State vs. local control is an age-old quandary. Bigger can be better for big problems
My friend Stan Oken recently lamented that local control is slipping away, but our form of government is built on levels, from local to state to national, one nestled inside the other. Our nation’s founding fathers believed in a system of checks and balances and California’s executive, legislative and judicial branches also operate independent of each other. The tension between local and state authority is part of the push and pull that makes sure neither holds all the power to make all the decisions. Because there are 58 counties, hundreds of cities, and school districts, each carrying out their obligations, who in this motley and overlapping system should get the final word?
After nine years on the Fresno School Board and eight years as a Fresno County supervisor, I understand the desire to have fewer requirements imposed on local government. I have witnessed firsthand the heavy hand of state government as we tried to improve local government. After serving in the state Assembly and chairing the Budget Subcommittee on State Government for many years, I can now better see the complex partnership between state and local governments.
I learned that elected officials from other regions try to work for the people who elect them, even if I disagreed. California is a big state, from Silicon Valley to Death Valley, and all 40 million of us have differing views on the role of government in our lives. Global warming has different meanings to coastal residents than Central Valley farmworkers. But when it comes time to set policy for the entire state, once the majority has made a decision, that becomes the law of the land. If the majority of Californians is more responsive to greenhouse gas emissions than our Central Valley neighbors, the majority has spoken, and we must figure out how to move forward as a region and a state. It is part of learning to live together as a large, diverse community.
For example, regarding criminal background checks, many Californians believe criminal records are serious barriers to successful reentry, and lack of access to employment and housing only create revolving doors back to prison. Many are concerned that those who have served their time often cannot get a job, rent a home, or care for elderly relatives, even years after having turned their lives around.
Faced with a statewide shortage of 3.5 million homes, Californians also believe we must ease our housing crisis in a way that discourages suburban sprawl and encourages the right kind of growth in the right places. We may individually disagree, but that is the direction the state is going.
California recently approved several innovative options to add much needed housing in existing urban residential zones, including: allowing small, independent accessory dwelling units on single-family home lots, and ministerial approval for urban lot splits and developing duplexes; reducing minimum parking requirements on development projects near major transit stops and the review process to re-purpose commercially zoned land for new, multifamily housing projects; and streamlining the process for cities that choose to zone for up to 10 residential units on any parcel in a transit-rich or urban infill area.
Similarly, federal and state governments recently weighed in on use of a derogatory term for Native American women. Many years ago, I did not vote to remove the name “Redskin” from high schools, including one I attended. Back then I too believed it was a matter of local control, but I have since changed my mind. Over the years, most Californians have come to believe, as have I, that derogatory names should be discontinued as a matter of state policy. It’s appropriate for the state to consider this, even if my former colleague and I now have opposing views.
Fresno County is not an island unto itself, and pitting state power vs. local control is misleading, as both have representatives elected by the same people, just at different levels. Perhaps the relative diminishing of local control just underscores our connectedness. How can we address the most pressing issues of our time — whether environmental, economic, or social — without large-scale coordination and a sense of the bigger picture? California is a wonderful but complex state, and our system ensures there will always be tension between different branches and levels of government. While the movements of the Earth’s crust may sometimes pull us in different directions, we remain one state. If overly restricted from using its authority to tackle our common problems, I am concerned our Golden State will dim towards a state of disarray.
