A Position Statement:

Cooperative Local Government
Cooperative local government provides answers for regional needs.

In several parts of the state, organized efforts are attempting to eliminate township governments or limit their responsibilities.

Seemingly well-meaning task forces, think tanks and study groups are pushing for larger and fewer governments, hoping to undermine the local government system that has effectively served Pennsylvania since its very beginnings.

These groups often use words such as urban sprawl, poor land use, and fragmentation as scare tactics to gain support for "regional" government. These groups paint dramatic, but untrue, images of townships in chaos.

In reality, our Pennsylvania townships have earned the praise of local residents because of their concern and action on residents’ behalf. A survey conducted by the respected Lincoln Institute of Public Opinion Research found that 78% of survey respondents believe their municipality is on the right track and doing a good job and 80% believe local governments should not be replaced with larger regional or countywide governments.

Efforts should be made to strengthen townships’ abilities, not undermine them.

At the dawn of the 21st Century, instead of looking to form bigger, more distant governments, Pennsylvania should capitalize on its positive, community-based system of township government and develop methods to make other levels of government more visible, responsive, and accountable to the people.

Cries that there are "too many GOVERNMENTS" are based on fiction. Pennsylvania has an average number of local governments compared with other states.

In a report from the Center for Rural Pennsylvania, 3,152 local governments — including counties, municipalities, and school districts — were counted in Pennsylvania during the 1990 census. On a population basis, there were 35 local governments for every 100,000 residents in the United States. In Pennsylvania, there were 26 local governments for every 100,000 residents. Among the 50 states, Pennsylvania ranked 21st in the number of local governments per capita.

Some of the "regional" groups hope to change local government without allowing a public vote.

Regardless of the wishes of local citizens, some critics suggest that local governments should be forced to regionalize local services such as sewer and water authorities, police departments, and even volunteer fire departments.

Some critics seek to erode township authority by:

• taking away their taxing ability
• eliminating or transferring local government functions to another entity
• moving toward larger, more centralized government
• imposing mandates and financial burdens that weaken townships’ ability to serve their residents

Big government has repeatedly shown itself to be more distant, anonymous, and basically unaccountable.

Time and time again, studies show that Americans rate local government more highly than state or federal governments. That’s because local government can simply be more responsive. Plus, local government is held accountable for its spending and its actions.

Studies also show that larger, more centralized governments result in high spending. Pennsylvania’s own two largest cities are living proof that bigger isn’t cheaper or better. As stated in an editorial in the Lancaster New Era, "Claiming that regional government could save significant money over local government is a little like pretending that the federal government is less wasteful than state government. It is not so."

Boundary changes, annexations, and other land grabs are band-aids to much bigger problems facing Pennsylvania cities.

Pennsylvanians are moving away from the cities into suburban and rural areas — mostly into townships — often because of concerns such as quality of schools and crime rates.

Cities should be made more attractive and desirable places to live and work but not at the expense of their neighbors. Cities should not be allowed to absorb township land surrounding them or grab money from people who don’t even live there. These quick fixes do not solve the cities’ underlying problems — poor schools, crime, high taxes, and too many regulations.

Residents have the Constitutional right to determine the type of government that represents them — not task forces, think tanks, or study groups.

The decision to regionalize should be initiated only by petition of the citizens of the affected communities or by agreement of the local governments the residents have chosen to represent them. Fundamental change in the government system requires a public vote.

Let voluntary cooperation prevail — encourage what’s already working. Involuntary or forced cooperation will turn a great concept into an undesirable mandate.

Since approval of the Pennsylvania Intergovern-mental Cooperation Law in 1972, municipalities have proven over and over again that they can work together to save money and improve delivery of goods and services. Sharing road equipment, creating shared water and sewer programs, making group purchases, and even sharing personnel are a few examples of local governments working together.

Voluntary cooperation among already highly effective local governments is the answer — not fewer, larger governments. Townships have historically been masters at providing services their citizens want and need while keeping taxpayer costs to a minimum.

The local governments already in place can rise to the next level of service excellence through encouragement of more voluntary partnerships that benefit the citizens they represent.

About PSATS
Since 1921, the Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors (PSATS) has represented the interests of townships and has helped to shape laws that have laid the foundation for township and municipal government. Today, PSATS represents Pennsylvania’s 1,457 townships of the second class and some 10,000 elected township officials. With more than 4.6 million residents, townships represent more people than any other type of political subdivision in the commonwealth, including cities.