League of Women Voters of the Area April 2009 103 Wm. H. Taft Rd., Cincinnati, OH 45219 LEARNING TO SHARE Regional Cooperative Efforts

Introduction savings of sharing services across jurisdictions is As a result of the Local Program Planning unit often the most important consideration along with discussions in January 2008, the League’s Program increasing the quality of services provided. Shared Development Committee (PDC) identified public services described herein relate to local “cooperation between local governments in south- government services such as fire, water, safety, west ” as one of the subjects deserving public health, waste disposal, insurance and LWVCA attention. Several units expressed a de- property maintenance. sire to learn: • How the various county, township and There are other shared or consolidated public city/village governments cooperate with each services provided to the entire county as a result other to increase the efficiency and improve the of an agency’s jurisdictional authority and not re- quality of their services to the citizens, and quiring cooperation agreements. Examples include: • library services provided by the Public Library • What opportunities exist for further collabora- of Cincinnati & Hamilton County tion of this type in the future. • human services provided by Hamilton County Jobs and Family Services The County Government and City Government • transportation services provided by SORTA Committees have looked into this subject of inter- • environmental services provided by Hamilton governmental cooperation and shared services. County Department of Environmental Services The attached list of References indicates the vari- and the Soil and Water Conservation District. ety of resources that these Committees examined. The Cincinnati Area League has a long history of There are various mechanisms by which local gov- interest in and advocacy for structural reform of ernments can cooperate and collaborate. Services Hamilton County Government. The present posi- can be provided directly through contracts or co- tion: “Modernization of Hamilton County Gov- operation agreements. Through such service agree- ernment” defines the LWVCA consensus on struc- ments, communities have voluntarily consolidated tural reform, i.e., a county home rule charter or an public service delivery to enable lower costs or in- “alternative form” model. creased service levels. Government alliances pro- vide forums for intergovernmental cooperation on In the mid 1980’s, the search for more efficient a wide variety of issues. Examples include Hamil- and less expensive local government continued. ton County Regional Planning Commission’s Plan- The possibility of combining the delivery of ning Partnership, the First Suburbs Consortium of a service between two or more local governments, Southwest Ohio, and the Local Alliance for Na- creating special service districts, or contracting out ture and Development. Allied organizations can to a private entity (such as management of a jail) assist in facilitating service agreements through was often being considered. This led to the devel- programs, networking opportunities or service to opment of another current League position their constituents: Center for Local Government, “Support of Certain Criteria for Methods of Serv- Hamilton County Health Insurance Program, Cin- ice Delivery” for evaluating service delivery cinnati USA Chamber of Commerce, and Ohio proposals. These include measures for: Municipal League are among them. • relationships with other governments and serv- ice providers, The focus of this information is inter-governmen- • accountability and responsiveness, tal contractual service agreements. • taxes, fees and assessments • quality of service. Over the years, a wide variety of shared public service agreements for various purposes have been These two LWVCA positions seek to improve established in Hamilton County. Potential cost county service delivery, reduce duplication/ redundancy and costs. Early Regional Efforts Grant Program was established in the 2008-2009 In the mid 1990’s there were several calls for re- Ohio Biennial Budget. In October 2008, the Ohio gional cooperation within Hamilton County and Department of Development announced the within the wider region. The Metropolitan Growth grants awarded from this program. The City of Alliance, a group of community leaders, engaged a Cincinnati was awarded a $63,350 grant to com- consultant, Michael Gallis to conduct an analysis plete a feasibility study to identify opportunities of the metropolitan region. The report “Greater for sharing the operation and maintenance of Cincinnati Metro Region Resource Book” was a heavy vehicle equipment among participating ju- call for collaboration and the need for the 13 risdictions within the County. And Hamilton County region to cost-effectively compete in the County received a $59,725 grant to investigate emerging global economy. Regional cooperation how consolidation can bring uniformity to the was promoted. Cincinnati Metropatterns fol- process of code enforcement and highlight differ- lowed in October 2001. Citizens for Civic Re- ences in local building, property maintenance, newal sponsored this study that identified socio- zoning, and fire codes. economic and land-use trends viewed as detri- mental to communities in the region. Two of these Local Efforts trends were: The Center for Local Government 1. urban sprawl, which was adding financial The Center for Local Government (CLG) is an alli- pressures on newer communities, and ance of communities focused on improving public 2. fiscal disparities, the wide variation in the abil- service delivery. Formed in 1990 its mission is to ity of local governments to raise revenues from improve public service delivery by the cities, local property and earnings taxes. townships and villages in the Greater Cincinnati The CCR study also recommended regional coop- Area through improved information exchange, eration and collaboration including tax reforms. cost reductions, shared resources, inter-jurisdic- tional collaboration and new approaches to capi- State Level Efforts tal equipment and skills acquisition. This non- Until recently, Ohio did not have state-level in- profit organization is supported by membership centives for communities to engage in cooperative fees, grants and fee based services. Membership in public service provision. Individual communities the Center is open to any county, municipality or weigh the potential savings from collaborative township in the southwest Ohio area. (For current service agreements against the obstacles to over- membership, see Appendix A.) come in developing such agreements or alliances. Planning Partnership During 2005 State of Ohio budget discussions, it In 2002-03, Hamilton County Regional Planning appeared that local jurisdictions were going to ex- Commission (HCRPC) engaged in a community perience cuts in funding for services. Cuts were re- wide comprehensive planning effort resulting in stored but the need for communities to explore the compilation of COMPASS, Comprehensive ways to reduce operating costs and dependence Master Plan and Strategies. Strategies were devel- on state entitlements became important. Legisla- oped toward a goal of building collaborative tion (H.B. 66) was passed requiring larger coun- decision-making including collaboration on ties and cities to report to the State Auditor de- county-wide issues and incentives for better col- scribing efforts to coordinate or consolidate serv- laborative decision-making. Early work to carry ices and engage in regional cooperation. Cost sav- out these strategies included an “Inventory of ings resulting from regional cooperation and con- Shared Public Service Delivery”. HCRPC together solidation of services was to be included in the re- with CLG surveyed jurisdictions and gathered in- port. formation about public service agreements. The re- sults of this and other surveys were compiled by In 2008 the Ohio Commission on Local Govern- HCRPC. ment Reform and Collaboration was formed to develop recommendations on reforming and re- The Hamilton County Regional Planning Commis- structuring local government in Ohio. The Gover- sion provides advisory planning services to the nor appointed Cincinnati’s Mayor Mark Mallory unincorporated areas (12 townships) of the to serve on the Commission. And the Local Gov- County and provides services upon request to 37 ernment Services and Regional Collaboration county municipalities that are members of the

