Columbia University Libraries Digital Collections: The Real Estate Record

Real estate record and builders' guide: [v. 97, no. 2507: Articles]: April 1, 1916

Text version:

REAL ESTATE AND NEW YORK, APRIL 1, 1916 PARTIAL HOME RULE NEEDED BY CITY Many of Existing Errors Could Be Righted Under Present Form of Government—Must Agree Among Ourselves Before Albany Will Act As the Legislature may not dele¬ gate legislative powers, it may not give us the power to make our o'wn charter, without an amend¬ ment of the State Constitution; but is it necessary that we make our charter free of the Legislature? If we can agree among ourselves upon the form of charter we wish, there is every probability that the Legislature will pass it. A charter should be an instrument for the guidance of the majority and the protection of the minority. ONE of the peculiarities of certain schools of political philosophers is that when they wish to escape from the results of past errors they jump to the conclusion that if they had some¬ thing new—although untried—it would be better than to try to improve old methods to which the people had be¬ come accustomed. It needs no argu¬ ment to prove that the city has suffer¬ ed in the past from mandatory legisla¬ tion, but I doubt that the present day burdens from this source are any greater than those which may be traced di¬ rectly to our own stupidity and lack of foresight. Nor does it need any argu¬ ment to prove that many of our purely administrative acts, such as making and adopting a budget, and fixing the sal¬ aries and other expenses therein, should be within the power of the city, with¬ out the absurdity of having such items fixed at Albany for certain groups of city employees. The fact will develop after a very cursory examination of the question that the advocates of home rule do not de¬ sire home rule at all. They will admit at once that they do not wish home rule in matters of civil service, education, taxation, indebtedness, contracts, de¬ cedent estates, insurance, excise, health' laws and many other things in which the interests of the city are so inter¬ twined with the interests of the State and the Nation that to separate them would be impossible. What they want is "More Home Rule" and not "Home Rule." The term home rule does not express v/hat is wanted, and only raises unnecessary opposition. It must not be forgotten that the City of New York is a governmental agency of the State of New York, and that so long as this is so, complete home rule is out of the question. Indeed, inde¬ pendence of the city from the rest of tlie State would be a misfortune for the city, while New York City is the great financial and commercial center of the country, its interests must be protected in Congress and with foreign countries, and this may be done only through the State. While our ears are resounding with the cries of "Home Rule," it might pav us to stop and think that in most of the functions which this city performs for its internal government, we have By HON. CYRUS C. MILLER home rule. That present methods might be improved, and can be improved, there is no doubt, but to do this it is not necessary to arouse the opposition of the rest of the State or of the residents of the City who see the futility of com¬ plete home rule. Article XII of the State Constitution provides that special laws relating to any city shall be referred to the mayor of the city for his approval or disap¬ proval within 'fifteen days. Upon his disapproval or failure to disapprove within fifteen days, the bill may be passed by both houses of the Legislature. HON. CYRUS C. MILLER. There is a considerable list of these special laws, and many of the laws over which we now groan were approved by our mayors and would be repealed if the city demanded it. It would be wiser if the advocates of greater freedom in the conduct of the city's aflfairs were to define exactly what measure of increased self-government would be necessary to better conditions, rather than to content themselves with the catch words "Home Rule." Perhaps, after all, the question is one of degree and not of kind, and perhaps the advocates and opponents of home rule will find upon comparing their views that they are not so far apart. For example, I do not understand that the most ardent home ruler favors full power in the city to incur bonded in¬ debtedness and to fix taxation, while they who oppose home rule because thev think its limits to be too broad will agree that budget making and salary fixing and other administrative acts should be lodged in the city alone. Many of the same men who are so anxious for home rule for the city are opposed to home rule in the boroughs— thereby creating a centralized govern¬ ment far from the scene of purely local functions, and resulting in practically the same evils they claim ensue to the city from control from Albany. Why the laying out, regulating, grading and paving of streets and the construction of It must not be forgotten that the City of New York is a govern¬ mental agency of the State of New York, and that so long as it is so, complete home rule is out of the question. Indeed independence of the city from the rest of the State would be a misfortvme for the city. While New York City is the great financial and commercial center of the country, its interests must be protected in Congress and with foreign countries, and this may be done only through the State. sewers, water systems and docks, the maintenance of parks and other purely local acts should be performed by a cen¬ tralized government and not by local borough officials directly responsible to the people of the locality is difficult to see. On the other hand, such general functions as police, fire, finance, educa¬ tion and the like must be performed by a centralized government. It is fashionable to lay to "Up-State Domination" about all the ills we suffer, but it is clear that rarely has any act aflfecting the city been adopted without the concurrence of the legislators from the city, and the approval of the mayor. When to this is added the fact that most of our citizens are indifferent to public affairs and interest themselves in legis¬ lation only when it aflfects them directly, we can see that home rule or any other rule in itself is not sufficient for good government. The machinery we have now is good enough if it is operated intelligently. We have observed a remarkable growth in this city during the past ten years of what are called "Social Work¬ ers," whose work consists in what they deem social betterment. The world pro¬ gresses, and some of this work has been necessary and helpful, but there is a ten¬ dency among all huinan beings who spend the money of others, especially when they themselves are the recipients of that money, by way of salaries, to overdo it. This, in conjunction with the increase in the number of our voting population, who agree with the social workers that something for nothing is desirable, tends to raise a suspicion in the minds of con¬ servatives, that "home rule" with¬ out the restraining vote of the up-State farmer may not be so desirable after all. The past has shown the pressure which has been brought to bear upon city of¬ ficials by the social workers and other well intentioned people, who have not realized the fact that all things no mat¬ ter how desirable, must be paid for. There may be times when the veto power of a Governor of the State will be a very valuable check on the legislation of a city. All through our government runs the idea of checks and balances up¬ on legislation aflfecting the lives and property of our citizens, by others who are not responsible for the legislation. (Continued on page 513.)