The worst town in the nation

 

The worst town in the nation -- part 1

What would you think of a town in which every decision of the town board had been unanimous for at least a dozen years, and in which town board members are allowed no public dissent at meetings, and none is ever expressed? A town in which it was virtually impossible to get a meeting with the town supervisor? One where citizens who express any dissent were met with either silence or disdain? You would probably think you were living in the pre perestroikan Soviet Union, or Mao’s China but you would be wrong. You would be living in Greece New York, the worst run town in the nation.

 

Greece is a large suburb of Rochester New York with a population of almost 100,000.  If you live outside of New York you might think of the whole state as an extension of New York City liberal and democratic.  Would that it were the case. Upstate New York outside of the City of Buffalo and now the City of Rochester is solidly Republican. As far back as I can recall the town of Greece has been run by republican as was the City of Rochester up the mid 70’s. However from the seventies onward there was always some dissent, At least one democrat held one of the four town board seats. By the 1990’s however that began to change. As happened in many   parts of the country politics became more mean spirited and adversarial. Without downplaying the extent of differences in the past, the republicans in the county and the democrats in the city were able to cooperate on a tax sharing plan that helped the city stave off fiscal disaster in the previous republican administration. However that relationship deteriorated once the new republican leadership of Steve Minarik and Jack Doyle took over as party leader and county executive, Following the blueprint of the Reagan era for demonizing of the poor and minorities, a strategy which gave cover to neo-liberal restructuring of the economy, the new republican leaders in Monroe had to face the deindustrialization and declining fortunes of workers in// Rochester industries like Kodak Xerox Bausch and Lomb and GM. They responded to this crisis with the politics of hate and fear. Instead of addressing the nature of the economic changes that were devastating the middle class they scapegoated the poor and the outsiders and the minorities, In the midst of these tough times the republican message said, these people are taking your hard earned money, The lazy no good black folk and the democrats who support them are making you poor and raising your taxes. More than this the Minarik/Doyle party specialized in the use of personal attack and degradation of the opponent. It wasn’t just that democrats were wrong they were corrupt immoral and degraded people. The worst example of this occurred when the African American mayor of Rochester ran for county executive, proposing consolidation of city and county services. The very thought of the black folk invading suburban schools and the hardly subtle racist campaign run by the Republicans insured a huge defeat.

 

The strategy of hate and division was a big success. The republicans came to totally dominate in the suburbs of Rochester. Besides winning the county executive, republicans regained and expanded control over the county legislature. But the worst thing about the rise of new republicans was there authoritarian autocratic style and rigid top down party discipline. Every republican in the county legislature had to tow the party line and support all the decision of the leadership. When 2 legislators once went against the party on a matter they were immediately stripped of committee positions and were replaced in the next election, No dissent allowed. This party discipline was also reinforced by an extensive spoils system. Most positions in the county government were filled by political cronies, often those who served on town boards. Other jobs were filled by wives, children and relatives of these town politicians friends and large contributors, While this may be seen as just corruptions it served a crucial role in maintaining discipline, Those who are dependent on the political leadership for their livelihood are unlikely to stand up to it.

 

The county leadership looked not only to control the county political apparatus but the larger towns in the area. With this in mind county leadership pulled a coup in the town of Greece and forced out the town of Greece supervisor and replaced him with their own man, John Auberger, who had previously been the leader of the county legislature. This didn’t happen by an election or decision of the town republican party or the town board. The county republicans basically took over the local party and in midterm made the incumbent supervisor leave. It happened without warning. I was working for local public access at the time and we were called one morning to show up at town hall for an announcement with no indication what it would be.  This gave the new supervisor a decisive advantage, Without needing to get elected, the new supervisor could run as the incumbent in the next election with all the benefits that conferred, This was a trick the local republicans would often use to advantage over the years. The effect was to make political office more like an inherited right than an elected office controlled by the people.