LWV Cincinnati Area VOTER Program Insert April 2009 Page 2 Commission and pay annual fees. HCRPC formed ganizations added timeliness to exploring service the Planning Partnership to bring together public, sharing opportunities. Discussions led to identify- private, civic organizations (including LWVCA) ing a list of opportunities for collaboration be- to work collaboratively in long range planning for tween these governments and services that they the County. could provide to other local governments within the County. Government Cooperation & Efficiency Project In 2007 the Government Cooperation and Effi- Twelve service sharing opportunities were identi- ciency Project (GCEP) was convened under the fied as having immediate potential. Implementa- auspices of the Hamilton County Planning Part- tion steps were developed and a responsible nership. GCEP is a voluntary effort designed to party was identified to take leadership in imple- help local communities improve service delivery mentation. Appendix B lists the 12 Service Pro- and control costs through cross-jurisdictional co- jects, and the leadership responsibilities. operation, sharing of services and possible service delivery consolidation. A Steering Committee was Achievements established to guide the project that received As of December 2007, the first goal of the GCEP funding from the City of Cincinnati, Hamilton Phase I goals was accomplished. Thirty-eight of County and the Cincinnati Business Committee. 50 Hamilton County jurisdictions participated in All 50 governments in Hamilton County are in- some way. Other jurisdictions by virtue of mem- cluded in the effort. bership in the Center for Local Government have access to ideas generated by GCEP that will be A consultant was retained to execute GCEP implemented by the Center. Phase I, a plan of work to engage local govern- ment leaders around the idea of service sharing Several projects have resulted in cooperation and and cooperation. Identifying additional service economies including the purchase of salt for win- sharing opportunities that could improve effi- ter season, the purchase of fuel for vehicles, the ciency and effectiveness of local government serv- sharing of road line stripe painting, fire hydrant ices and provide tax dollar savings was a goal. maintenance, and architectural services. Savings in Respecting the existence of shared service initia- these services have been documented at approxi- tives that many jurisdictions were involved in al- mately $500,000 on an annualized basis. ready, an initial task was to build on those efforts and discover additional types of service sharing An intangible result of the GCEP has been a new- that could help save money or solve problems. found trust among jurisdictions including interest in collaboration with the City and County. From interviews with elected officials in local ju- risdictions and focus groups, distinct areas of GCEP Phase II service emerged. Three subject specific working Building on the results of Phase I, a second Phase groups were created in areas of: of the GCEP was initiated in 2008. The Steering • Finance, Administrative and General Services Committee working with the consultant is seeking • Public Works to support the Center for Local Government in in- • Economic Development, Community Develop- creasing its capacity to serve as the institutionali- ment and Planning zation of the GCEP. Discussions in the Economic Development, Com- munity Development and Planning group revolved The role of CLG will include: around code enforcement and zoning issues and • soliciting input from jurisdictions and others on resulted in the successful application for a state current and potential service sharing activities grant. and opportunities • serve as an arena for information sharing and A separate fourth working group was formed discussion regarding service sharing ideas with selected managers drawn from the admini- • serve as the convener and staff for the GCEP stration of the City of Cincinnati and Hamilton Steering Committee County to explore cooperation between the two • assist local jurisdictions in marketing shared largest governments. While information technology service opportunities to other potential part- and dispatch services were examples of past co- ners operation, current budget constraints of both or- • serve as a clearinghouse for information related

