Local Leaders Look at Louisville's Unigov Model

[Bill Pote]

Sources tell me that Rashad Young didn't make the Louisville trip because he was busy dealing with city unions, and the mayor didn't make the trip because of having to teach a class at Central State.  Those on the bus gave a collective "sigh" when told that the mayor and city manager would not be attending.

Their absence coupled with their apparent silence on the matter tell me that it just isn't a high priority for them.  Perhaps they know that it is too much of a longshot and their energies are better spent on doable initiatives that will benefit the city.  I don't get the sense that the mayor is very engaged with other leaders throughout the region, but I could be wrong.  But I would not be surprised if the city leaders are as skeptical as others in the region when it comes to the idea of regional government, since they would be giving up a certain amount of control like everybody else. 

[Jeffery]

Hope everyone had a good Thanksgiving.  I was down in Louisville for part of the time, thinking a bit about those Daytonians visiting here!

Miamisburg Mayor Dick Church agreed that political leaders must take charge, but said regionalism is difficult to pursue. He said communities want to retain their identity and fear that regionalism would abolish it.

One way to look at this is that Portland example I gave upthread.  The suburbs in Portland, fairly large places like Gresham and Beaverton, and so for, all retained their local governments and corporate identity.  So its possible to do forms of regional governance without the type of merger that Louisville & Jefferson County did.  One of the first things that the start up Portland metro services district took on for the Portland area was solid waste disposal, so things started somewhat small, and it was an evolution to more resposibility.  The Portland metro required some enabling legislation too, so the state law roadblock Foley mentioned can be addressed.

Still, it is good to see that there are county leaders that get it (Dan Foley).

Yes, definetly, and I saw that other surburban govt. types went along too, so that is positive sign (if they are seriously thinking about it). I think, logically and politically, that its best that the county commissioners & business community take the lead on this. 

[Bruce Kettelle]

It is good to see this discussion so active.

As a long proponent I was thrilled when Jeffery took up the topic on Daytonology a few years back. The more we know about the possibilities and pitfalls will help the process.  There is a little more background here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consolidated_city-county and be sure to check out his archives at http://daytonology.blogspot.com/

If Dan Foley can keep everyone talking this can get some new legs.  Our elected leaders need to have the support of the residents in their communities but they also have to help educate them on the benefits.  Likewise the state legislature will need to address some issues in the ORC which some will oppose because of the strong 'Home Rule' philosophy that pervades the municipal and township rules.  (To make it clear you must remember that a majority of the senators and reps in Columbus are from Townships.)

But the most stunning recent development is the vote in Indiana this November that seems to clear the way to essentially abolsh all the townships in Indiana and let them be run by the county government.  This took a well explained effort emanating from the Governor and statehouse.  Here is an excerpt from an editorial in Evansville

"And, in another forward-thinking development on Tuesday, Indiana voters demonstrated a willingness to reduce the size of local government. In 30 of the 43 largest townships in the state, voters chose to eliminate the offices of township assessor.

Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Randall Shepard, who headed up the Kernan-Shepard Commission on government reform, said the results show that voters are "willing to change, willing to hear the argument" for abolishing township-level government.

That commission recommended earlier the complete elimination of township government in Indiana, a move long overdue.

After Tuesday's votes, what remains are the township trustees, who administer poor relief and perform other township fuctions, and those relatively few assessors who have not been eliminated by vote or legislation.

Shepard, in a speech in Indianapolis this past week, suggested that political resistence to the rest of what his commission has recommended is phenomenal.

"The turfdom and the comfort with the existing arrangements is substantial," he said, and indeed, it is.

But we suspected long ago that the resistence would be strong enough to block the elimination of township assessors, and we were wrong.

Now, if there is any doubt among Indiana lawmakers about the wishes of taxpayers and voters, let them look at Tuesday's results as they prepare for the 2009 legislative session.

Those results tell us that voters are willing to spend money, even in tough times, if the intention is to significantly improve Indiana as a place to live and raise our families. They tell us that the voters are willing to embrace thinking that reaches outside the box (Major Moves), if it has a strong potential for positive result.

