Since early October, I’ve been working on several columns for this newsletter. They’re all sitting in my drafts folder—waiting for the right combination of factors to get them across the finish line. Earlier this week, one of those moments happened for a draft, which brings us to today’s topic.
In my last newsletter, “We can’t say ‘no’ to everything,” I concluded by noting that while some communities demand more housing, others need it to survive long-term. As I’ve discussed repeatedly here and elsewhere, serious viability questions loom over many Upstate New York communities. Shrinking populations, school districts, and economies are common realities, yet the general attitude has been, “Eh, it’ll be fine!”
But the truth is, it won’t be fine—at least not without strategic thinking. Earlier this week, I sat down with Jackie Augustine for our Debrief Podcast, where we talked about how local government is working in New York. There were recurring themes, but one idea stood out: If small communities are going to continue existing in the future, they can’t rely on their past alone—they will have to justify their existence and prove their value to the broader community.
The Need for ‘Why’
During our podcast conversation, I spent some time expanding on the idea of “We can’t just say no to everything.” I’ve discussed it in the newsletter before, using two local examples: housing and Byrne Dairy. These cases highlight a recurring problem in local governance—when it comes to debates about housing or economic development, the issues are often framed as a binary choice: This or That.
In practice, this binary might look like a developer proposing an apartment building, housing development, or commercial build-out, only to be met by well-meaning residents raising concerns. If these concerns aren’t addressed quickly by developers or town officials, the situation hardens into opposition. The conversation shifts, and the table is set for a simplistic This or That decision.
But here’s the problem: No one asks why.
No one in local government should be able to say ‘no’ and walk away. Regardless of how much opposition a proposal faces, it exists for a reason. Developers don’t want to waste money on bad investments, and the people who make up both sides of these debates often have legitimate reasons for their concerns.
Unfortunately, the structure of local government doesn’t allow for the kind of nuanced debate that’s needed. The decision-making process is cumbersome, clumsy, and archaic. This isn’t just a perception—it’s a reality for anyone who doesn’t have direct experience with it. ‘Decision cycles,’ as they’re called, are structured the same way they were in the 60s, 70s, and 80s—before the internet and certainly before AI. For instance, in 1970, buying a home took around 90 days. Today, that process takes 30-45 days—a reduction of over half. Other processes, like buying a car or even getting same-day deliveries, have been streamlined to meet modern needs. Yet, local government operates on a cycle that’s practically frozen in time.
The lack of progress in decision-making structures is one of the biggest reasons we see so many binary This or That debates. Governing bodies meet once a month, and only a small number meet more frequently. Developers don’t have years to wait for approval, and residents grow frustrated with a system that feels detached from their immediate concerns. This outdated structure makes it unrealistic to expect nuance in local debates if good questions aren’t being asked.
The Case for Asking ‘Why’
If the structure of local government can’t change, then the questions we ask must. Instead of letting proposals be reduced to “This or That,” decision-makers need to focus on asking why.
Why do people on both sides feel the way they do?
What needs would this proposal fill for our community?
How would this proposal impact us long-term?
Will it help us achieve our broader goals?
Even if a proposal seems flawed, there’s usually a rationale behind it. Take housing, for example: it’s often proposed because of established market demand. A commercial development, like a convenience store, is likely driven by the community’s needs. In Seneca Falls, for instance, a Circle K was proposed at a busy intersection because the former village lacked major convenience stores. When a small Byrne Dairy store up the street closed, residents were disappointed, illustrating the unmet demand.
Asking ‘why’ in these situations can reveal your community’s underlying needs, and that is critical to finding sustainable solutions. A proposal isn’t just a random idea—it’s a response to a gap, a need, or a trend. By understanding the ‘why,’ communities can move beyond binary debates and start shaping their future with purpose.
The Uncomfortable Truth: Justifying Existence
In our podcast, I mentioned that at some point, small communities will have to justify their existence to larger, surrounding entities. It’s an uncomfortable reality, but one we should address proactively. My assumption is that this will start with school districts, likely merging into countywide systems across rural Upstate New York as costs rise and student populations shrink. Small local governments might follow as infrastructure costs increase and tax bases decline.
This isn’t just speculation, though. If local governments can’t evolve to make more strategic, long-term decisions, the larger systems that sustain them will begin consolidating resources. It will become increasingly difficult for a small town or community to exist without proving its worth to the broader region. The first to merge may be schools, but infrastructure and services are certainly not far behind.
So, how can communities prepare for this future? By asking why and thinking beyond short-term opposition to proposals. Instead of dismissing a housing project because it’s unpopular in its initial form, officials and residents should ask, “Where else could this go?” Instead of rejecting a commercial development because it doesn’t fit the neighborhood’s aesthetic, ask, “Can this be designed in a way that aligns with the area’s character?”
The Power of ‘Why’ in Shaping the Future
Ultimately, asking ‘why’ leads to better proposals, more thoughtful community feedback, and alignment with long-term planning. It’s not just about avoiding a bad decision—it’s about building a stronger case for why the community should thrive in the first place. As residents and decision-makers grapple with shrinking populations and economic stagnation, these questions become even more urgent.
In an era where towns face dwindling resources and shrinking tax bases, their survival depends on defining their purpose. By engaging in deeper debates and understanding the ‘why’ behind every proposal, communities can ensure they meet the needs of today while planning for tomorrow. The towns that embrace this mindset will be the ones that thrive. The ones that don’t may not survive long enough to see the next generation.
Why does your town exist? Because it fulfills X, Y, and Z necessities for its residents. The future belongs to the communities that can answer that question clearly and compel others around them to believe it.
If you want to watch the podcast, there’s a video version on YouTube.
Odds & Ends
Miss that last newsletter? Tap the button below if you want to check it out.
Say Hello
Have something to say? Comments are turned on, and I’d love for you to leave one if you feel so inclined. If you’d rather send an email—whether it’s a thought on a topic discussed in the newsletter or just an idea that you’d like explored a little more—that works too! Tap the button below and it’ll launch an email that I’ll certainly see within 24 hours.