LWV Cincinnati Area VOTER Program Insert April 2009 Page 3 to GCEP activities consolidation needs to be clearly delineated if the concept is to gain additional support in Hamilton A business service analysis for each of the service County. areas identified by GCEP will be developed. The analysis will be directed toward identifying and There are arguments in favor of consolidating local quantifying cost savings, increased efficiencies or services, such as more efficient use of tax revenue improved levels of service/management expected and maintaining service levels. These points are to result from implementing proposed service de- supported by the number of service livery methods or models. The probable service agreements/consolidations already in effect areas for such analyses may include: through arrangement between individual commu- • Emergency Communications nities and collectively through organizations like • Call Center Operations the Center for Local Government. • Heavy Equipment Maintenance and Use Shar- ing When considering service consolidation, the argu- • Tax Administration ment for tax savings is crucial. Elected leaders • Public Health Services from each community involved want to know • Code Enforcement/Hazard Abatement what benefits are possible in terms of money saved and service levels increased. The answer to Driving Forces the question depends on the type of service pro- Benefits of Shared Services: gram involved. In general, a well designed service • Trust and engagement among jurisdictions sharing program will provide tax savings, in- • Increase in quality of services creased efficiency and decreased redundancy in • Increase in efficiency of services services, and enhanced service planning. Smaller, • Savings to government and business non-controversial service sharing programs will • Possibilities of new governance structure to en- yield smaller cost savings, but will require little able shared services political capital to carry out. Larger controversial programs or consolidations have the potential for Drawbacks/Difficulties of Shared Services: great savings but require skilled political leader- • Citizens want their own government and inde- ship to enact. pendence and don't want to give up local con- trol Complementary/Allied Local Organizations • Tension between strong parochialism among REGIONAL INCOME TAX AGENCY (R.I.T.A.) diverse communities and the need to collabo- The Regional Income Tax Agency in the rate State of Ohio provides services to collect income • Citizens question if the time and energy spent tax for 142 member municipalities in the state. in negotiations would result in actual cost sav- Founded in 1971, their mission is “to provide ings member communities with high quality, cost effec- tive municipal services. We strive to service mem- The following is excerpted from a September 2005 bers with integrity and their taxpayers in a pro- Report from HCRPC re: shared Public Service De- fessional, courteous, and responsive manner.” livery. There are competing pressures of budget (The Regional Income Tax Agency). shortfalls and demand for high quality public In 1971, a Regional Council of Govern- services from residents. Most communities take ments was formed among 38 municipalities in pride and derive a sense of identity through the Ohio in order to enforce and administer tax col- services provided to residents. However, with in- lection in cities and villages. The Regional Council creasing costs and decreasing revenues, sharing or of Governments created R.I.T.A. as their first act. consolidating local services between communities R.I.T.A. currently serves 44 counties in Ohio. In in order to reduce costs, spend tax dollars more Hamilton County, 29 jurisdictions (including the efficiently and maintain or increase service levels city of Cincinnati) administer their own tax collec- looks more attractive to local jurisdictions. But tion, while five (Addyston, Arlington Heights, there can be problems with this approach. There Lockland, Newtown, and Silverton) have consoli- is a perception that combining services with an- dated, using the services of the Regional Income other jurisdiction is a step toward a political Tax Agency. merger between the communities. The line between (Information adapted from an article in the functional (service) consolidation and political Summer 2008 Citizens for Civic Renewal Newsletter,

