A consolidated city-county is a city and county that have been merged into one unified jurisdiction. It is simultaneously a city, which is a municipal corporation, and a county, which is an administrative division of a state.
Service Delivery
Consolidated city-counties have mostly eliminated duplication of service delivery efforts which has increased efficiency, effectiveness, and either lowered service delivery costs or reduced rate of the service delivery cost increases.
Legislative structures
All consolidated city-counties elect mayors and include a mix of representatives elected by district or at large.
Tax system
Typically, consolidated city-counties are divided into a general service district (GSD) and an urban service district (USD). • GSD - a uniform base-level tax rate paid throughout the county pays for basic countywide services. • USD, additional municipal services are provided within the old city limits and are paid for by a correspondingly higher tax rate imposed within the USD territory. (Ex: The USD might have waste disposal services plus recycling and special collections; but the GSD would have only waste disposal services). Many city-county consolidations have used their two-tier service/tax districts to segregate debit and other obligations to the taxpayers of the jurisdictions that originally incurred the costs.
Voter approval
Many communities have formed citizen task forces to study consolidation and alternatives to the existing regional governance system and those task forces have provided recommendations to the governing bodies. Most city-county consolidations have required local voter approval. Most have required a simple, single-majority of all residents countywide for approval. Some have required dual-approval; separate approval by both voters within city limits and voters in county limits.
Federal assistance
Consolidation has generally not resulted in the consolidated city-county government receiving less federal transfer money than the two governments had previously received separately. However, regulations for CDBG specifically prohibit changing funding allotments because of the consolidation of a city and a county.
“Balance” cities
Several consolidated city-county governments where the formerly independent incorporated places still maintain some governmental powers-“balances”.
• Milford, CT • Jacksonville-Duval County, FL • Athens-Clarke County, GA • Augusta-Richmond County, GA • Indianapolis, IN • Louisville-Jefferson County, KY • Butte-Silver Bow, MT • Charlotte-Mecklenburg, NC • Nashville-Davidson, TN
Jacksonville/Duval County, FL
Name: Consolidated City of Jacksonville
Consolidation: 1968
Statutory ability: Consolidation charter required the approval of the FL legislature before going to referendum
Citizen voter approval: Single majority approval threshold
Structure: Strong mayor, 14 district seats + 5 at-large seats
Taxing: GSD and USD
Population: 735,000
Major operating functions: Public safety, health, recreation, public works, waste management, housing and streets. Individual outlying counties provide sheriff and electric authority.
Budget: • FY 2009 - $1.62 billion • General Fund – 56.61% • Capital Project Fund – 7.14% • Enterprise Fund – 10.04% • Special Revenue Fund – 17.28% • Other Funds – 8.93%
Indianapolis/Marion County, IN
Name: Consolidated City of Indianapolis and Marion County, aka “Unigov”
Consolidation: 1970
Statutory ability: IN General Assembly
Citizen voter approval: n/a
Structure: 25 district seats + 4 at-large; strong mayor form of government
Taxing: GSD and USD
Population: 791,250
Major operating functions: City provides functions countywide: streets, public housing, sewers, solid waste, public health, mass transit, and airport. City and county each have public safety (Police & Sheriff Departments)
Budget: $1.12 billion
Louisville/Jefferson County, KY
Name: Louisville-Jefferson County Metro Government
Consolidation: 2003
Statutory ability: KY General Assembly created a 56-member task force of local elected officials to study consolidation. The task force endorsed to the General Assembly and they passed a consolidation bill and set a consolidation referendum.
Citizen voter approval: Single majority approval
Structure: 26 district seats, strong mayor form of government
Taxing: GSD and USD
Major Operating Functions: Public safety, public works, codes and regulations, parks and recreation, economic development, housing, health and neighborhoods.
Budget: • FY 2009 - $828 million • General Fund – 95.3% (includes fees and fines) • Capital Fund – 0.3% • Other Funds – 4.4%
Charlotte/Mecklenburg, NC
Name: Charmeck
Consolidation:
Statutory ability:
Citizen voter approval: n/a
Structure: Council/Commission/City and County Managers
Taxing: Two tax rates levied by governing bodies
Major Operating Functions: Charlotte and Mecklenburg have divided responsibility for various public services between them. Charlotte provides mass transit, airport, land use, customer service, economic development, public works and police service to the entire county. Mecklenburg County is responsible for parks and recreation, courts, environmental services, water, social services and tax assessment.
Budget: City of Charlotte - $1.85 billion; Mecklenburg County - $1.4 Billion
Nashville/Davidson County, TN
Name: The Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County
Consolidation: 1963
Statutory ability: TN General Assembly authorized the consolidation charter commission. The mayor and county judge each appointed five members.
