Friday, February 5, 2010
Six Reasons To Consolidate
Posted by Mary Cashiola on Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 8:15 AM
Jacksonville, Florida, consolidated in 1968 after a period of widespread public corruption, problems with the school system, and an inferiority complex.
Sound familiar?
And in the 40 plus years since then, Jacksonville has thrived. They now have an NFL team; their citizens have fewer taxes than in other large Florida cities; and they're not dependent on tourism.
"Our darkest hour became our finest," Richard Mullaney, Jacksonville's general counsel, told the metro charter commission Thursday afternoon. "In my opinion, some forms are local government are better than others. Some provide a competitive structural advantage over others."
With charter commission members in attendance, as well as sheriff Mark Luttrell, County Commissioner Mike Carpenter, MLGW head Jerry Collins, and Memphis City Council member Shea Flinn, Mullaney gave an overview of Jacksonville before the merger and after.
"What we've seen ... is a remarkable change in Jacksonville over the past 40 years, and that change has been consolidated government," he said.
Pre-1968, for instance, different branches of government each had their own legal counsel.
"That model was good for lawyers," Mullaney said. "It slowed things down, it was very expensive, and it was very difficult to get anything done."
But getting rid of lawyers isn't the only reason to consolidate. Mullaney laid out six benefits of the transition for the commission:
1. Savings due to efficiency
2. Less bureaucracy and a streamlining of government
3. More accountability and transparency ("If you have shared responsibilities, no one is responsible.")
4. No intergovernmental litigation (Having recently covered the ongoing school funding crisis, no comment.)
5. An opportunity to create public policy on a countywide basis
6. Clout — you can leverage all of the area's assets
The first two are helpful in terms of economic development, and Mullaney predicts more cities will be looking at consolidation because of the economic downtown.
Interestingly enough, residents of Jacksonville's suburban municipalities voted for consolidation of Jacksonville and Duval County, but also voted to stay autonomous.
"While I think it would be better for us all to consolidate," Mullaney said, "it worked out fine this way. Jacksonville acts like a county government to those municipalities."
But for consolidation to occur, Mullaney said that two things have to be present:
Extraordinary statesmanship and a crisis.
Elected officials have to be forward thinking/unselfish enough to put the area's best interest before their own personal power.
And you have to have enough of a crisis for people to decide the current system isn't working.
"I'm not here to pretend this is easy," he said. "As stewards for the future, it's something to think about."
Comments (24)
Showing 1-24 of 24
If Fred Smith (insert any superstar of the business world here) was mayor of Memphis I think consolidation would work. On paper it is a great idea. But the people who live out in the county have no reason to believe anything other than 1) Taxes for them will go up 2)Services will stay the same. How are you going to sell that kind of deal?
like
dislike
If you look at the most pressing issues facing the county, it is clear that having two giant screwed-up old-fashioned bureaucracies are hurting everyone. The advantages to getting rid of city government, getting rid of county government and replacing it with something new and modern would deliver enormous benefits, in the short-term but especially in the longterm. Sticking with the status quo is the worst idea of all.
One of the things Mullaney pointed out -- Jacksonville's taxes (ad valorem rates) are lower than every other metropolitan area in Florida (go here to listen: http://shelby.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php… .... go to the 22:00 mark).
Who in Shelby County believes that county taxes aren't going to go up with the current status quo? As I understand it, the new charter could include protections like, for instance, taxes cannot go up without a vote of the supermajority of the council. Another huge benefit -- people in the county would actually have representation on the council, people in the county would have a vote (and a huge voice) in the mayoral election.
Speaking of Fred Smith, do you have any doubt he would be in favor of getting rid of the creaky and bloated old government models to replace it with something innovative and modern, something more streamlined, with less regulation, more accountability and more transparency? Businesspeople know what we have now is not conducive to sparking the kind of entrepreneurship this county desperately needs.
It was nice that this gentleman was brought to Memphis to talk about consolidation, but comparing Memphis to Jacksonville is a little like comparing apples to oranges.
Lets just look at the demographics today.
Memphis has a population of 600,000 today and is 65% black-Jax is 827,000 and 65% white. Jax's population is also older than our's. On a good note, we actually have a higher rate of people with graduate degrees.
In the past 20 years Jax has gained 200,000 people. Memphis has lost 60,000
Jax's MHI is $10,000 more a year than Memphis'. Memphis' child poverty rate is 42%-Jax 19%. Over all poverty in rate in Memphis is 26%-Jax 13%.