LWV Cincinnati Area VOTER Program Insert April 2009 Page 4 Volume 11, Issue 2, page 2) www.ritaohio.com Central Riverfront Project envisioned by the City and the County, and the Riverfront Advisors BUILDING ECONOMIC STRENGTH Commission, as well as continuing the brownfield TOGETHER (BEST) TASK FORCE redevelopment activities of the predecessor The BEST Task Force, formed by Citizens for agency. Civic Renewal (CCR) as an outgrowth of the Cin- cinnati Metropatterns report released in October There are 18 members of the board of directors of 2001, has focused for the past three years on local the Port Authority jointly appointed by the Mayor government collaboration by looking at a variety of the City of Cincinnati with the advice and con- of ways jurisdictions can work together. BEST has sent of City Council, and by the Board of County looked at the prospect of small governments Commissioners of Hamilton County. The board working together on things like joint fire districts represents a broad mix of business expertise, in- and joint economic development districts. In cluding development, design, finance and market- March 2009, CCR hosted a Citizens Connect Fo- ing. rum – “Silverton Shares Services: One City's Com- mitment to Efficient Local Government” for citi- www.cincinnatiport.org/pa zens to learn how this city is becoming a model When the Riverfront Advisors Commission was for how shared services can keep cost down and chartered by the City/County Riverfront Steering help deliver better services. Committee in February 1999, they were charged with creating a comprehensive development pro- AGENDA 360: A Regional Action Plan gram for the central riverfront area between the www.cincinnati360.com two new proposed sports stadiums. Due to the Agenda 360 is a community-wide citizen engage- reconfiguration of and other ment process designed to improve the competi- major street and utility infrastructure projects, tiveness and quality of life of southwest Ohio. eight city blocks (15 acres) of land on the Ohio The mission of the Agenda 360 initiative is to River were opened up ready for redevelopment. transform Cincinnati USA into a leading metro- The result of the Riverfront Advisors’ efforts was politan region for talent, jobs and economic op- a far-reaching vision (The Central Riverfront Ur- portunity for all who live here by the year 2020. ban Design Master Plan) for “The Banks,”a devel- This citizen engagement process resulted in the opment that would create a 24-hour, seven-day-a- February 2009 release of “Agenda 360: A Re- week diverse, pedestrian-friendly urban neighbor- gional Action Plan” to transform the region by the hood with a mix of uses consisting of residential year 2020. Work on the Shared Regional Civic housing, retail shops and restaurants, office and Agenda began in spring 2007. Geographic and hotel space, public greenspace and parking. demographic meetings were hosted throughout Cincinnati and the four southwest Ohio counties The Port Authority was chosen in 2001 as a de- (Hamilton, Butler, Warren and Clermont) to gain velopment mechanism because it has a broad input from participants as to how to make this range of project management and funding capa- region a better place to live, work, and play. Gov- bilities or “tools.” A port authority’s unique “tool ernment collaboration is one of the six action ar- kit” includes special financing options like revenue eas to transform the community and includes pri- bonds, project incentives and grant programs as ority focus on expanding shared service practices; well as lease financing options, property owner- increasing regional leadership capacity; and ex- ship and project coordination. A developer selec- ploring multi-jurisdictional revenue sharing. tion process was implemented and eventually two Atlanta-based firms were chosen as co-develop- PORT OF GREATER CINCINNATI DEVELOP- ers. Work began in December 2008 on the public MENT AUTHORITY www.cincinnatiport.org parking garage for the first phase of the $600 mil- In the latter part of 2000, the City of Cincinnati lion riverfront project. Construction is on track to and Hamilton County collaborated to create the begin in June 2009 on the first major retail and Port of Greater Cincinnati Development Author- residential phase of the project (Phase 1A) to be ity. This new entity reconstituted an existing port built on top of the garage just west of the Great authority that the two governments had formed American Ball Park. earlier to spearhead the redevelopment of brown- field sites. The newly created Port Authority was The Central Riverfront Park www.CRPark.org given a dual mission of overseeing The Banks Jointly commissioned by the Cincinnati Park