Citizen voter approval: Dual majority approval
Structure: 35 district seats + 5 at large, additional 3-member urban council to levies USD tax rate; strong mayor form of government
Taxing: GSD and USD
Major operating functions: Public safety, courts, jails, health, libraries, mass transit, parks and recreation, water and sanitation, public works.
Budget: • FY 2009 • Property Taxes: 50% • Local Option Sales Tax: 18% • Grants and Contributions: 18% • Fund Balance: 2% • Other: 12%
• GSD General Fund 43% • GSD Debt Service 6% • GSD Schools 44% • USD General Fund 7% • USD Debt Fund 1% • Interfund Transfers -2%
Consolidated city and counties – operating as cities or counties
• City and Borough of Anchorage, AK • City and Borough of Juneau, AK • City and Borough of Sitka, AK • City and Borough of Yakutat, AK • City and County of San Francisco, CA • City and County of Broomfield, CO • City and County of Denver, CO • City of Miami and Dade County, FL (operating as county) • City and County of Honolulu, HI • Kansas City/Wyandotte County, KS • City of New Orleans and Orleans Parish, LA • Town and County of Nantucket, MA • Portland Portland/Clackamas/Multnomah, WA • City of Washington and District of Columbia
Miami/Dade County
Name: Miami-Dade County
Consolidated: ?
Statutory ability: ?
Citizen voter approval: ?
Structure: 13-member County Commissioners; Executive Mayor; County Manager
Taxing: GSD and USD
Major operating functions: Development and land use, public safety, public works, water systems, auto licensing, courts, county clerk, mass transit and others.
Budget: • FY 2008-09 - $7.5 billion • Operating – 66% • Capital – 34%
• GSD – 49.7% • GSD Debt – 2.9% • USD – 20.6% • Fire – 22.9% • Library – 3.9%
Kansas City/Wyandotte County, KS
Name: The Unified Government of Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas
Consolidation: 1997
Statutory ability: Kansas State Legislature created a five-member commission of residents. The commission recommended consolidation to the governor and drafted a charter. Legislature approved and question went to ballot for the residents in the region.
Citizen voter approval: Single majority approval threshold
Structure: 8 district seats, 2 at-large; county-administrator form of government
Taxing: GSD and USD
Major operating functions: Development and land use, public safety, public works, water systems, auto licensing, courts, county clerk, mass transit and others.
Budget: • FY 2007 - $296,180,997 • Tax – 59% • Service Fees – 18% • Intergovernmental – 20% • Other – 3%
• Operating – 80% • Debt – 7% • Capital – 10% • Reserve – 3%
Portland/Clackamas/Multnomah/Washington
Name: Oregon Metro
Consolidation: 1979
Statutory ability: Oregon legislature has assigned additional responsibilities to Metro with concurrence of the jurisdictions within Metro’s boundaries.
Citizen voter approval: single majority approval
Taxing: General service district property tax, excise tax, and capital projects ax
Structure: • Seven-member council (President at large, 6 districts); Elected auditor-at large; Chief Operating Officer
Major operating functions: • Metro Exposition Recreation Commission • Oregon Zoo • Planning • Regional Parks and Green spaces • Solid Waste and Recycling • Finance and Administrative Services • Human Resources • Public Affairs and Government Relations
Budget: • FY2008-09 $208,717,449 • 54% - revenues from enterprise activities • 18% property tax revenues • Excise tax paid by users of Metro facilities and services (limited by Charter) o Tax supports costs of general government activities (Council Office, elections expense, lobbyist functions and various department activities) • “Double Triple” bond rating
Merged Counties – Independent from Municipalities
• Anaconda and Deer Lodge County, MT • Butte and Silver Bow County, MT • Columbus and Muscogee County, GA • Cusseta and Chattahoochee County, GA • Georgetown and Quitman County GA • Hartsville and Trousdale County, TN • Houma and Terrebonne Parish, LA • Lexington and Fayette County, KY • Lynchburg and Moore County, TN • New York, Bronx, Kings, Richmond and Queens County, NY
City of El Paso and El Paso County
• A Resolution was introduced by Senator Eliot Shapleigh during the 79 th State Legislature to create a consolidated El Paso Metro Government by consolidating El Paso County and the City of El Paso • It was referred to Committee on Intergovernmental Relations and remained there • Resolution calls for • Abolishment of Commissioners Court, Office of County Judge and County Court • Creation of El Paso Metro Council includes original City Council plus 4 Commissioners • Sheriff as the chief law enforcement officer of the El Paso Metro Government • Single majority approval by voters of El Paso County