 

 Now the previous leader was no great shakes but he did allow discussion and dissent, and the town board meeting often featured contentious debate of current issues. All that changed when Auberger got in. He took the authoritarian top down style of county government and intensified it with own tyrannical paranoid outlook.  All town communication had to come out of his office and under his name and imprimatur. As part of our programming at the public access channel at which I worked we would often before Auberger have town officials on to address issues and even have call in shows in which they would answer questions from the public, When there was property revaluation the town assessor would be there, An ice storm or other weather damage would get a visit from public works. Other times people from zoning or even the deputy supervisor would be on. These were often useful and informative.  Once Auberger took over he instituted a dictatorial style. No one outside of his office was allowed to speak or voice an opinion in public. Once he was able to consolidate power and defeat the democratic town board members this dictatorial style extended to public meetings as well. Town Board meetings were reduced from twice a month to once a month, all votes were to be unanimous 5-0 votes with no dissent or discussion with any policy content allowed. He even passed a referendum that his term of office was extended for two years to four to double the time he could serve before term limits kicked in.

 

Greece officials often defended this policy of unanimous votes by claiming that they had discussion of the issues at the more private agenda setting meetings held a week before the town board meetings. This had two problems, First of all it wasn’t true, and People who had attended these meetings said that there was in fact little or no discussion of agenda items. Much like the public meetings the initiative came from the supervisor and his heads of the Greece bureaucracy. There was little indication that town board members had any input into town policies. Second even if it were true, it contains a strong anti-democratic cast. If democracy is a matter of public deliberation in which reasons for decisions are deliberated together in public, then that element is totally missing. The public, unless one was a special interest like a developed in on the game, had virtually no input on these matters and one would struggle in vain to hear any reasons why decisions were made. Many town boards introduce controversial matters and discuss them with the public and in public with members of the town board, before voting. Decisions were often reserved. The only time this ever happened in Greece was in matters of zoning where public hearings were mandated by law. Even then while the public was “allowed” to speak, the town board members never publically debated differing views. Property issues were very important to the board, protecting the property of residents from the invading city hoards, or accommodating the interests of developers. Most of us, democrats non –parry republicans and the publically unaffiliated, came to see the town board as a political puppet show. On cue the puppet master would pull the stings and all the hands would go up,

 

My uncle, who still lived in the city of Rochester used to chide me that I lived in communist Greece (not the country). He wasn't that far off. THe town of Greece under Auberger often seemed like a Stalinist cult of personality. Auberger’s picture was all over the place. When you entered town hall there was a picture of Auberger on the door. When you got any piece of literature from the town even one about leaf pickup it had Auberger’s visage. THe summer concerts were renamed John Auberger’s summer concerts. It was clear he considered himself regal ruler and owner of the town. It was John Auberger’s town of Greece. To mix metaphors a bit, republican rule in Greece took on a royalist tint. Only the republican’s had the right to rule almost by divine right. THe mere  that a democrat might actually might hold office in greece was seen as an affront and the mere fact of running a serious candidate was an act of usurpation to be met with personal attack and degradation,

 

Trying to meei however with the supervisor of Greece to discuss any matters proved daunting to the average citizen proved daunting. It was a bit like trying to get hold of the character Major Major in Catch-22. If he was in, he was out.  A call to the supervisor would get his administrative assistant, who was little more than a glorified political operative disguised as a public official, She would maybe call you back and give you an answer but you would never get to see the supervisor, give your view or hear his reasons. In the few cases where you would see the supervisor he was never alone, He was always accompanied by his assistant/operative to protect him from misstatements, He had come to have a profound distrust of and paranoia about the public, and seemed to think that he couldn't trust the public to have an open and honest discussion.

 

In all of these examples a common theme is present: the notion of public and democratic accountability is absent. Not only was the Auberger administration totally unaccountable in its own actions, the supervisor did everything he could to limit accountability. Isn't the elimination of such accountability really to essence of authoritarian and dictatorial rule? Clearly Auberger thought of Greece as one party state, in which the party apparatus speaks for us all.