LWV Cincinnati Area VOTER Program Insert April 2009 Page 5 Board and Cincinnati Recreation Commission, is Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission under construction between Great American Ball- Planning Partnership: park and along the banks of www.hamiltoncountyohio.gov/hcrpc/partner/ the Ohio River. With Phase I due for completion in late 2010. The 40-acre park will function as a Cincinnati Metropatterns. Myron Orfield and “front yard” for the city and will feature restau- Thomas Luce. Metropolitan Area Research Cor- rants and cafes, water features, playgrounds, gar- poration. Minneapolis. 2001. dens and trees, walkways, bike trail, and a River Edge Promenade. The park will continue the con- Port of Greater Cincinnati Development Author- nection of the greenspaces along the Ohio River ity. www.cincinnatiport.org that include the Serpentine Wall, Sawyer Point, Bicentennial Commons and Theodore M. Berry In- “The Banks” Project www.cincinnatiport.org/pa ternational Friendship Park. Funding for the park has come from a variety of sources: $50 million, “Cincinnati Parks 2007 Centennial Master Plan: federal; $10 million, state; $ 20 million, local; and Executive Summary.” www.cincinnatiparks.com an anticipated $35-40 million from private sources. “Parkways: Newsletter of the Cincinnati Parks,” Fall/Winter 2008. www.cincinnatiparks.com REFERENCES Cincinnati Riverfront Park www.CRPark.org “Government Cooperation and Efficiency Project”. Phase 1 Project Report, December 2007. Know Hamilton County. League of Women Voters of the Cincinnati Area Education Fund. 2007. “Agreement for Government Cooperation & Effi- ciency Project Project Phase II,” The City of Cin- cinnati and the Regional Planning Commission of Hamilton County, dated August 13, 2008.

“Inventory of Shared Public Service Delivery”. Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission. September 2005.

“ODOD Grant Encourages Regional Collaboration for/delivery of Services”. UPDATE The Planning Partnership Newsletter. July 2008.

“Legislative Update approved Committee to Study Reforms to Local Governments”. Senator Robert Schuller. UPDATE The Planning Partner- ship Newsletter. July 2008.

“Hamilton County Helps Found and Fund the Government Cooperation and Efficiency Project.” Hello Hamilton County. January 28, 2008. www.hamiltoncountyohio.gov/hc/news.asp

“Lovely R.I.T.A.” Citizens for Civic Renewal Newsletter. Summer 2008. Citizens for Civic Re- newal: www.citizenscivicrenewal.org

Center For Local Government website: www.c4lg.org

Agenda 360 website: www.cincinnati360.com

LWV Cincinnati Area VOTER Program Insert April 2009 Page 6 APPENDIX A APPENDIX B

MEMBERSHIP INFORMATION HAMILTON COUNTY GOVERNMENT Any county, municipality or township in the fol- COOPERATION AND EFFICIENCY PROJECT lowing Ohio counties is eligible to join the Center for Local Government: Brown, Butler, Clermont, Shared Services Projects Clinton, Greene, Hamilton, Miami, Montgomery, The Government Cooperation and Efficiency Pro- Preble and Warren. Membership shall be effective ject (GCEP) was started in 2007 to help local gov- upon receipt of dues from the jurisdiction. ernments improve service delivery and minimize costs through local government collaboration and Membership: Full Members and Associate Mem- service sharing efforts in Hamilton County. The bers. Full Members are those political subdivisions following shared service opportunities identify ex- which employ a full-time, appointed public ad- isting and emerging collaborative efforts among lo- ministrator (e.g., Manager, Administrator, or cal governments. More shared service opportuni- Safety Services Director). Associate Members are ties will be identified as the work of the GCEP ini- those political subdivisions which do not employ tiative continues. a full-time, appointed public administrator. Service Category: Finance, Administration and Current Center Members General Services Project: Bulk Road Salt Purchasing Amberley Loveland Responsibility: Hamilton Cty/Cincinnati Anderson Twp Madeira Service Category: Finance, Administration and Blue Ash Mason General Services Cincinnati Miami Twp, Clermont Cty Project: Bulk Fuel and Daily Fuel Purchasing Responsibility: Hamilton Cty/Cincinnati Colerain Middletown Service Category: Finance, Administration and Columbia Twp Milford General Services Deerfield Twp Monroe Project: Bulk Office Supply Purchasing Deer Park Montgomery Responsibility: Hamilton Cty/Cincinnati Delhi Twp Mt. Healthy Service Category: Finance, Administration and General Services Evendale Newtown Project: Training and Professional Development Fairfax North College Hill Responsibility: Center for Local Government Fairfield, City Pierce Twp Service Category: Finance, Administration and Fairfield Twp Reading General Services Project: Human Resources Forest Park Sharonville Responsibility: Center for Local Government Glendale Silverton Service Category: Finance, Administration and Greenhills Springboro General Services Green Twp Springdale Project: Information Technology Services Responsibility: Center for Local Government Hamilton County Springfield Twp Service Category: Finance, Administration and Harrison St. Bernard General Services Indian Hill Sycamore Twp Project: Grant Coordination and Acquisition Lebanon West Chester Twp Responsibility: Center for Local Government Liberty Twp Whitewater Twp Service Category: Public Works Project: Equipment Sharing Contracting Lincoln Heights Woodlawn Responsibility: Center for Local Government Lockland Wyoming Service Category: Public Works Project: Specialized Training Responsibility: Center for Local Government