The question is how are these two cities so different. Well first is history. Jax was traditionally a winter resort for wealthy in the early 20th century, then diversified into banking and insurance. In addition, the US navy established 3 large bases. So you have an inflow of tourist, finance and federal defense dollars. Memphis on the other hand based it's economy on cotton and hardwood lumber milling up until WWII then transitioned to warehouse and distribution. Those are pretty divergent economic courses. Also, Memphis was a much larger and established city. In 1930- our population was 253,000 as opposed to Jax's 129,000. In 1950, we had 396,00 to their 204,000. This is important because Jacksonville has been drawing money and new population since the 1960's, just like other sunbelt cities. Memphis had a large, established population and poverty rates of at least 20% since the turn of century. We are much more like a Cleveland, Pittsburgh or rust belt city than a sunbelt city.
Perhaps the biggest difference in the two cities is when white flight occurred. Jax's white flight hit in the 1950's and early 1960's, much like in Atlanta. It wasn't near the scale or the economic consequence of Memphis'. So yes, Jax was able to pass consolidation in 1968, with schools I might add. Memphis didn't go through substantial white flight until 1980's and 1990's. We still will not touch schools.
So in brief we are vastly demographically different and have different histories that positioned us in highly divergent economic paths.
Now let's get to positions of the above article.
1) This has not been the case of Louisville and other more recently consolidated cities. SCM actually acknowledged this earlier last year.
2) This is true, the problem is that these consolidated parts of government that will have increased efficiency are not the big parts of local government. The big ones are the schools system and criminal justice, which aren't really going to be effected by the current vision of consolidation.
3) I wish I could believe this. The charter members were all selected by the same person rather than elected and it was predetermined that schools would not be included. Not a good start
4) There will still be intergovernmental litigation because we have two schools systems, but not the current degree.
5) Ah politics. The real reason of the consolidation push. By creating a new charter you are creating a new political system, which does shape public policy. This provides the perfect opportunity for certain interests to consolidate power by shaping the new system. Here's a question? Who is paying the million dollars for a "grassroots" push in support of consolidation. They aren't doing this out of the kindness of their hearts.
6) Who's assets and how? gets back to point 5.
After all of this, you may think I am opposed to consolidation. I'm actually open to it. Just not the way it is being done now. No elected Charter commission members and a short timeline.
Mary,
In 1997, "Florida State University examined the 30 year track record of the
Jacksonville Florida/Duvall County consolidation and failed to find
evidence of a link between consolidation and economic development". At
that point, nothing had happened. Here it is 13 years since the report
was written - 43 years since consolidation took place in Jacksonville.
If nothing happened in 30 years then whatever economic development
occurred since then was the result of something other than
consolidation. Does Memphis need to wait 43 years to see some
improvements?
Mary, email me if you need the documentation. SaveShellbyCounty.org
Not that it matters much in overall make up of the cosmos, but I have been in favor of consolidation for more than 20 years. I don't see how it is ever going to work with consolidating the school systems though.
Tom since the link you provided did not work (could be the work net nanny), can you give me some reasons to be against consolidation? Aside from the obvious ones pointed out by DT that is.
Some very good points.
Given the attitude frequently seen in the CA and Flyer and their websites towards the suburbs and those of us who choose to live here, it is hard to understand the push for consolidation. Unless it is really because Memphis is out of areas it can annex and tax (even when those citizens overwhelmingly oppose it).
If Memphians wanted consolidation because they feel they pay for too much of the County government, then a simpler, much surer fix is more separation - simply let each government get 100% of the taxes their citizens pay, and then pay for 100% of the services their citizens use.
Instead of promises, we can all look at a real-world example: not long ago, most suburban libraries dropped out of the county-wide agency. Everything I hear is that these suburban libraries are getting more for less, and it's simply because Memphis is no longer subsidizing their wants, needs and waste with suburban money.
As to other "economies", Memphis built two unneeded high schools for a reported $54 million, spent $6 million on one school auditorium - while they "can't afford" to build the long-promised elementary school in Cordova or rebuild White Station High. What similar economies will we suburban residents get from a Memphis-dominated consolidated government?
Actually, we have just seen two indications from the current Democrat/Memphis dominated County Commission:
1) a departing Republican Commissioner from a heavily Republican district was replaced with a Democrat.
2) Each City school child was allocated more County money than each County child.
Tom I have heard of the report and admittedly not read it yet. However, I have also been clued into other studies that support the merit of consolidation. Does the report speak to the level of trust and/or approval ratings for the consolidated government?
I have to say, that one argument I hear over and over again is that this community is in a major “rut”, it is going to take a major catalyst to achieve positive momentum again and that consolidation could provide that spark. I can’t speak to the worthiness of this relatively vague and unquantifiable statement, but I can say that if this city continues to operate tomorrow as it did yesterday and is today, there is little in the way of hope for local conditions to change. I have spent too little time here to have such a pessimistic attitude, but I see little reason to expect a grassroots change using the current formulas.