 

Like the old centralized soviet model, the Auberger administration set out not only to centralize control of the political administrative apparatus in his own hands, it worked hard just as in the old soviet union to erase the distinction between the government and civil society, Community associations and groups, which are often important to localism and citizen participation, and often provided paths to politics, had to comply with the party line or the Auberger administration would try to delegitimize and eliminate them. Even traditionally republican groups like the Chamber of Commerce and the Rotary Club came to have either Auberger’s administrative assistant, his deputy supervisor, or town board members in positions of power where they were able to oversee these groups and monitor and direct their decisions. The real ire of Auberger was directed at community groups like local neighborhood associations which threatened to organize citizens and take views which dissented from their own, Worse yet they might invite politicians to speak and ask them hard questions,

 

One group that I was familiar with a local neighborhood association in the area in which I lived was quickly subject to surveillance and harassment once they threatened to show some degree of independence. This neighborhood association was by no means a party affair, the president for most of the time I was around it was a staunch republican, as were other members of the association, but there were democrats and even democratic party members in it who raised questions and issues Auberger did not like. This was enough for the Auberger operatives to spring into action. No non-governmental institutions which were independent of the town were to be tolerated. In the local blogs and in everyday discussion this group was labeled as “political” and likened to a plot by the democrats to take over power. Because it had democratic on the board it was for that reason alone, illegitimate. It was as if the judgement of the democrats is always not only biased but dangerous and threatening, They had no right to participate, unless they bowed down to the views of republicans, Republican office holder began to refuse to appear in any context in which they might be questioned, and republican operatives began to join the group to try to steer it away from any concerns that were unacceptable to Auberger, There was to be no dissent in civil society in Auberger Greece.. Only the Republican Party and its leadership was allowed to speak “for us.”

 

Even members of the public trying to express dissent at a town board meeting found it was risky proposition. Citizens who were not familiar with procedures, occasionally came to town board meetings hoping to engage in a dialogue with their public officials were often stunned to find out that while they were allowed a very short period several minutes to make statements or ask questions, the supervisor nor anyone else ever replied. THe public forum was not really a forum for discussion or debate. Thus for the most part, few if any comment in the public forum. Town Board meetings which were once well attended were only sparsely populated. There was no reason to attend. The sole exception were for meetings where a new police officer was sworn it or some citizen got an award, But after the ceremonies the family and well-wishers would file out before any actual business was begun leaving only the echo of an empty room. Occasionally Auberger did comment. When the leader of the Democratic Party spoke on an issue of public concern, the supervisor stepped to identify the speaker as a Democratic Party member and several others as members of the democratic committee. Now their comments on this issue had little or nothing to do with the issue. The implication was that what they were saying as “democrats” was deceptive and illegitimate. In other cases the supervisor it to shut down a questioner who had preceded him at several meetings on matters of public and private misbehavior/ When some of us protested the treatment of this citizen the board simply adjourned the meeting. so we could not talk  The town then changed the rules of the forum to limit what you could say, Of course this big lie technique is not without its irony, THe auberger government was perhaps the most partisan and political of any I have ever seen

 

And they call it democracy

 

More to come

The neighborhood I grew up in – a story of decline

The neighborhood I grew up in – a story of decline

 

            Things have changed a lot and not for the better in the neighborhood I grew up in it’s a more gloomy stagnant place than it was when I grew up. The sense of decline is palpable There are empty houses and others in foreclosure, While the houses still are mostly well kept the neighborhood has an empty decaying feel. There is no there there, No sense of hope and no future.

           

Like many after the war my parents moved to the suburbs a year or two after they married in the late 1940’s, They were lured by the promise of having their own home in a more peaceful setting at a reasonable price, They didn’t have much money but with the help of the VA loan program they were able to buy a house and start families. The houses in these postwar suburbs were not that big sometimes bland and cookie cutter and not as expensive as today’s suburban mansions, but they did provide the spur to the growth of suburbs in America.