LWV Cincinnati Area VOTER Program Insert April 2009 Page 7 Service Category: Public Works ficial from each political jurisdiction in Butler Project: Fleet Maintenance County; one technical person appointed by each Responsibility: City of Cincinnati Fleet Services political jurisdiction in Butler County; one repre- Service Category: Public Works sentative recommended by the Butler County Project: Fire Hydrant Maintenance Chambers Caucus and one representative recom- Responsibility: Hamilton Cty Department of mended by the Butler County Farm Bureau Fed- Public Works eration for appointment by the Butler County Commissioners. The common goal that directs this Service Category: Public Works body is efficient economic development in the Project: Street Signs and Markings county. Responsibility: Hamilton County Engineers Office - Traffic Department Transportation Improvement District With the oversight of several state and federal agencies, including the Federal Highway Admin- APPENDIX C istration (FHWA) and the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT), the TID serves Butler Director's Corner - Butler County in LUCC County, the cities of Hamilton and Fairfield; and As a former employee of Hamilton County Re- Fairfield, West Chester and Liberty townships. gional Planning Commission, I, like a lot of folks For a project to occur in one political subdivision, around town, get caught up a story of local gov- there must be a consensus that exemplifies inter- ernment fragmentation that focuses on our region's governmental coordination. The TID was the main core county. I don’t know how many times we driver for the construction of the Butler Regional identify the 49 local jurisdictions in Hamilton Highway between I-75 and Hamilton and the Lib- County as a convenient talking point when talking erty Township interchange. Future projects include about the need for government collaboration. Well the widening of the SR 4 bypass and SR 747. as a colleague recently told me, this focus on the 49 is a bit disingenuous - particularly when you No doubt that even with these strong institutions step back a bit and see all the good local govern- that foster collaboration, opportunities exist for ment cooperation that is going on in our region. more collaboration in Butler County. The lesson learned may be that just because jurisdictions are Perhaps no area has been walking the talk of local not going to agree on everything they shouldn't ig- government cooperation more than Butler nore areas of common interest. These tough eco- County. It maybe that Butler County’s coopera- nomic times may just be the right environment for tive spirit illustrates the old axiom “necessity is even more collaboration between Butler County the mother of invention” but no matter, Butler jurisdictions and beyond that collaboration with County has spent the better part of the last jurisdictions across the county line. twenty years finding areas - particularly relating to infrastructure - where local governments come Reprinted from: Citizens for Civic Renewal News- together to act on issues of mutual benefit. Two letter. Winter 2009. vol 12, issue 1. examples of these cooperative efforts are the Land Use Coordinating Committee (LUCC) and the Butler County Transportation Improvement District (TID).

Land Use Coordinating Committee The LUCC has been working on common infra- structure items like roads, airport planning, and groundwater protection for over ten years. The mission of LUCC is to be a facilitator, helping bring together public and private entities in order to assist them in the development and manage- ment of the county’s land, transportation system, and infrastructure. The regular membership of LUCC is composed of all Butler County OKI Board of Trustees Representatives; one elected of-

LWV Cincinnati Area VOTER Program Insert April 2009 Page 8