Please note: this text may be incomplete. For more information about this OCR, view
About OCR text.
REAL. ESTATE
NEW YORK, FEBRUARY 12, 1916
HOME RULE FOR CITY IMPERATIVE
New York City Should Have Control Over Local Ex¬
penditures—Efficient Government and Saving the Result
By JOHN PURROY MITCHEL, Mayor, City of New York
T T is impossible for one to occupy a
* responsible position in the govern¬
ment of the City of New York without
being compelled daily to consider some
aspect of the very difficult problem of
the relations between this city and the
State of which it is an integral part.
Even a casual observer of our political
and civic life must realize that there are
objectionable elements in this relation¬
ship as it now exists. Personally I have
given a great deal of time and attention
to this problem. I feel very deeply that
the city cannot work out its own salva¬
tion in the matter of effective and eco¬
nomical government until its relation
with the State Legislature has been
established upon some more satisfactory
basis than now prevails.
Vigilant Lobby Necessary.
Nobody appreciates more fully than I
the value of the protection which the
city enjoys by reason of the power
vested in the Mayor to exercise a sus¬
pensive veto on special legislation affect¬
ing the city. In spite of this, however,
it is well known that we are compelled
to maintain a vigilant lobby at Albany
in order that we may be kept in touch
with proposals for city legislation that
are introduced, in order that we may op¬
pose in their inception such proposals
as are deemed to be deleterious to the
best interests of the city, and in order
that we may promote those proposals
which are regarded as necessary or
advisable.
It should always be borne in mind that
the City of New York is operating under
a charter and group of laws that are
exceedingly complicated and detailed in
character. In this charter and these
laws there are many provisions which
have no place whatever in the funda¬
mental law of a city—provisions con¬
cerning matters of detail which should
clearly be left to the discretion of the
officers who are actively engaged in the
conduct of the city's business. The net
result of all this is that whenever the
city, acting through its own officers, de¬
sires to put into efifect any piece of con¬
structive reform, application must al¬
most invariably be made to Albany for
a change in the charter or laws ap¬
plicable to the city. The proposed
change may relate to a matter of most
intimate and, if I may so put it, personal
concern to the city as such.
Ridiculous Supervision.
We are, nevertheless, compelled to
plead our cause before members of the
Legislature from all parts of the State—
members who for the most part have
little interest in or knowledge of the
conditions and requirements of this city
and its government. To my mind it is
little short of ridiculous that these meni-
bers should have any part whatever in
determining whether New York City
shall purchase its supplies through the
medium of a central agency, or whether
we shall have a centralized department
of markets, or whether we shall enter
into a contract for the disposal of our
.garbage, or whether we shall have one
Commissioner of Accounts instead of
two, or whether the office of City Cham¬
berlain shall be reconstructed so as to
HON. JOHN PURROY MITCHEL.
make it a more effective agency in our
government.
This city contains approximately half
of the population of the State of New
York. More than seventy per cent, of
the people of the State reside in incor¬
porated cities. If the people of the
State are capable of self-government, it
is obviously absurd to say that the
people of the cities are not capable of
self-governinent. It is simply a fact that
the people of the State are in major part
the people of the cities of the State.
New York City Capable.
I am ready to concede that the State
government is sometimes of higher grade
and tone than the governinent of this or
that city, but this is subject to change
as the wheel of politics revolves. It is
often true that the .government of a
particular city is superior to the govern¬
ment of the State in point of character,
ability and devotedness to the public
weal. It seems to me that against the
proposal to grant home rule to the
cities of New York State no argument
worthy of consideration can he drawn
from the notion that the people of our
cities, and especially the people of New
York City, need to be protected against
themselves by the representatives of the
State. If instances of the well-working
of such protection may be cited, so also
have there been numerous instances of
its ill-working. I make bold to declare
that tlie people of the City of New York
are capable of producing and maintain¬
ing, without assistance from Albany, a
government appropriate to their own
needs.
Familiar With Difficulties.
I am under no delusions about the
difficulties that inhere in the proposal
to grant to the City of New York the
power to regulate those affairs which
are primarily, if not wholly, of local in¬
terest and concern. It would be well,
indeed, if the people of the city should
clearly understand the particular ele¬
ments of difficulty that are found in this
problem. 1 think 1 can set these forth
with clearness even in an article as brief
as this must of necessity be,
In the first place, we can rely upon
a constitutional amendment to afford us
the complete relief that we seek. There
IS a fundamental doctrine of our law
that the Legislature may not delegate
Legislative powers. Generally speakin-^
It may doubtless be said that while the
Legislature can delegate to a city the
powder to enact local ordinances, which
power IS unquestionably Legislative in
character, the Legislature may not dele¬
gate to the city the power to make a
charter. We cannot, therefore, appeal to
the Legislature for a thorough-going
grant of the right to make our own local
charter. Just how far, however, the
Legislature may go in the direction of
conferring upon the city broader power
over certain matters that are dealt with
in the charter is a matter which is as
yet not clearly and definitely settled in
our law. Personally, I am of the opinion
that the Legislature may by simple statu¬
tory enactment greatly broaden the
powers which the city now has with re¬
spect to the organization and operation
of Its own government. At least, I am
convinced that the time has come when
this whole question should be thorough¬
ly threshed out before the courts.
City Under Handicap.
The simple and obvious fact is that
the Legislature may grant to a city a
charter which estabHshes merely the skel¬
eton of its government and it may con¬
fer upon the corporate authorities of
such city the power to transform this
skeleton into a complete organism. On
the other hand, the Legislature may de¬
cide not only to provide the skeleton
of the city's government hut may also
deal with every minute detail relating
to the organization and operation of that
government. This latter is what the
Legislature has done with the City of
New York. The result is that the cor¬
porate authorities of the city are placed
under a tremendous handicap. I am in¬
clined to believe that in spite of the
elaborations of the city's charter the
Legislature could extend to us the power
to remotild and reshape certain aspects
of the city government and this could
be done through the medium of one or
more brief amendments to the charter.
1 believe that we should ask the Legis¬
lature to extend to us every power of
local self-government that is within
its pow-er. But this is not all. The
Legislature can go only a little way.
The constitution must be changed to
meet our further needs.
Scope of Powers.
In the second place, assuming that a
constitutional amendment for this pur¬
pose is to be drafted, we are face to
face with the problem of the scope of
powers that we want granted to us. I
am not one of those who believe that
this question of the scope of the city's
power can be determined by the use of
any general phrases giving the city con-
tori over "matters of local concern" and
reserving to the State Legislature the
right to enact laws in "matters of State
concern." Such phrases are entirely too
general and vague to accomplish an ade¬
quate separation of powers between the
city on the one hand and the State on
the other. ___.