(11-25-2009) The following opinion is written by Clifford Sondock, President of the Land Use Institute.

SEE STORY BELOW

The Land Use Institute is a land use oriented think tank that believes in a free market system – one that would allow the market to determine the type of development that should be placed in any given area. This would give the region a much better chance of adequately dealing with pressing issues such as affordable housing, high property taxes and the loss of young professionals to other regions.

The LIU mission is to formulate and present market-oriented solutions to problems as opposed to government-based initiatives.

Mr. Sondock asserts that the decision-making process is controlled by factions consisting of civic and environmental groups, which effectively determine the path of development on Long Island.

The basic tenet of LUI is that free-market solutions – which essentially eliminates levels of beaurocracy to allow the market to fix itself, aren’t even considered when trying to solve Long Island’s problems, noting that governments aren’t thinking about the unintended consequences of their actions as related to land use.

Mr. Sondock is a preeminent Libertarian mind here on Long Island.

Here’s his opinion.

Town Council Districting would be bad for Huntington

The Town of Huntington has called a special election for December 22 to create four (4) separate town Council districts to replace the current four (4) at-large town Council seats.  Town Council Districting would be bad for Huntington.

The Districting advocates group calling itself the Concerned Citizens for Huntington strategically submitted its petition in late October to avoid a vote during the regular November 3rd election.  The Districting advocates are betting that few residents come out to vote against their districting scheme.

Districting would increase town spending as Council members try to bring home the bacon for their individual districts.  Huntington’s budget would likely expand to accommodate the need to create enough appropriations for each district, so that each district receives its share. The only loser would be the taxpayer.

Residents would continue to pay property taxes town wide. Under the current at-large system, residents with strong opinions on issues can affect policymaking by casting their votes on all the Council members. Under a district system, residents would vote only for the Council member representing their district. This is taxation without representation.

Currently, all voters have the opportunity to change half of the Town Council every two years. Under a district system, a voter would only be able to oust an incumbent once every four years, and even then, can only affect one-fourth of the Council composition.  Thus, a voter would have less impact over Town government than under the current at-large system.

Districting may leave a specific area of Huntington unprotected.  The residents of the district opposing a particular project inserted in their district would have no recourse against the other three Council members, who may be in favor of the project.  Districting would allow projects to be imposed on individual areas, with Council members from the other districts ganging on the receiving district and who do not have to answer to those voters in the other districts. 

Conversely, chances are that a Council member would not agree to a project if there were no clear benefit for their area, even if the proposal would benefit Huntington as a whole.  The attitude of “what’s in it for me” would prevail, instead of what’s best for Huntington. The net effect is that these artificial divisions would split Huntington when our town should remain unified in looking for regional solutions to town problems.

Districting advocates claim that at-large council seats have resulted in unanimity of council voting.  The truth is that unanimity on the town board is caused by the fact that all the council members are from the same party, not that the council members are elected at-large.

Unlike the county, state and federal governments, town government has no clear executive branch, separate from the legislative branch, and thus lacks the checks and balances of a chief executive with veto power.  Horse-trading would be the inevitable result as each Council member seeks to get the most for their individual district.  Council members elected at-large must be concerned with the bigger picture, since their responsibility is to all Huntington taxpayers, not just to those in their district.

Districting would make it easier for special interests such as civic associations to influence elections and stall town government.  Under the at-large system, Council members must be familiar with issues important to all areas of Huntington and vote based on what is good for the entire Town.

Huntington needs to adhere to the Rule of Law as opposed to the influences of special interest groups and limit the expanse of burdensome and costly regulation and spending.  Huntington residents need to go to the polls on December 22nd and vote against Districting.

Clifford Sondock, President

Land Use Institute, 131 Jericho Turnpike, Jericho, NY

(516) 322-1199