Change Is Needed If Niagara Falls Is to Advance Into a More Responsive and Growth-Friendly Government

By Tony Farina

It is reasonable to observe that public pension costs in many cities are substantial and have risen rapidly and that certain governments like Niagara Falls have struggled to cope with that fiscal pressure, thus creating a financial burden on economic growth and development and, to put it bluntly, any meaningful change in the way of doing business.

In plain and simple terms, small and mid-sized cities like Niagara Falls are in kind of a never-ending cycle where the politically powerful city unions like police, fire, teachers, and municipal workers drive many decisions that ultimately do little to promote change.

The elected leadership depends to a large extent on union political support so, in other words, elected officials place great value on keeping union support in their political corner come election time-and most of the rest the time as well. In other words, don’t ruffle the feathers of their political supporters.

What this does, in the eyes of many government analysts, is create an unofficial protectionist system, where new business models, especially disruptive or tech- forward ones, are slow to gain support. The union-political connection perhaps—and most likely—makes it difficult for outsiders or non-locals to break into government contracts, licenses, or even basic permits. Budget priorities—or should I say political ones as well—often favor
legacy payrolls over investments in infrastructure or economic diversification.

Let’s put it this way: a large public-sector payroll combined with a shrinking tax base can crowd out private investment. High costs for pensions and benefits reduce available funds for business incentives, downtown revitalization, or infrastructure upgrades that attract investment.

Some observers suggest transparency and data journalism (FOIL) requests to make public payroll, pensions, and budget allocations visible. The goal is to show systemic imbalance and hopefully engage the business community—local entrepreneurs, investors, and developers into a coalition that demands reform, less red tape, and more, like policy changes.

The electorate should run or support reform candidates who support economic growth, reinvention, transparency, and modernization of
governance—particularly someone from outside the political-family network. Other thoughts: promote charter reforms or an oversight push for third-party audits, ethics reviews, or even structural governance changes like term limits, public salary caps, or performance reviews.

That’s a lot to hope for but change is necessary in order to promote a more fiscally responsive and forward-looking government or nothing will get better in the small and mid-sized cities like Niagara Falls where the old and non-progressive ways are firmly entrenched and the power structure alliance continues to flourish with little hope for new ways of spurring and promoting economic growth that could make hope for the future more than just an empty dream.

I’ve written a lot here but on close review, it’s obvious Niagara Falls needs leadership change because whoever has been in office isn’t doing the trick. Things need to change or the entrenched ways will continue and nothing will get better. Residents should try to form a coalition of new-way thinkers to try and make the city better and loosen the grip of the current power elite and break their dominance.

Nothing comes easy but if the grassroots movement I’m suggesting here can gain momentum, it might encourage the power holders to respond and move in a better way to help more than just their power alliance that works for them and not the public good.