 

I can’t say I loved the suburban life I grew up in. There were many ways in which it was narrow parochial and small minded. I was never comfortable and didn’t fit in. But it was however, if in a modest way prosperous and active. There was a sense we were on the way up. Many of the families in our neighborhood worked for Kodak. A few ran small businesses like plumbing and service stations that prospered in the decade after the war. It was mostly working class with a couple of white collar workers. For a working class area, people were doing well. A number had boats they used in Lake Ontario and a couple even could afford second home cottages along the lake shore. There were lots of children in the neighborhood and we played baseball on the streets in the summer touch football in the fall, made snow forts in the winter, and shot hoops in our driveway basketball courts. There were lots of school yards and other lots to play ball as we got older. We played in high quality high school bands and others in high school sports and were well regarded. Despite the fact that we had some decent schools, living in the oldest part of my suburb advancement through education was not really emphasized. Most ended up staying in working class jobs like Kodak until they started cutting back or other similar jobs, The girls didn’t generally go to college in my immediate neighborhood and married boys of similar background and aspirations, Short of one family that moved out before high school, I am the only one of my neighborhood to even go to college. (Other newer built parts of my suburb had a higher percentage of college bound students) Still for the most part life in the suburbs was isolated and comfortable and if way too homogeneous. We were very isolated from the problems developing in the City of Rochester. When the riots in Downtown Rochester broke out in 1964 as kids we were taken by surprise. Of course in the white solidly republican suburb of Greece that was a problem caused by those other people who weren't like us. Luckily I had parents that were more enlightened but for the most part the sense of suburban prosperity rested on a thinly veiled sense of soft racism.

 

The situation is quite different today. My old neighborhood is a mix of elderly still living in the houses they bought in the post war years, older families downsizing or with reduced economic resources, and a small smattering of younger couples. It is no longer the prosperous area I grew up in. A lot of these folks are struggling economically and/or medically. You hardly ever see kids running around or playing on the streets. Occasionally you will see a group of teenagers from a catholic group home walking around trying to look tough. But any regular group of neighborhood kids is gone. In the houses where there are kids, they generally stay inside. Many people don't seem to have jobs or have low paying ones. In the house across the street from where I grew up, three adult children live (a couple and one son) none of whom work. The only one in the house that works is the 75 year old mother. Down the street are two adult children who seem to be very well educated, live with their adult parents, and don't appear to have permanent employment. Rochester is littered with well educated workers who worked for Kodak, Xerox Bausch and Lomb, and have lost jobs as these businesses radically downsized. Despite the fact that the local media tout the success stories of a few upper level employees who have started successful businesses, the majority of those who were still young enough to enter the workforce either had to work at lower paying jobs or faced age discrimination trying to find jobs at their skill level. I read a statistic while back that in the first decade of the century, incomes declined 17% in the suburb I grew up in which was heavily populated with Kodak workers. The working middle class has virtually disappeared in our area.

 

The worst harbinger of .decline is however, the creep of empty houses in the neighborhood, This never would have happened when I grew up, Apparently the  greater  Rochester area is 10th highest rate of zombie (empty or abandoned home) foreclosures in the nation   zombie homes In another piece I read it is ranked 7th worse/ THe house two doors down from me went into foreclosure and has been empty for close to a year. The one next door was empty for a long time too after a similar foreclosure and although it is was sold and owned by an absentee landlord it is only sporadically occupied. Down in the next block another house is unoccupied. A quick list of the contiguous streets on in my neighborhood on internet site Zillow indicated numerous housed in foreclosure and many for sale.  Another house on that block while well kept up shows no sign of occupancy. A local town activist has started to document the growing number of empty homes in the town many in the oldest part. Some have been unoccupied for years.

 

The specter of drugs also plays a role in some of these foreclosures. The couple two houses away were both drug addicts, not the down and our kind but the working ones, THe female was arrested released and then jailed for parole violation leaving the father, who worked as a minimum wage restaurant worker to take care of the two kids, He fell into a deeper more addiction. He let the house go down living with the kids for over a year in house without heat or electricity until he was finally addicted. The house next door only occasionally occupied was last used as a place to sell drugs. So things are surely going downhill.

