Is Byron Brown the worst mayor in America?

Byron Brown’s incompetency as mayor has been on full display since the blizzard hit last Friday. The city was unprepared to handle what was coming or clean up when the snow and wind finally relented. 

No snow removal plan that contemplated a blizzard. 

Not enough plows and drivers. 

Too few warming centers — two of which had to close because when their power failed they lacked backup generators.

No plan to police vulnerable commercial districts.

The list goes on.

Lots of common folks have been grumbling about the city’s ineptitude and the mayor’s insensitive, self-serving “I told you so” remarks. Erie County Executive Mark Poloncarz amplified their discontent at a press conference Wednesday.

“The mayor’s not going to be happy to hear about it, but storm after storm after storm after storm, the city, unfortunately, is the last one to be opened, and that shouldn’t be the case,” the county executive said. “It’s embarrassing, to tell you the truth.”

“We will do what it takes in the future to ensure that our community is open as quickly as possible,” Poloncarz said. “If that means we have to hire more trucks and get more contractors and bring in more people to handle an area that Erie County has never been responsible for, we’ll do it. I just don’t want to see this anymore. I’m sick of it.”

Good for the county executive. It needed to be said.

Fact is, this is just the latest example of Brown’s incompetence. It’s been 17 years and counting.


Donate to support our nonprofit newsroom. Contributions of up to $1,000 made by Dec. 31 will be matched.


The mayor has been in over his head since he took office. He mismanaged city finances as soon as the control board gave him full rein a decade ago, inheriting $166 million in reserve funds and blowing through the money in just seven years. 

He refused to raise property taxes to keep pace with inflation and has overseen runaway spending on police and fire while starving many other city departments for resources. Only federal COVID aid has saved the city from financial ruin — for the time being. 

His police department has grown more distant from the community it serves, especially on the East Side, and has proven itself incapable of solving most homicides. Crime has decreased over the years, as it has across the county, but Buffalo continues to suffer from one of the highest violent crime rates in the nationWe also remain one of the nation’s poorest cities.

The Police Benevolent Association has a stranglehold on department operations and Brown has not pressed for reforms during negotiations. In fact, the last round of talks resulted in raises for the cops but absolutely no reforms.

The mayor dragged his feet on addressing lead poisoning, waiting years to propose a program, and then only in the face of pressure from the Common Council. In the interim, hundreds, if not several thousand children were diagnosed with lead poisoning.

The city building inspections department remains impotent, as evidenced by its mishandling — along with police — of a problem property we recently wrote about at 149 Arkansas St.

Other city operations ceased altogether, particularly those meant to keep city government accountable to its citizens. Consider the Board of Ethics, just recently constituted after lacking a quorum for two-and-a-half years. Or the Commission on Citizens’ Rights and Community Relations, which was created to investigate civil rights complaints — including police misconduct — but rarely meets or does anything beyond providing a comfortable patronage paycheck to its executive director.

Subscribe to our free weekly newsletter


Then there is the city’s response to the May 14 massacre at Tops. There has been none, unless you count the call to change the name of the East Side to East Buffalo. 

The mayor’s response has been mostly rhetorical, going on national television and testifying before Congress to whine about a lack of federal resources. This from a guy whose tenure has coincided with the city’s failure to invest on the East Side or otherwise act to improve the lot of life of the city’s most vulnerable citizens. A study released a year ago by the University at Buffalo Center for Urban Studies concluded that the city’s Black residents have not made progress over the past 30 years. In some ways, they’re faring worse.

The reality is that city government has atrophied during Brown’s tenure. Governing took a back seat to politics. The mayor has acted as though his only job is to keep his job, and it shows. 

Remember how many people hesitated to vote for India Walton for mayor last year because of her lack of experience? Brown presented himself as a seasoned, steady hand. I don’t know what kind of job Walton would have done, but could it have been any worse than what we’ve experienced under Brown this past year? 

Buffalo has no provision to recall elected officials. If it did, I suspect the mayor wouldn’t survive a vote. As it was, he lost the primary last year and had to wage a vigorous write-in campaign to retain his job. I suspect it was the last time he broke a sweat. 

So, we’re stuck with him for another three years. Brown is certain to resist any talk of having the county or state handle snow removal duties during major storms, but the Common Council should insist. It’s the least Council members can do, given their complicity in tolerating Brown’s ineptitude over the years.


Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, InstagramYouTube


Brown’s incompetency  — and that of the Council, which doesn’t so much legislate as it does rubber-stamp — demands systemic change. 

A mechanism to recall elected officials would be nice. Better yet, term limits. Brown is on target to serve 20 years — an entire generation — and his predecessors served 12 and 16 years. Way too long. 

Limits on campaign contributions and more stringent Hatch Act type restrictions on political activity by city employees are also in order.

So far as the next mayor goes, it’s not too early to start thinking about a successor. 

State Sen. Tim Kennedy is said to have an interest, and he has a war chest to underwrite a well-funded campaign. I’ll take a pass: Brown, Tony Masiello and Jimmy Griffin all came to the mayor’s office straight from the state Senate. How has that worked out?

It’s best if someone with executive experience running a large government takes over City Hall. Given the mess that Brown will leave behind, this is no time for on-the-job training. If a seasoned politician with executive experience is not in the cards, the addition of a city manager type position is necessary. 

While I’ve been critical of how Poloncarz has handled stadium negotiations with the Buffalo Bills, he has otherwise managed county government well, for the most part. He was front and center during the COVID crisis and again during the blizzard. He’s cut taxes and maintained the quality of county services. 

Perhaps he should trade his county job for City Hall in three years. He’s already a city resident, so there’s no obstacle there. 

Be it Poloncarz or someone else, we need competency. As it now stands, Buffalo is governed by arguably the worst big-city mayor in America. That needs to change if we’re ever to get ahead as a city and region. 

The post Is Byron Brown the worst mayor in America? appeared first on Investigative Post.

Related articles

AI Charlie Kirk tributes are a new version of this old response to violent American deaths



By Art Jipson, Associate Professor of Sociology, University of Dayton.

An AI-generated image of Charlie Kirk embracing Jesus. Another of Kirk posing with angel wings and halo. Then there’s the one of Kirk standing with George Floyd at the gates of heaven.

When prominent political or cultural figures die in the U.S., the remembrance of their life often veers into hagiography. And that’s what’s been happening since the gruesome killing of conservative activist and Turning Point USA co-founder Charlie Kirk.

The word hagiography comes from the Christian tradition of writing about saints’ lives, but the practice often spills into secular politics and media, falling under the umbrella of what’s called, in sociology, the “sacralization of politics.” Assassinations and violent deaths, in particular, tend to be interpreted in sacred terms: The person becomes a secular martyr who made a heroic sacrifice. They are portrayed as morally righteous and spiritually pure.

This is, to some degree, a natural part of mourning. But taking a closer look at why this happens – and how the internet accelerates it – offers some important insights into politics in the U.S. today.

From presidents to protest leaders

The construction of Ronald Reagan’s post-presidential image is a prime example of this process.

After his presidency, Republican leaders steadily polished his memory into a symbol of conservative triumph, downplaying scandals such as Iran-Contra or Reagan’s early skepticism of civil rights. Today, Reagan is remembered less as a complex politician and more as a saint of free markets and patriotism.

Among liberals, Martin Luther King Jr. experienced a comparable transformation, though it took a different form. King’s critiques of capitalism, militarism and structural racism are often downplayed in most mainstream remembrances, leaving behind a softer image of peaceful dreamer. The annual holiday, scores of street re-namings and public murals honor him, but they also tame his legacy into a universally palatable story of unity.

Even more contested figures such as John F. Kennedy or Abraham Lincoln show the same pattern. Their assassinations were followed by waves of mourning that elevated them into near-mythic status.

Decades after Kennedy’s death, his portrait hung in the homes of many American Catholics, often adjacent to religious iconography such as Virgin Mary statuettes. Lincoln, meanwhile, became a kind of civic saint: His memorial in Washington, D.C., looks like a temple, with words from his speeches etched into the walls.

Why it happens, what it means

The hagiography of public figures serves several purposes. It taps into deep human needs, helping grieving communities manage loss by providing moral clarity in the face of chaos.

It also allows political movements to consolidate power by sanctifying their leaders and discouraging dissent. And it reassures followers that their cause is righteous – even cosmic.

In a polarized environment, the elevation of a figure into a saint does more than honor the individual. It turns a political struggle into a sacred one. If you see someone as a martyr, then opposition to their movement is not merely disagreement, it is desecration. In this sense, hagiography is not simply about remembering the dead: It mobilizes the living.

