While I have largely stopped checking the major headlines for fear of bellyaches, I occasionally will search for the local news to see what is happening in the city I live in. I’m not sure if this is a new thing around here, but it is somewhat shocking to see the tenor of disrespect from local officials and agencies:
- “Residents need to be aware of a deeply problematic law being considered by Binghamton City Council that would restrict how the City can enforce against homeless encampments. RL 24-91 makes “unhoused status” a protected class, providing homeless residents with special protection from “the unreasonable search, seizure or displacement of their person or personal belongings.” from Mayor Jared Kraham’s Facebook page, June 2024, preceding a list of “worst case scenarios” of seeing people visibly experiencing housing and mental health challenges
- “Town of Maine Interferes in Broome Tech Park Planning Process” title of newsletter from the Broome County IDA about how a town that is opposing the project is taking legal action (The Agency, December 2025)
- “Councilwoman Rathmell’s claims are once again without merit. We’ve decided it’s no longer worthwhile responding to them.” from Deputy City of Binghamton Mayor Megan Heiman in response to a councilperson explaining their disappointment in not being made adequately aware of a funding deadline in order to properly engage the community in project selection (from Press and Sun Bulletin March 2026)
- “The ABO report should not be read as a fair measure of the Agency’s performance, public value, and economic impact” response from the Agency to the New York State Authorities Budget Office after audit findings released in June 2026 show that over $47,000 was spent on inappropriate purchases including alcohol with government funding ala tax payer (from Press and Sun Bulletin June 2026)
I don’t understand, do you?
- What is problematic about limiting unreasonable search, seizure, or displacement of their person or personal belongings? Why aren’t we seeing them as people who need our help?
- If a municipality chooses to take legal action to protect itself by pausing a project for a protocol error, and there is a law to do so (Article 78 in New York State law which allows a party to appeal decisions related to administrative actions), isn’t that its right and not simply “interfering”?
- If a public official is claiming that there was not due diligence in government process, is that not something to address directly by providing the proof of communication out of respect for residents?
- If an auditing committee of the state is making findings about misuse of taxpayer funds and poor financial documentation protocol, is that not worth apologizing for if it was an accident instead of trying to control someone’s perception? Why should we not take this finding seriously?
Legitimate concerns about government process and law deserve to be addressed without ridicule from the executives. Leaders should take responsibility for the resources they are privileged to manage through our collective taxpaying and voting contributions. It seems that the legitimate concerns were minimized, deflected, and dismissed instead of recognizing the problem and proving that there is something getting done. Instead of a better future, or a better present, we are offered an excuse or an offer that the “other” is not worth hearing and considering.
Despite the challenges in creating real change in how a place treats itself and its members, I think it is worth hearing and considering what local leadership is saying about us, to us, and on our behalf. We deserve reassurance and accountability for what we contribute to this area, and if we can’t find it there, we need to work on something better.