatives and the conceptual framework for its mission, revealed something interesting and important about the City:

Long time residents located their fondest memories—“better days”-- somewhere in the past, and wanted to recreate a City and neighborhoods where good things happen like they used to in the old days. To some extent, they lamented change because they saw its negative consequences.

More recently arrived residents described the virtues of the City as it exists today and said what attracted them to Geneva is what it is now, how little it has changed—compared to other places they know, blah suburban McPlaces or big cities seemingly losing their warmth and given over only to the pursuit of wealth.

What is critical is that both groups valued quality of life and community, and both expected Geneva to be a place where they can be found. That suggests a powerful, intergenerational alliance might be formed between them today, and that should be an important aspect of the Office of Neighborhood Initiatives, trying to harness a commonality of purpose between some of Geneva’s longest, and shortest-term residents. That commonality exists in what the older residents say they remember about Geneva and what the newer residents say brought them here by a recent choice.

The Office of Neighborhood Initiatives may strike some as a new effort with a lot of new faces, but at its core, it is a revival of the traditional community values which are, themselves, the most progressive concept to hit Geneva in decades.

Maybe Geneva Needs a "Kamikaze Council":Listening to the Drumbeat of the Numbers

Our most recent appearance on Ted Baker’s Finger Lakes Morning News focused on the City of Geneva’s 2010 budget, its multi-year financial plan, and the economic climate’s effect on municipalities in general. If the City maintains a “business as usual” approach, it will lead to business unusual, as in bankruptcy.

We believe that one thing New York State has done correctly with regard to cities has been to require the filing of multiyear financial projections with the State Comptroller’s office. While these are only non-binding financial models, Capraro points out that they at least force cities to consider scenarios beyond the present. They reduce the possibility that cities can claim to be taken by surprise when faced with reduced revenues and increased expenses. In essence, multi-year planning forces elected officials to do one of two things:

1. Nothing: i.e., pass the problem down the line, and hope it either works itself out or blows up after your term is up.

2. Something: i.e., accept the reality, prioritize expenses, seek out new revenues, change the way business is done to make the business model work. Make a decision.

As Ted rightly pointed out, changing the way the City does business is politically risky. Things are done the way they are because someone benefits. As we’ve pointed out ad nauseam in multiple posts, the existing structure is set up to benefit economic development through tax exemptions, to administer city services without strategic deployment of resources, and to privilege vested special interests.

A new and more dynamic approach would see City government as a partner of the people, using sensible and effective means to meet critical needs. This new way of doing business may leave elected officials on the outs with the outspoken minority, but it would bring government back to the people in a way that is both useful and affordable.

In short, Geneva doesn’t need a Council that takes unnecessary risks, but it does need strong, focused, creative leadership to right the ship and make Geneva shine! Ted suggested the image of a “Kamikaze Council” that might go down in a blaze of sacrificial glory for the cause. Capraro reminded us the drum beat of the numbers is relentless. Click here to listen.