| Authorized and paid for by CityYes Political Action Committee, Gregory A. Purvis, chair, Walter Bagot, treasurer. |
The Issues
| Why CityYES! As citizens, we desire the next generation to have a greater quality of life than we enjoy. This tradition has made our nation, country, and community among the most prosperous. Prosperity results from hard work improving our community, focusing on the future and adapting to change. As we move into the future, it is important to recognize our Fishers, Indiana community is at a crossroads. Fishers has risen from a small, sleepy town to a large, bustling community. This growth occurred by people seeking a good quality of life, strong economy, low taxes and low crime, affordable housing, emerging cultural scene and wonderful schools. Yet, the best attribute about the area is the people. We the people want a better, more prosperous Fishers. To get there, we must work hard to improve our community. Fishers must focus on the future and not rest on the successes of the past. Our community must adapt to change by realizing a place of nearly 70,000 residents has different needs than the small, sleepy town of the past. Unfortunately, our current form of local town government doesn’t meet the challenges our larger community experiences. We are not adapting well to our growth. Infrastructure hasn’t kept up with demand, crime is rising and many people don’t know who’s in charge. But most importantly, there is no clear vision of where our community is headed. An old proverb adequately says,” Without a vision, the people perish.” We believe a vision is desperately needed and to have a clear vision requires a change to officially recognize we are a mature community- a city. A City of Fishers would be led by a mayor accountable to the people. A city would have true neighborhood representation, checks and balances, be progressive not stagnant, great stature and have a strong sense of direction. We want a proactive form of government to help us remain economically viable. The local government must mature and step up to the responsibility of a large city. Fishers will soon become the third largest community in Indiana, but has not assumed the responsibility and expectations of its stature. There are compelling reasons to become an official city. 1. One Leader/One Vision A city elects the mayor by direct popular vote. The mayor is the official spokesman for the city. He articulates the vision of where he is leading the city. In town government, there is no single vision or voice. All council members and the town manager have distinct and often competing visions. There is no definite leader. In town government, the council elects its president and appoints a town manager and town attorney. Often all three give statements concerning issues but who is truly speaking for the community? With city government, the message is clear and concise with the mayor delivering the message. Mayors are more responsive because they must set the agenda as the sole leader. This brings a level of maturity and visibility to the city. City residents respect the position of mayor and perceive a sense of organization. 2. Neighborhood Representation With a population of nearly 70,000 residents, a City of Fishers would have 9 councilors. Six would be in neighborhood districts and three would be at-large. The six councilors from districts are only voted on by the voters of their respective districts. A district councilor represents and answers directly to the district residents. Currently, all town councilors all must live in a certain district, but are elected at-large. Thus, they do not represent a particular district, because everyone is voting on them. As a result, residents aren’t given the respect they deserve. In city government, councilors are more responsive to the people’s needs in their neighborhood, because only their neighborhood elects them. In a city, the atlarge councilors work closely with the district councilors to help meet neighborhood needs. 3. Accountability to Residents There is greater accountability in city government. The mayor answers directly to the voters. In town government, the town manager who runs the daily operations of the town is hired by the council and is not elected. In a city, the elected mayor runs the daily operations of the city. If he does a good job, he can get re-elected. If he does poorly, he can be replaced by the voters. The councilors answer directly to their neighborhoods with the district councilors only answering to the district voters. With the leadership answering to the voters, more is accomplished. Elected leaders are more progressive and don’t become as stagnant. Simply, they want to be viewed in a positive light by getting things done so they can be re-elected. 4. Checks and Balances City government has a system of checks and balances. The mayor and council must work together to implement the city’s vision. Both have limited powers. However, a town government has no checks and balances. The council is both the legislative and executive body. It operates without answering to another local government entity. This is problematic because the town council often believes it can do whatever it wants and it generally does. Good government requires the sharing of power with a distinction between the legislative and executive bodies. Checks and balances bring legitimacy to a community. 5. Economic Development/Proactive Government Economic development opportunities are greater with a mayor leading a city. With a full time mayor, much time is spent on economic development. In town government, the entire council is part-time with no mayor. This means towns often tend to be reactive to issues. A city with a mayor is very proactive. Business usually migrates toward cities instead of towns. Even Fishers is a bedroom community with most residents working elsewhere. The perception is towns are small, quiet, and stagnant; while, cities are viewed as bustling with activity, progressive, moving toward a clear vision with many possibilities. This focus on development results in business growth. The growth keeps taxes low, schools funded, improved infrastructure and an overall healthy business climate. |
