Metropolitan Government: Four Views

The following diff approaches to solving the metropolitan problem, characteristic of diff groups, are noted: (1) the attempt to remedy 'fragmented gov' by taking umbrage at untidy gov boundaries, overlapping services, & small, inefficient gov's; (2) the approach of the 'purveyors of services,' who consider gov service deficiencies the major villain in the Ur US; (3) the esthetic approach which is horrified at the decline in quality of Ur life; (4) the approach which expresses a longing for some 'process of gov' by which the residents of the metropolis can express their preferences among competing demands for gov'al action. These categories may overlap in practice. Each is discussed in detail & the solutions they offer are evaluated. It is observed that each perceiving group has a specific answer to the metropolitan problem. The problem is that of establishing a representative set of perceptions on the charter commission or metropolitan study group. This means that all values, interests & perceptions should be represented on the original study group. A state legislature approach which would favor the solution of Ur problems on a districtwide basis & would represent all interests within a district, is proposed. The federal gov is also involved in determining Ur gov structure through their grant-in-aid requirements. Its ,stick- &-carrot' & financial pressure approach may be more effective in developing metropolitan consensus than the means used by other levels of gov. It is concluded that the original blue-ribbon charter commissions tended to have varied & apparently non-representative perceptions of Ur problems, which may explain the failure of metropolitan gov elections. Reconstitution of these commissions is one possibility, but it may be better to rely on the perceptions of the state legislature & even to succumb to federal views & requirements. M. Maxfield.