Local-state relations in Mass. a model for nation

From The Beacon, June 2013

The news that Lt. Gov. Tim Murray will be stepping down at the beginning of this month presents an opportunity to review one of his true successes as a statewide leader: building strong and lasting relationships with cities, towns and local officials. As anyone in the business of making government function smoothly knows, this is not flashy or glamorous work, and much of it is done out of the spotlight. But it is essential in order to deliver results and make sure that government at every level operates as effectively and efficiently as possible.

As a former councillor and mayor, Tim Murray knows what local government is all about, especially coming from central Massachusetts. His hometown of Worcester may be the second-largest community in the state, but he served in local office surrounded by dozens of small communities whose chief elected officials are volunteers. He has an appreciation for the diverse history, issues, needs and perspectives of our 351 cities and towns, and he respects the value and importance of home rule and hometown government, no matter the size or location.

From day one, Tim Murray wanted to be Gov. Deval Patrick’s chief liaison to cities and towns. He wanted to roll up his sleeves, not just to advocate for localities on Beacon Hill, but to be a bridge to connect the state and municipalities in meaningful ways. This relationship worked both ways, too. In addition to working on a daily basis to respond to requests for help on local projects and issues from local officials, Tim Murray was the administration’s chief messenger to communities.

His list of accomplishments is too long to list here. Suffice it to say there are major policy achievements (local-option taxes, closing loopholes, passing municipal health insurance reform and more), countless smaller wins (dozens and dozens of local projects and grants), and innumerable conference calls, emails and community meetings. The public will never fully appreciate how much hard work, attention to detail, and passion for follow-through and results were packed into Tim Murray’s six and a half years in the state’s second-highest elected office. But the local officials who worked closely with him will be forever grateful.

One of the critical roles that Tim Murray has filled is his loyalty to the importance of meeting and talking openly with local officials. During his time in office, he attended all but one meeting of the Local Government Advisory Commission. That’s dozens and dozens of meetings since 2007, with local and state officials sitting down together as equal partners to discuss local aid, new regulations, major reforms, model programs and everything in between. The LGAC is a vitally important institution that creates a formal relationship and framework for local officials from across the state to offer input and advice to the governor and lieutenant governor.

The LGAC is a model that the rest of the nation has looked to as a major success in facilitating strong local-state relations. In its most recent edition, Governing magazine has a terrific article that slams the federal government for walking away from its own Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations and notes that the failure of Capitol Hill leaders to take the business of federalism seriously is related to the overall breakdown and gridlock in Washington.

We are confident that the governor and his administration will continue to actively participate in the LGAC, as Massachusetts continues to demonstrate that dialogue and communication are vital to the vibrant partnership that the citizens of our communities want between state and local government. We all remember Gov. Patrick’s recognition of the LGAC in his first days in office, when he came to the MMA’s Annual Meeting to kick-off his strong working relationship with cities and towns.

Of course, a full and robust partnership between levels of government goes beyond one person or branch. Here in Massachusetts, we are fortunate to have outstanding relations with the House of Representatives and Senate, and any legislative and budget progress that has been achieved in recent years has been accomplished with the full partnership of the Legislature.

We note with pride that the speaker of the House is a former selectman, the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee is a former councillor, the House Ways and Means vice chair is a former selectman, and the assistant vice chair is a former parks commission and planning board member. In the Senate, the president pro tempore and the Senate Ways and Means Committee chair are former selectmen, and the assistant vice chair of Senate Ways and Means is a former council member. And there are dozens and dozens of legislators whose roots are in local office and hometown service.

Interestingly, the local-state dialogue in Massachusetts is strong because of a shared commitment to make hometown and state government operate effectively. Of course there are many policy disagreements, and frequently tension can increase to uncomfortable levels, but that is normal and should be expected. Even close families have disagreements, so we should never be surprised when levels of government have different perspectives about how to solve problems.

But here in the Commonwealth, the understanding that local and state officials serve the same constituents and taxpayers seems built into our DNA, as is the understanding that in the end we have to find a way to stand on common ground to make things work. That’s why the complete breakdown in Washington, D.C., seems so foreign from our perch in New England.

In the end, it comes down to this: The residents of our communities want government leaders to work together. They want their leaders to focus on solving problems, not assigning blame. They want their leaders to focus on results and not on politics.

This takes a lot of work by hundreds, even thousands, of local and state officials. This may not be glamorous, but it is vital to the future of Massachusetts.