Who says you can't fight City Hall?

By J. Basil Dannebohm

I tend to avoid writing about state and local politics. Topics of national interest keep me more than occupied.

However, if you think Washington DC is chock full of glad-handers and good ol’ boys; and that the federal government leverages the legal system as a weapon, I encourage you to more intimately acquaint yourself with local government.

Many of us have heard stories about municipal surveillance being used against a particularly outspoken member of the community. While I can’t say whether such accounts are fact or fiction, I can speak from personal experience that local governments aren’t above wasting tax dollars on intimidation tactics and frivolous investigations aimed at waging petty vendettas.

Is this to suggest that all municipalities are mired in corruption?

No. But there are warning signs.

A local government I’m intimately acquainted with is currently neck deep in controversy, some of which stems from a retribution campaign involving a dining landmark that set out to paint a mural on its iconic storefront. City officials claimed the mural was in violation of local law. A federal judge disagreed and ruled that the city violated the restaurant’s First Amendment rights. Nearly $1 million in taxpayer funds were wasted on legal fees.

Though the mural is finally complete, the city commission has doubled down in its pursuit of repercussion by spending more tax dollars researching legal options against the restaurant. It’s worth noting that the longstanding establishment is one of a handful of tourist attractions in the community.

But this city’s problems don’t end there.

Citizens have complained about murky tap water, a local waterway being clogged with debris, slow disaster relief response time, animal cruelty at the hands of city employees, a public animal shelter riddled with “systemic failures,” and a host of other concerning issues.

Public outrage has heated to such a boiling point that the City Manager issued a letter imploring residents to tone it down.

Recently, the city added a “Frequently Asked Questions” section to its website, addressing the aging water infrastructure, a river renewal project, and a hotel demolition site.

Given the vitriol, you would think that voters would have replaced the commissioners during the last election cycle.

You would be mistaken.

As with most elections, voters took the “safe” route by re-electing the incumbents. Consequently, nothing has changed.

Big tech’s involvement with municipalities is another thing to keep watch over.

Lately, major tech companies, online retailers, and data center developers are spending heavily on lobbying, political contributions, and economic development deals that directly involve local and state governments.

States including Arizona, Illinois, New York, and Pennsylvania have placed freezes or restrictions on data center tax perks; while states such as Kansas and Virginia have offered tax incentives.

Some lawmakers have introduced bills to ban non-disclosure agreements between tech developers and local public officials to prevent secretive deal-making. This has led to developers rushing to secure zoning approvals, tax breaks, and fast-track permits for massive server hubs.

In most states, meeting with local elected officials individually to bypass transparency laws violates open meetings acts. Likewise, using a staff member or city manager as a conduit to poll or lobby council members individually ahead of a vote constitutes hidden deliberation.

But that doesn't mean it never happens. Proving it is the tricky part.

There are subtle hints of backroom deals.

For example, when municipalities and local elected officials attempt to silence citizens by invalidating petitions, conducting meetings virtually, restricting public comment during meetings, and having citizens arrested for simply clapping during a meeting.

Another red flag to watch out for is billionaires buying elections.

In states with “home rule” laws, municipalities have broad power to govern local affairs, including campaign finance. Hence, most local governments determine their own political fundraising policies. Some cities set strict contribution limits and ban donations from lobbyists or city contractors.

If local elected officials seek to increase fundraising limits, it’s a good idea for both the media and the electorate to pay very close attention.

A well-known idiom suggests, “You can’t fight City Hall.”

That’s not entirely true.

Citizens have at least two powers they frequently neglect to employ: the ballot and the recall.

The most effective way to communicate with elected officials at any level begins with the ballot box. They’ve shown the extraordinary measures they will leverage to retain power once they have it, and to silence those who stand in their way.

Watch them with eagle eyes, just as they allegedly watch you. Vote and recall accordingly.