The votes tell us that Hoosiers are more than willing to eliminate or merge local government offices, if it makes good sense. And frankly, we can find no good sense in continuing to shell out tax money to pay for duplicate government offices.

Indiana voters had a lot to say on Tuesday.

We hope our lawmakers were listening."

I hope our state legislators can embrace these concepts and find ways to implement some changes in Ohio.  We need to be allowed to create things like Urban Growth Boundaries around our cities and towns.  We need to be encouraged to look at creating one countywide fire department to save on the cost of overlapping service districts and redundant administrative services.  We must be able to respond to the call from the Ohio Supreme Court to overhaul the way we fund our schools and be able to look at new options like County Wide School Systems.

Yes there are many that will object but with the facts properly explained and the ability to retain geographic identities maybe we can find enough support to make Ohio a leader again.

[Bill Pote]

While Jon Husted replied with a vague clarification of his position on the Austin Road Interchange project, Dan Foley replied with some valuable info on his efforts to expand regionalism here in the Dayton Region.  Not only that, he invited me to meet with him to discuss the plans and how we all can get involved!

I'm meeting Mr. Foley next Monday and I'll let y'all know what happens.  I do know that some of these efforts may involve changing state laws that currently do not encourage (and sometimes don't allow) for regional cooperation.  More coming soon...

[Murf]

Cool! I think it would be great if we Daytonians could flex our creative muscle and be the first region, at least in Ohio, to adopt a modern, progressive form of government. 

[metromark]

I'm meeting Mr. Foley next Monday and I'll let y'all know what happens.  I do know that some of these efforts may involve changing state laws that currently do not encourage (and sometimes don't allow) for regional cooperation.  More coming soon...

Billy, I was wondering how your meeting with Dan Foley went. It's obvious that he gets it about regionalism and has a plan at least to raise public awareness.

This article from this morning's DDN shows the lunacy of not thinking regionally:

Commuting to suburban jobs difficult for city residents
By James Cummings

Thursday, December 11, 2008

It used to be that "commuting" typically meant traveling from a home in the suburbs to a job in an urban center.

Transportation planners are having to deal with a trend in the opposite direction: Residents of center cities, typically people with lower incomes, must find a way out to the suburbs where many entry-level jobs have moved.

"If you think about it, where are most of the restaurants now?" asked Bob Steinbach, director of regional initiatives for the Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission. "It used to be you'd go to places like King Cole downtown or Neil's Heritage House; now all the new places are spread out along the highway corridors."

As the Dayton area and the rest of America has moved from being a downtown-oriented culture to a mall-oriented culture, Steinbach says our dependence on automobiles has exploded. And among the people who tend to be the most negatively affected are the poor, who may not have a reliable car.

"Lack of dependable transportation and lack of access to child care are the biggest barriers to underemployed people getting a job and keeping a job," Steinbach said. "And it's not just a Dayton problem; it's a problem in the economy nationally."

Frank Ecklar, planning director for the Greater Dayton Regional Transit Authority, said getting people from city neighborhoods to suburban manufacturers and commercial centers is a priority for the transit authority. But it's a priority that's hard to address.

The big issue is that while the demand is growing, the flow of passengers is not yet large and steady. "We can't run a bus all those miles out into the countryside if there are only going to be half a dozen people riding," Ecklar said. "It's just not financially feasible."

Another problem is that the Greater Dayton RTA is supported by a Montgomery County property tax, and it can't spend county tax dollars servicing other counties.

One of the newest bus routes, No. 32, for instance, runs from the Salem Mall area to the eastern border of Kettering. But people wanting to catch the bus to jobs at The Greene must get off at County Line Road and walk across the street because the shopping center is in Greene County.

Ecklar said RTA is working with transit authorities in neighboring counties to coordinate service for people who want to use public transportation between counties. And the regional planning commission is seeking federal grants to make connecting people to jobs more economically feasible.

One grant application in the works would provide shuttles to help get job-ready workers from an Urban League Job Training program in West Dayton to "a major employer in Miami County."

But the pattern of placing new development farther and farther out in the countryside can't last forever, Ecklar said.

"The cost of gasoline is eventually going to go back up," he said. "We're going to have to start thinking about redeveloping land closer to the population centers. All these long trips we've been creating just aren't practical."