But there are risks. Once someone is framed as a saint, criticism becomes taboo. The more sacralized a figure, the harder it becomes to discuss their flaws, mistakes or controversial actions. Hagiography flattens history and narrows democratic debate.

After Queen Elizabeth II’s death in 2022, for example, public mourning in the U.K. and abroad quickly elevated her legacy into a symbol of stability and continuity, with mass tributes, viral imagery and global ceremonies transforming a complex reign into a simplified story of devotion and service.

It also fuels polarization. If one side’s leader is a martyr, then the other side must be villainous. The framing is simple but powerful.

In Kirk’s case, many of his supporters described him as a truth seeker whose death underscored a deeper moral message. At Kirk’s memorial service in Arizona, President Donald Trump called him a “martyr for American freedom.” On social media, Turning Point USA and Kirk’s official X account described him as “America’s greatest martyr to free speech.”

In doing so, they elevated his death as symbolic of larger battles over censorship. By emphasizing the fact that he died while simply speaking, they also reinforced the idea that liberals and the left are more likely to resort to violence to silence their ideological enemies, even as evidence shows otherwise.

Digital supercharge

Treating public figures like saints is not new, but the speed and scale of the process is. Over the past two decades, social media has turned hagiography from a slow cultural drift into a rapid-fire production cycle.

Memes, livestreams and hashtags now allow anyone to canonize someone they admire. When NBA Hall-of-Famer Kobe Bryant died in 2020, social media was flooded within hours with devotional images, murals and video compilations that cast him as more than an athlete: He became a spiritual icon of perseverance.

Similarly, after Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death, the “Notorious RBG” meme ecosystem instantly expanded to include digital portraits and merchandise that cast her as a saintly defender of justice.

The same dynamics surrounded Charlie Kirk. Within hours of his assassination, memes appeared of Kirk draped in an American flag, being carried by Jesus.

In the days after his death, AI-generated audio clips of Kirk styled as “sermons” began circulating online, while supporters shared Bible verses that they claimed matched the exact timing of his passing. Together, these acts cast his death in religious terms: It wasn’t just a political assassination — it was a moment of spiritual significance.

Such clips and verses spread effortlessly across social media, where narratives about public figures can solidify within hours, often before facts are confirmed, leaving little room for nuance or investigation.

Easy-to-create memes and videos also enable ordinary users to participate in a sacralization process, making it more of a grassroots effort than something that’s imposed from the top down.

In other words, digital culture transforms what was once the slow work of monuments and textbooks into a living, flexible folk religion of culture and politics.

Toward clearer politics

Hagiography will not disappear. It meets emotional and political needs too effectively. But acknowledging its patterns helps citizens and journalists resist its distortions. The task is not to deny grief or admiration but to preserve space for nuance and accountability.

In the U.S., where religion, culture and politics frequently intertwine, recognizing that sainthood in politics is always constructed — and often strategic — can better allow people to honor loss without letting mythmaking dictate the terms of public life.

  • Arthur “Art” Jipson is an Associate Professor of Sociology in the Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work at the University of Dayton. For 11 years he was the Director of the Criminal Justice Studies program.

‘There’s a literal civil war’: GOP candidate pushes Trump to use Insurrection Act



Don Brown, a North Carolina Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate, argued that President Donald Trump should use the Insurrection Act to fight what he said was "literal civil war on the streets."

During a Monday interview on Real America's Voice, host Jake Novak asked Brown about Trump's decision to deploy National Guard troops in Portland.

"I just feel like we're in a civil war here in America," Novak said. "I wish, I mean, I'm not trying to be hysterical here, but I don't know what else to call it. It's becoming kinetic. People are dying, literally. I wonder if you're as alarmed as I am?"

"You've nailed it on the head," Brown agreed. "There is a literal civil war on the streets."

The candidate argued that Trump had a duty to "ensure domestic tranquility."

"The President of the United States has the authority to send in the National Guard to these cities where domestic tranquility and rampant crime have taken over, with or without the request from the local authorities," he said. "You look into the Insurrection Act. And when Americans' constitutional rights and liberties are being threatened, the president can go ahead and send in troops."

"The president has the authority to do it. And these local leaders who are soft on crime and pro-crime and just want to kiss up to antifa and all these communist left-wing groups that are intent on unraveling civil society, they're not relevant," he added. "So I'm going to encourage the president to do what he needs to do."

