Metro Boston’s future requires contemporary forms of governance based on unity of purpose, accountable to the local population, and able to deliver services cost-effectively and to legislate efficiently.  A review of the current home rule structure may identify opportunities to resolve the complex myriad of statutes that unnecessarily limit local control, are in conflict with each other, or are otherwise obsolete and counterproductive

The current home rule structure leaves cities and towns less able to respond to the economic and demographic shifts, with local governments having little control over taxes, fees and borrowing.  Local governments have historically struggled with the myriad of “local control” mechanisms and responsibilities set out in state law, which often put local officials at odds with each other over jurisdiction and autonomy.  An antiquated and confusing framework of local governance combined with limitations on municipal autonomy perpetuates state intercession at the local level.  The need for legislative approval as well as the cumbersome home rule charter process has led to an archive of locally targeted “session laws” of the state legislature that annually numbers in the hundreds and accounts for a significant portion of the legislation passed by the legislature each year.  The process of legislative approval is often slow and may result in political realities and processes hampering a local community’s need for action to react to the quickly evolving world.  The end result is a loss of efficiency for both the municipalities and the legislature.

As a follow-up to the 1964 passage of the Home Rule Amendment, a special commission was supposed to be established that would reconcile all the general laws with that Amendment; that work was never done.

3.a    The Legislature should establish a Special Commission to review the current structure of “home rule” approval in the Commonwealth

Add Comment