[Bill Pote]

I'm meeting with Dan on Monday 12/15 and I'll give you all the details shortly afterward.  The conversations is about regionalism, but you can count on me asking about the Austin Road project.

[Jeffery]

Yeah, count me, too, as someone interested in what you hear from Foley.  He sounds like he is not giving people the brush off, at least so far.  Trying not to be cynical. 

[tgasper]

Hi all, I should probably post this under the Austin Road conversation as well, but I wanted to follow up on my meeting today with Dan Foley.  While Billy's meeting was mostly about the unigov and regional form of government issue, also discussing Austin Road, mine was more the reverse with the focus on the interchange.

I have to start with how much I truly like Dan, he's so sincere and honest and just wants to do the right thing.  My response is pretty much like Billy's - like it or not, the Austin Road interchange is going to happen.  This is a way, especially the arena part of the deal, for Montgomery County to get some piece of the tax revenue pie.  When you look at the numbers, you can understand their reasoning. 

I shared with him the fear that the arts will be next - that Springboro will start building their own Schuster or DAI and we'll be screwed.  I also shared that we see all of the existing buildings and infrastructure that needs "some lovin" and just see all the development heading south.  It FEELS like it's at the City's expense. 

What I came away from the meeting with was the appreciation that Dan's fiduciary responsibility is to the ENTIRE COUNTY - that includes parts like Trotwood and Brookville, Centerville and Kettering, as well as the City of Dayton.  He has to find a revenue source.  While I still strongly oppose the interchange from a global warming, dependence on foreign oil and anti-sprawl perspective, I can't do anything to stop it from happening. 

What I believe Dan came away from the meeting with was a sense that the Commissioners and other elected officials need to do a better job of communicating their message and of listening to their constituents.  He brought up Obama's campaign and the change.gov website and I suggested that the City & County find a way to duplicate change.gov on a local level so residents can submit their ideas and they can do a better job communicating their positions.


So there's my report.  The bottom line is that I wouldn't want Dan's job for the world!   

[metromark]

What I came away from the meeting with was the appreciation that Dan's fiduciary responsibility is to the ENTIRE COUNTY - that includes parts like Trotwood and Brookville, Centerville and Kettering, as well as the City of Dayton.  He has to find a revenue source.  While I still strongly oppose the interchange from a global warming, dependence on foreign oil and anti-sprawl perspective, I can't do anything to stop it from happening.

This just reenforces the argument for metro government. Dan's reasoning is sound, but the municipalities (such as those in Springboro) are still competing with the center city. BTW, the Ohio Senate voted down the 4% hotel tax for funding the Austin Pike arena. What next?

[MRICEAVE]

Just hunting for pockets of revenue is a zero sum game.  Leads nowhere.    Just creates more problems longer term while satisfying some shortterm political pressures.  I wouldn't want Dan's job either.  But he took the job, we didn.t.

[tgasper]

No doubt it's a compelling argument for a uni-gov and uniform tax rate.  Companies are leaving municipalities with city income taxes and moving to those that don't have them.  (i.e. around Austin Road).

When I owned my suite in Beavercreek, that was my primary selling advantage to companies - B'creek doesn't have a city tax, Fairborn does. 

I don't know what happens now that the lodging rate increase wasn't approved, but the Austin Road interchange is happening no matter what.  I sent a submission to change.gov to pull funding for it because it's counterproductive to a lot of Obama's agenda - just causes more sprawl, which leads to more driving, more consumption of foreign oil, etc.   Don't know what else we can do to stop the boondoggle unless we change ourselves to the bulldozers!

[Jeffery]

Regional revenue sharing is an old idea here.  During the I-675 controversy of the 1970s, it was proposed as a mitigation to get the city to agree to the highway (that the city would get a cut of the tax money from new development), and was coupled with the city annexing Wright Patterson to get city income tax money from the base.

This was of course opposed by suburban govts (esp Greene County suburbs), and went nowhere. 

The present day revenue sharing approach would be ED/GE, but whether it would be possible to expand this beyond county lines into Greene and Warren is a good question. 

The issue here is really expanding regional approaches and governance beyond the county line and beyond highway planning.