A lawsuit filed by Oregon and the city of Portland asserted that Trump did not have the authority to deploy National Guard troops in response to "small" protests near an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility.

"There is no insurrection or threat to public safety that necessitates military intervention in Portland or any other city in our state," Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek (D) said in a statement.

‘He just dynamites it’: Alarm sounded over Trump’s ‘smoking gun for abuse of power’



Legal commentator Elie Honig said during a podcast Sunday that the indictment of former FBI director James Comey might be "abuse of executive power."

Speaking to journalist John Avalon on The Bulwark's podcast, Honig, who is the author of the book When You Come at the King: Inside DOJ's Pursuit of the President, From Nixon to Trump, said, "I mean, God, Trump basically, by mistake, published a DM demand to his AG that in any other environment would be seen as a smoking gun for abuse of executive power. And now it just seems like something happened two Fridays ago. And who can remember or care?"

He continued: "I do think more people will get indicted on the hit list. He gave us a hit list. I know there's speculation if it's a DM that he inadvertently posted. It has hallmarks of both."

Avalon said the indictment "seems like a new low in the politicization of justice and the persecution of [President] Donald Trump's enemies."

According to Honig, there is "the complete evisceration of this wall that has long existed between the White House and the political operation of the executive branch and the Justice Department's prosecutorial function."

"When the president gets involved in dictating who gets charged and who doesn't, prosecutorial decisions, then we have crossed the line. And that's something that both parties for decades. Presidents don't always love it. Presidents would like to have more control over prosecutors. But even going back to Nixon, they've always understood that there has to be some independent prosecutorial function. But that's changing now very quickly," he added.

Honig further noted that there is no law per se "saying DOJ must be separate and independent from the White House, from the president."

He added: "I mean, if you went to court and said, I want to sue because I think DOJ is no longer independent, you wouldn't have a leg to stand on. This is more along the lines of a long established law foundational norm and tradition that both parties have long observed and respected."

Referencing his book, Honig noted how Trump 2.0 appears different from other presidencies.

"And part of the book is about ways that that has been chipped away over the years. But whether it's Nixon or Clinton, and they're not all equal, but Nixon or Clinton or Trump 1 or Biden, they've all chipped away at that wall in various ways."

"But now here comes Trump 2.0 and it's over. He just dynamites it. This is one of those things that's like not really enforceable. I mean, yes, Jim Comey can go into court and argue that he's being selectively prosecuted. And I think he's going to win on that. Given the things Trump has said and posted on social media publicly, he makes the case for him, but it's not like 'my fourth amendment constitutional right is being violated. My first amendment constitutional right is being violated.' It's just really like good government that we've long recognized that is now totally scrapped."

Avalon noted that "there is an unwritten part of the constitution, which is rooted in concepts of honor, decency, and common sense, as the founders intended and as everyone has recognized."

"And the rest of the quote, 'Rome wasn't built in a day, but it was burnt in one.' And Trump is burning something. I mean, FBI shows outside John Bolton's house. You've got [New York Attorney Genera] Letitia James next on the list."

Commenting on James' case, Honig said, "I've looked at the allegations against Letitia James. You know, I've been a critic, a sharp critic of Letitia James. But this mortgage fraud case is bogus. It's bonkers."

Freddie Mercury didn’t sing ‘of the world’ at the end of ‘We Are the Champions’?

The 1977 power ballad rocked the world, but some claim its big finale differs from how they remember it.

Trump announces major tariff in effort to make crucial swing state ‘great again’



President Donald Trump announced Monday that he will be imposing “substantial” tariffs on any country that does not purchase American-made furniture, presumably in addition to his sweeping so-called “reciprocal tariffs” already placed on hundreds of nations.

“In order to make North Carolina, which has completely lost its furniture business to China, and other Countries, GREAT again, I will be imposing substantial Tariffs on any Country that does not make its furniture in the United States,” Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social. “Details to follow!!! President DJT”

The North Carolinian furniture industry has indeed suffered significant losses due in large part to China, which has increased its exports of cheap furniture to the United States. Between 1999 and 2009, the furniture manufacturing industry in North Carolina lost more than half of its jobs, one of the many sectors that suffered following the adoption of the NAFTA trade agreements.

Whether Trump’s pledge would boost domestic furniture manufacturing remains to be seen, though the pledge comes just shortly after the president declared war on foreign films in a similar online post in which he announced he would be imposing a 100% tariff on all foreign films.