Letters to the Editor do not reflect the opinions of The Reporter, its publisher or its staff. You can submit your own Letter to the Editor by email to News@ReadTheReporter.com. Please include your phone number and city of residence. The Reporter will publish one letter per person per week.
Dear Editor:
In mere decades, Westfield has grown from a sleepy town to a rapidly expanding city. This brings us to a pivotal decision: should we transform into a second-class city, or hold onto the outdated, broken systems that are becoming more corrupt and dysfunctional every day?
A clear-eyed choice requires understanding where we come from, where we are, and where we’re going. The growth of our community over nearly two centuries mirrors some of our own common experiences of growing up, advancing from a pure-hearted childhood, to a troubled yet hopeful adolescent, and to a responsible adulthood.
Our beloved community was born as an outpost against the morally corrupt practice of slavery. Naming their new home after the one they left behind in slaveholding North Carolina, our Quaker founders established our town as a stop on the Underground Railroad. Westfield is the physical manifestation of the belief that liberty is a fundamental right of every person, and an attack against that right requires the sum of our collective moral courage.
At the close of the twentieth century, explosive growth transformed Westfield into what it is today. This sort of change is always awkward and uncomfortable, feelings we can all relate to from our own years when we were no longer children, but not quite adults. Alongside the adolescent discomfort of frequent roadwork and the youthful awe at new developments, our self-discovery has drawn out those who wish to lead our young city astray through the cold disregard of our needs and corrupt deal-making to benefit insiders. These embarrassing growing pains are the unavoidable lessons in the transition to municipal maturity.
A new Westfield is taking shape, requiring the government a second-class city provides: a city council independent from the mayor, increased representation on the council, and professional fiscal management of a $100 million city budget.
Those who claim we’re not ready have forgotten the lesson from their own childhoods. Maturity arrives when it’s required to meet the adult responsibilities before us, not when we decide we’re ready for it.
Refusing to move forward would only fuel the juvenile arguments and lawsuits we see today, impairing the quality governance our growing community needs.
With our city poised to reach 70,000 people by the end of the decade, we don’t have time for a few mean-spirited city councilors to childishly bully us into stunted mediocrity. We are ready to accept the responsibilities of a second-class city.
It’s time because that’s what the people of Westfield need, and because it’s what our community deserves.
Neil Koglin
Westfield
I always enjoy the mean spirited comment from people you disagree with. This is where we are in America politics. If I disagree with you I will stomp my foot and loudly proclaim you are bullying me and are mean. Can’t reasonable people just disagree for varying reasons?
Further, politics has become the land of spending your dollars wildly to benefit the few. Government continues to be the most inefficient use of capital. Why would we want to make it bigger? Also if you need any proof of what government can do, look no further than the creation of TIF districts and the RDC. When you give government more power they have taken dollars away from the schools and will not relinquish the very areas they created even when no longer needed. Instead they will force the schools to ask for another referendum so they maintain control.
I would rather see the government have checks and balances. Why do people think that is not important? Also, they can hire a CFO today and get rid of the consulting fees they pay right now. However this would mean maintaining checks and balances and the administration and its people who all serve on the mayors various committees would not be able to control the narrative and exactly what they want you to see. This decision is not hard at all.