 

Obviously there are economic consequences of empty houses. It estimated that an empty house in the neighborhood up to 15% and costs a great deal of tax money in maintenance. But the broader problem is what it does to the character if the neighborhood, It can attract petty thieves looking to rob the house of copper pipes and other valuables. Stripping the house of its infrastructure however, makes the house even more difficult to sell and costly to repair. Two main economic culprits are the financial crisis of 2007-8 and the longer term one of middle class decline. In the short run the financial crisis burst the housing bubble and recession meant that many could not afford the houses they had purchased during a time of cheap money. Given the lime it took for foreclosures to process in New York State, these foreclosures are just coming on line. They are however, significant. THe foreclosure rate is 4 to 7 percent in the suburbs and 7-14 percent in the city.

 

The longer term problem however is the decline of middle class incomes for the large majority of the population. Without the ability to make a substantial down payment or paying monthly payments many can no longer qualify for mortgages or afford to pay them. Many have high debt loads especially from student loans. The dream of a home of one's own is dying.

One becomes more transient a non-permanent resident who has less of a stake in the community. And while central city Rochester has one of the highest poverty rates in the country the inner rings suburbs now have areas of persistent and significant poverty.

 

Scholars have noted some of the features that are at the root of decline of the inner ring suburbs.  One of them is the desire for larger housing and with it further escape from the problems of inner ring suburbs. This has led to a disinvestment in the inner ring suburbs by developers. There is a disinvestment in housing stock. Another is the above mentioned deindustrialization, which has led to the loss of working class jobs with the resulting declining incomes for the working class. Inner ring suburbs have become less homogenous and more ethnically diverse with some the problems that entails. The result is what has been called the new suburban gothic. “in the most problematic areas” according to Short Hanlon and Vicino. “there are issues of a housing stock that is no longer marketable, an infrastructure that is in need of repair and residents that are dying out without a younger generation to replace them.” The result is the rise of central city problems like rising crime and schools that are failing.

 

Dignity and the aging poor or Getting old is a bitch

Dignity and the aging poor        

or Getting old is a bitch

 

Recently a friend of mine and her family were faced with a difficult decision. Her mother has been in and out of hospital in the last couple of years and has some mobility issues. At the hospital they claim she can no longer live on her own. The family relative who has been taking care of her and my friend’s dad who is also in poor health can no longer care full time for them. Her mother was pushed into a permanent nursing home residence while undergoing rehab. It’s not that clear that she understood what was entailed in that. While some might see this as okay she will end up separated her from her husband, in far less than ideal circumstances and cause difficulties in the family. Splitting up the couple seems cruel, but that is the nature of contemporary health care. It too often follows a medical model and not a model that stresses the dignity and autonomy of the aging person. This is doubly true if you are poor. The poor person who needs care is often just a throwaway. They cannot get the resources they need to stay at home and when they must be in a home the kind of setting that makes life worth living. They don’t even have the basics of privacy. More than just the reduction of the person to a medical patient without dignity being poor makes one more open to coercion and loss of autonomy in decision making and subject to conditions that are depressing and sometimes dangerous.

 

Too often healthcare providers use manipulative tactics to get older folks into nursing homes. They threaten them with sanctions or legal action if they want to keep their relatives at home. In this case the family was threatened with the loss of health services. They said if her mother wanted to live at home against their wishes they would cut off health care to her. I am not sure what that means, since they cannot actually cut off all care, but obviously some services are involved. It is the threat however, that is at issue. The attempt to coerce compliance through threats seems unacceptable. It goes against our sense that people ought to make decisions freely and with due consideration. It is not even clear in this case that my friend’s mom actually realizes that she has committed to live in the nursing home on a permanent basis. She keeps asking when she is going home.

