LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Getting Involved

Charles C. Euchner, Executive Director, Rappaport Institute for Greater Boston

For most people, politics is like the famous “Where’s Waldo?” puzzles. It is easy to spot a few familiar figures — in this case, the president, some members of Congress, even some Supreme Court justices — but the vast majority of characters are obscure and unfamiliar. Even more disquieting, it is hard to identify even the figures closest at hand.

In an age when state and local governments have been given greater responsibility for public policy, few people have a working knowledge of local government. Turnout for local elections is usually about one-third, and often significantly less. Most people know little about local elected officials or agencies unless they have direct contact with them. Through direct contact, parents know something about the school system, builders know about the planning department, and so on.

People’s lives are affected more directly at the local than either the international or national levels. Even when the federal or state government sets policy, local government implements it. Local government exerts an important impact on housing, education, crime, the environment, transportation, parks and recreation, and culture and the arts.

Some of the most creative work in government occurs at the local level. The last generation of local government offers a textbook on making things work better.

Community policing and computer tracking of “hot spots” have created new hope for attacking crime, starting in New York and spreading to Boston, New Orleans, and Baltimore. Charter schools in Massachusetts and elsewhere have unleashed an impressive wave of creativity in education. Choice revived schools in East Harlem. In Boston, Main Streets initiatives have helped neighborhoods rediscover their centers. Nonprofit organizations and universities from Hartford to San Francisco have tackled the housing crisis.

But wait, there’s more: Cities across the country have cleaned their rivers and bays and brought housing and enterprise to the waterfront. In Baltimore, the mayor has brought an impressive computer database called CitiStat that gives him the information he needs to hold departments accountable for better performance. Cities like Boston are experimenting with new transit systems.

Why, if local politics is so important and so rewarding, is it such a neglected part of our lives? People who have lived in Greater Boston for years often do not know the most basic facts about their community — much less, how to get involved. If the opportunities are plenty, why are political debates and policy engagement so often left to such a small (if hardy) gang?

Part of the explanation is that we live in such a mobile society. Most people move every five or six years, so it is hard to develop a basic literacy of politics and policy at the local level. Greater Boston is even more itinerant than most regions because of the influx of hundreds of thousands of college students every year.

The rules of the game vary from place to place. Things work differently in Massachusetts than New York or California or Missouri. It’s not a different set of characters and issues, but a whole different way of playing the game.

Politics is a narrative, and it’s often hard to find the thread of the story locally. Pick up a copy of the Boston Globe or Herald and you’re likely to find the latest digs on Massport, the Big Dig, Chapter 40B, MCAS, “forward funding” of mass transit, and waterfront development. You also get some nice “enterprise” stories about trends in demographics, key industries and companies, and regional development patterns.

For a newcomer to the region, these stories create the worst kind of frustration. On the one hand, the issues are familiar. People everywhere care about schools
for their kids, safety on the streets, and housing. But politics is so idiosyncratic in any given place that it’s hard to follow the particular issues under discussion in a given day.

What is missing is the background and follow-up briefings. When you move to town, you get all kinds of “Welcome Wagon” materials — information about where to buy a house, worship, join a club, enroll kids in school. But no one orients you to the political system. When you try to understand local politics and policy, there is no clear point of departure.

The irony is that most local political systems are open to all newcomers. Veterans of local politics are thrilled to see someone new at a meeting about affordable housing or parks. But it is hard for newcomers to find a voice because they don’t have the toolkit and networks they need to join the game.

Once upon a time, local party organizations provided that orientation. Parties were permanent organizations on the lookout for support. They organized political clubhouses and tended to residents’ everyday needs. The party organization was often a crass operation, but at least it connected people to discussions about local affairs. Reform organizations like the old Village Independent Democrats in New York — where Ed Koch got his start — often did even better.

In the absence of a unifying local media or party system, we need to create new ways to connect people to the tools they need to do politics and policy at the local level. The Internet offers an unprecedented tool for giving people local briefings. Newspapers and cable TV stations need to reinvent themselves to provide information for everyone, not just insider policy wonks. Universities, churches, and neighborhood associations have important roles to play. Local government should make its own operations more transparent and accessible.

Tip O’Neill’s expression is cliché, but true. Eventually, all politics is local. The story of the next generation is written in streets and lots, school buildings and parks, museums and universities. Who will write it?