Efficiency Through Consolidation
Filed Under Demographics, Electoral Map
[Cross-posted at The Electoral Map]
Tom Brokaw recently penned a column in the New York Times suggesting that this recession is an opportunity to press the reset button and that one aspect we should focus on reforming is the efficiency of government. Specifically, Brokaw suggests that state governments could save billions by consolidating municipal governments in the way that Miami-Dade, Nashville-Davidson or Jacksonville-Duval have merged services.
He points to a New York State study from a few years ago that concluded that “New Yorkers could save more than a billion dollars a year by consolidating and sharing local government responsibilities like public security, health, roads and education.” Brokaw also suggests that North and South Dakota, which are home to 17 state universities combined, could get “a bigger bang for their higher education buck if they consolidated their smaller institutions… with satellite campuses but a common administration and shared standards.”
I like Brokaw’s reasoning.
But the folks at the rural blog Daily Yonder bring up some good counterpoints. They suggest that big government is not always more helpful or efficient (true) and that the cost of administration rises when geography expands. West Virginia, for example, spent millions closing small schools and consolidating education systems, but now faces the burden of busing some students over an hour to their schools and hiring more officials to deal will the challenges of massive school districts.
“Small towns aren’t big spenders,” notes Daily Yonder blogger Bill Bishop. He notes that North Dakota has about the same amount of counties as California, but that North Dakota is running a surplus while California has a 13.6% budget gap. Message: While consolidation might streamline the big government bureaucracies of the Empire State, it’d be solving a problem that doesn’t exist in small town America.
I think both Brokaw and Bishop have good points, and I actually think that the real solution lies somewhere in the middle. Let me give you two examples. I went to school at Union College in Schenectady, N.Y. The city of Schenectady runs an independent municipal government within the county of Schenectady. Both are fraught with crime, corruption and unemployment, although the problem is particularly pronounced in the city of Schenectady, which is a classic Rust Belt collapsed town.
There’s been talk of consolidating the two, which would likely save millions on police and eduction. But county officials don’t want the city’s problems, and city officials don’t want to relinquish power to the county. And so the community decays.
Now, move your attention 400 miles down the coast to Arlington, Virginia, where I live. Arlington is a geographically small county nestled between the District and booming Fairfax County. Arlington has its own schools and police independent of Fairfax and is doing just fine. In fact, it’s doing great. It’s been named the most educated community in the nation and was rated “one of the best places to [ride] out the recession.” It has its own cultural identity independent of the District and Fairfax. It would make no sense to merge.
So here’s the solution: Struggling governments, such as New York State and some in the Rust Belt, ought to merge in the same way that General Motors is streamlining. I don’t mean to hold up GM as a model of efficiency, but the motor company used to have seven brands with seven networks of dealerships, and is now consolidating. Schenectady city and county should combine. Maybe Baltimore city and county should consider it, too.
Communities that are prospering, such as Arlington, or even running a positive balance sheet, such as North Dakota, should probably keep serving their citizens and business the way they are now. Don’t shutter the local courthouse and throw a wet towel on hometown pride, and don’t force two happy and independent entities into an awkward marriage.
Of course, the big problem here is that all politics is local. If powerbrokers aren’t interested in surrendering their lifeblood, they’re probably going to do everything they can to stop it. But if that hurdle can be overcome, consolidation is an interesting choice for more efficient government.
I found your article and supporting data/facts excellent! I was directly involved in the successful consolidation of 13 different unincorporated fire districts into one Fire Agency several years ago, and can relate to both the challenges and benefits of doing so. Do you have any known sources where I can obtain case studies in consolidation of public entities? I’m giving serious thought into pursuing this fulltime as a service. Thanks!