You speak of good government. Tell us how one achieves good government and what very real steps are necessary that produce good government? Please don’t read this as being antagonistic, I am genuinely curious.
These discussions will go much faster when everybody gets it through their thick skulls that the school districts, their students and school facility construction is not part of the equation. In case no one noticed, the current proposal for consolidation does not touch the local public school systems.
Some people need to understand that the same electorate and politician pool that allows, if not demands, Memphis City Schools be run the way they are will dominate a consolidated county government. Why would the priorities and standards of a community be any different in other areas of government than they are in its school system?
Wait a minute!
If consolidation is bad - or at least not good enough - for the school systems, why wouldn't it be bad - or at least not good enough - for the rest of County government?
If one has a problem with the residents currently residing within the city limits, they need to come out and say it instead of hiding behind what is essentially a non-issue in the discussion.
Guleff is cherry-picking from a flawed presentation, and he knows it. It’s puzzling why someone like Guleff who long has told us local governments are broken now refuses to join a conversation about the opportunity to get rid of two antiquated, bloated bureaucracies and replace them with a new, modern streamlined government.
The study he cites comes from a presentation given by someone who emphasized that he was "no expert" in the field. Furthermore, the very same presentation says that the Indianapolis consolidated government "… has enhanced the effectiveness of economic development strategy – there has been substantial economic development in the downtown that would not have occurred without Uni-Gov.”
People in Florida know good and well that Jacksonville's progress is closely related to the benefits of its unified metro government, which many, many other public policy experts have studied over and over and concluded is a model for superior local governance.
Mullaney, a Republican, grew up in Jacksonville and says flatly: "I believe the transformational change in last 40 years in Jacksonville is directly related to consolidation."
And when people bring up, well, let's just cooperate and collaborate better, he points out: "You'll get some sutff in the margins but it's not going to get you what I am talking about."
This is the conversation we'd like to have -- can we do something transformational? We have that opportunity.
Come join the conversation. www.RebuildGovernment.org or 347-8623.
I haven't taken a side on this one yet, but I am de facto against anything I don't fully understand. What I would like to hear from the pro-consolidation side are the specifics of consolidation as it is likely to happen now. While I support the idea in theory, there are dozens of ways to screw it up and probably only one or two ways to get it right. I want to know how X consolidation plan is going to help Memphis and Shelby County for Y reasons. That's how you're going to win my support.
Rebuild_Government, It would be nice if you would use your real name, so at least I know who is attacking me. At least, be man or woman enough to do that.
I'm with Auto here, I am undecided on the issue but after seeing first hand some of the behind the scenes maneuvering of the charter amendment process in 08 makes me suspicious of this process...admittedly perhaps too much so.
However, this cannot and should not be a conversation about just the theory of the merits and flaws of consolidation as a model, BUT almost more importantly what are the real political forces behind SOME of the motivations for and against, and the Political ramifications.
That's why even though I disagree with some of the points and motivations made by SOME of the consolidation opponents I am equally concerned that it seems any skepticism to the idea of consolidation THIS YEAR in this process in this fashion is somehow presented as obstructionist, dilatory or "living in the past."
I think Doubting Thomas made some interesting points and would like someone on the pro-side to please address them.
As i said before the time for doubts,questions and challenges is now..because if you wait to do that until this fall you will be publically criticized as "waiting until now" and labeled "obstructionist" in the media.
I warned folks about this after the charter amendment process of 08 and was called "paranoid"
I raised concerns that one person could theoretically selected all the members of the commission...and was told this was "unlikely" and again "paranoid.
and here we are..
We are talking about a fundamental change in local government and in fairness the burden of proof here is on the Pro-side to demonstrate that this change will result in the positive outcomes described.
Urbanut, fair question. Let me see what's going on with the website. We know that we have to provide strong arguments to counter balance ReinventGovernment, and I hope we can do that. We also have data and studies, our job is to get that out to the public. You have to ask us the hard questions, which you and others are doing. We've always wanted a good dialogue on consolidation.
To be honest, this thing will probably come to a boil come August - November 2010. In this case, we're about 6-7 months out from that firestorm. These discussions on The Flyer website are true leading indicators of what's to come. The fights are raw and emotional. I hear a lot from anti-consolidation people outside the city limits (I live in midtown) and they are livid over this. From what I can observe, the intensity (emotional response & action) of the anti-consolidation forces on the issue is very high. We are not as well organized as the pro-consolidation folks, but we're getting there. I am sorry to report, that there won't be a lot of people listening to any of us, because their minds are already made up.
Maybe we can salvage something out of all this.