 

 Often however these decisions are made in circumstances in which alternatives are not available or presented. My aunt for example faced a similar problem when her husband had a stroke and could no longer take care of himself. She too was coerced into placing him in a local nursing facility which was not very good. I wouldn’t wish the treatment he received on my worst enemy. He lived out his life often medicated and sometimes restrained because he was sometimes agitated and unable to communicate his needs. He lived without dignity or much compassion or care at the nursing home. It was only because his wife came to the nursing home every day and cared for him that he had any quality of life at all. It is a lousy way to end your life. My father used to call the homes where the poorer elderly were forced to live chicken coops, He wasn’t far from the truth. We ought to wherever possible help people to live in their own homes. Many nursing homes don’t do the job.

 

The decision to place him was however, not simply a medical one, he had problems but did not require or get constant medical monitoring. It was largely an economic one that is one of supple and cost. Although my aunt and her husband were not poor they lacked the resources to get any of the nursing care reserved for the rich they simply had to place him where space was available whatever the quality. And nursing homes seem anxious to fill beds to capacity without much concerns for the person and her dignity/

 

The situation with my friends mom seems little different. The social workers say she can’t live alone without almost 24 hour care. They live in a semi-rural area and the options are limited. The family had to take that nursing home otherwise the family would have to travel many miles to see their mom. The nursing home where she will stay will put her in a double room with another person she does not know. She has no TV and no access to the recliner she has at home is not available. Once she is a patient in the home she will not even be getting physical therapy she is basically left alone with little contact except family visits. In short she has little or no privacy. Getting a phone and TV is extra money that the family really can’t afford. You have to wonder whether the situation is really in her best interests. From what I can tell she is not going to get much attention there. The risks of such institutional neglect seem worse than dangers she might face at home where at least her husband is there. The nursing home has made little attempt to provide a place where both could stay together.

 

Dealing with an ill and aging parent is stressful in itself. But being in a nursing home that is less than optimal can divide families. Some see no choice, while others find the ill treatment and indignity of the conditions heart breaking, In any case even those who see the necessity of institutional care, are affected by the decline of their relative under poor conditions. Of course the conditions of home care are often stressful too. Caregivers often sacrifice and find that the area care without enough help can be very difficult. Yet as people live longer and with more chronic diseases these choices are going to be more a part of the lives of children and parents. But really it is the economic situation that is driving the problem. As our society is characterized by greater inequality and as the middle classes disappear Fewer and fewer elderly will have the resources to deal with the challenges of old age. The burden then falls on their children who are themselves are struggling economically and socially. As with other social issues the risks are being pushed downward onto those who are least capable of carrying further burdens. We are creating a major crisis in the care of the elderly.  THe children and relatives of the elderly should not have to risk financial ruin or bankruptcy to provide their parents a dignified life,

As with most goods in our society the divide between the access of the well off and he weaker in will increase.  Few will have the resources for quality elder care. Like our children who are being ill served by an education system that is breaking down the elderly are in the process of becoming another throwaway generation. The children of the family don’t have the resources they need to deal with the situation. They all work and at jobs that don’t pay enough IF their children have to quit jobs or work part time to take care of them then they too will suffer. They face financial ruin and emotional turmoil just to provide a dignified life for their parents.

 

Perhaps there are some better solutions and more help available but the family isn't aware of that they have met with social workers to attempt to get more help. Getting information on available resources is a big problem. When possible the best thing is try to keep elderly in their homes. There are a few programs that help a bit when elderly are not too bad, but there needs to be more what they start to decline. If the choice is a chicken coop, separated from your spouse and family or living at home, the answer seems simple. Yet families will need help to keep parents at home when their health problems increase. Those resources are not really available.

 

We need to rethink the way we treat the elderly in several areas. First we need to take seriously a transition away from a strictly medical model to a human flourishing one, the aim should not be simply following the judgments of doctors and the medical community about the health of an elderly person, but the wellbeing of the individual taken broadly. Ethical and moral issues such and dignity and autonomy of the elderly need to be emphasized. Second we need to provide more resources, yes public resources toward keeping the elderly at home or in places where their care and needs are paramount. Third we need to provide more resources to caregivers if they find they have to stay with parents who are in declining health these include economic support and emotional ones as well.