Many Wisconsin residents deeply value the idea of keeping at least one tier of government small and non-bureaucratic. Since their large geographical size makes it impractical for federal, state and county governments to do this, the only way to keep grassroots government alive in Wisconsin is at the municipal (town, village and city) level. That is why many town and village (as well as small city) residents can be expected to strongly object to proposals for "metro" governments or other plans that would make local government bigger and more remote.

Wisconsin’s 1,265 towns are an especially valuable part of our local government heritage because they are among the last vestiges of direct democracy in America (or anyplace else). Town residents still discuss and then vote on their own municipal property tax levy every year at an annual town budget meeting. Democracy doesn’t get much more direct than that. This unique tradition of direct citizen involvement may help explain why towns are so good at keeping spending and property tax levies down. It may also explain why town residents often vigorously fight forced annexations into neighboring cities.

Towns are remarkably versatile and efficient. The average Wisconsin town delivers essential municipal services for about $1 per resident per day. They accomplish this by stressing the basics and by using tools like privatization, intergovernmental cooperation and volunteerism to manage costs.

Today, over 1.7 million Wisconsin residents live in towns and they’re justifiably proud of the contribution they make to their communities and to their state. Yet current state laws governing everything from annexation to zoning give town residents a smaller voice than their city and village neighbors in land use and other important matters. Shouldn’t every Wisconsin resident have an equal voice?

Some argue that Wisconsin simply has too many governments and that cutting down on that number will yield cost savings. Yet this assertion is not borne out by the facts. Published data show that states with equal or larger numbers of local governments generally have much lower tax burdens. Other data confirm that per capita town spending is relatively low. What Wisconsin really needs is a thoughtful set of reforms that clarify the role of county versus municipal governments. Counties are generally better suited to deal with regional needs (hazardous materials response, for example) while municipalities are better equipped to deliver local services (such as fire protection). Our goal should be to design a new system that recognizes the value of both big- and small-scale governments – and the benefits of working together.