Consolidation has historically led to tyranny by a centralized government. The Constitution emphasizes a separation of powers to prevent this very thing. This is the foundation of most institutions in a just social order. Those that worship the state desire the chains of the state as a slave. Safety with tyranny is a form of bondage; why else did the tenth amendment get added to the Constitution?
"Safety with tyranny is a form of bondage" Wow, CHG. Sounds like something James Rutledge would have said after two days in an opium den. I think I saw it on brainyquote.com.
Tom:
Why don't you help calm down the irrational emotions and help with the conversation about what we can do to create a new government with safeguards that we need. If it's not what we need, we'll all have time to oppose it and actually have some facts to base it on.
There are too many people willing to fight to keep the status quo - to keep their political offices, to stay in power, and to create fear rather even pull up a chair and talk about what we could do to make a new government better than the ones we have now. I wish all these people who say they hate big government would consider eliminating one of them altogether. They seem more committed to their talking points to talking about better government. Our people aren't as irrational as the opponents portray them to be and that's why they have to attack any attempt to talk about this. Most people are responsible citizens and are willing to tell the Charter Commission what a new government should look like.
Since when is talking about improving government a bad thing, and giving people the right to vote on it so frightening.
Wow Tom G, you've really caused quite a stir in opposing consolidation. As for Mr. Jones, this is the problem with the current consolidation push. Unlike the city charter commission, these charter commissioners weren't elected and all the charter members were selected by the same person. The consolidation push is being advanced by $1 million professional marketing campaign. In addition, what kind of talk is this. The primary points of consolidation have already been established by the people paying a $1 million. Who pays that much money for an unknown end product? This looks like political theater and that's the problem the pro-consolidation folks don't seem to want to address. What political legitimacy does the charter commission have to fundamentally reshape the political system of Memphis and Shelby County? I would dare to say not much. By electing charter members, there would have been a debate as to what citizens wanted. That didn't happen. It is fairly disingenuous to invite people into the conversation now about improving government. This isn't simple efficiency. The new charter covers everything from term limits, to lines of succession, district boundaries, recall ability, etc, even before we get to government bureaucracy. So we are going to cover all that, have it publicly vetted, and then have it decided on a simple majority vote by the end of this summer.
The Charter Commission doesn't have any legitimacy and the pro-consolidation campaign is not grassroots. Inviting people into the "conversation" is an attempt manufacture that legitimacy and if people don't take part they can be labeled frightened obstructionists.
TJONESMfs said
"Why don't you help calm down the irrational emotions and help with the conversation about what we can do to create a new government with safeguards that we need."
Mr Jones, with all due respect you are making a strawman here.
You are talking about inviting people to be apart of a "conversation" to do something they are not yet convinced is needed. Then you are labeling their opposition as defending the "status quo"
Think of it this way,let's say we are all going out to dinner. You and some others want to have Mexican food. So you get together menu from all the local Mexican restaurants..map quest them all to find out which is closest,put together a chart comparing prices etc. So that people can choose the best Mexican restaurant possible.
What Tom G and others are saying is that they want Thai food not Mexican...so inviting them to a conversation about which Mexican restaurant to go to is not really productive for them. That does not mean that they are not hungry.
great analogy, brad, maybe if we build a food court in overton square we'd all get along
Hey Rebuild_Government, if your real objective is to promote a "conversation" on the issue of consolidation, as you maintain, why do you single out for abuse Tom Guleff and others who oppose the idea? Doesn't a conversation imply a dialogue between those who favor and those who oppose the idea? If so, why is it that all of your arguments support those in favor and attack those against consolidation? Furthermore, how helpful can this "conversation" be if we don't use our real names? Shouldn't we be a little more transparent, both with how we present ourselves, and with who is funding our message?
A part I don't understand, and a question nobody can answer is why do we need to go through all of this about consolidation in the first place?
RebuildGovernment alludes to "efficiencies" but has never said what they are or what the benefit might be (don't they know?). Seems like the cart is placed before the horse here and somebody (or somebodys) has decided that consolidation is needed without even showing a single reason why, other than "efficiencies" which they can't show.
How much money will be saved, what will the actual benefits be, how much will the government shrink, what will the structure be, how many will be laid off, what will the transition costs be, what will the new tax rates be .... etc. Nobody knows and that's what bothers me. How can you know to be for something without knowing what it is? Please show me!
In my opinion, this is a desperate attempt by Memphis to spread their incredible mess and government cost over-runs to county residents who live outside Memphis. After all, annexation didn't work - let's try something else. The decision to consolidate is an irreversable decision, folks, and I want to know what I'm getting into before I am in favor of anything!
THIS WEEK'S ISSUE
