Don't Stiff the Cities

Article excerpt

FOR most Americans, cities are the government that directly affects them. Cities provide water, schools, and basic social services. They pave and plow the streets. It would be nice if cities could pay their own way. But for decades, many have been caught in a Catch-22: Their tax base declines while the demand for services rises. And if they raise taxes to maintain services, more businesses and individuals flee to the suburbs, making matters worse. So the cities need help from the state and federal governments. State politics, however, often preclude increased aid to cities: Outstate legislators know voters aren't keen to pay increased taxes to what the voters often see as corrupt and inefficient city governments. Sometimes, unfortunately, race is a factor, too. The federal government has thus been the funder of last resort, and often furnishes large percentages of city budgets. But those budgets, already lean, would take an inordinate hit if the US Senate doesn't modify budget-cutting bills passed by the House. Mass-transit, crime-prevention, education, and job-training funds are among those scheduled for trims. A recent survey of mayors, Democrats and Republicans, found that 96 percent of those responding believe the cuts will have a negative impact on their cities. More than 80 percent said they would have to reduce city services, and more than 40 percent said they would have to raise taxes. …


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.