[Evergrey]

File this under the "Well, DUH!" category:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06336/742922-85.stm

Pa. towns need way to merge, says state report
Saturday, December 02, 2006

By Tracie Mauriello, Post-Gazette Harrisburg Bureau



HARRISBURG -- It soon could be easier for struggling boroughs to merge with their neighbors or even to dissolve themselves.

In a report released yesterday, State Planning Board members said existing law provides too little guidance on government mergers and does not allow municipalities to revert to unincorporated status.

"Some municipalities in this commonwealth are in very serious financial trouble with huge deficits and problems with infrastructure, but it's been impossible to dissolve or merge into an adjacent municipality," said board member Ron Bailey, who is a land use planner in Chester County. They are required to continue providing services regardless of their ability to pay for them, he said.

That has been a problem in communities like Wall and Wilmerding, which considered merging a decade ago because of declining population and property values.

More recently, there have been talks of merging Kilbuck, population 723, with Ohio Township. The unpopular effort failed, partly because there wasn't enough benefit to Ohio Township, which would have had to absorb the cost of Kilbuck's road repairs.

Other Western Pennsylvania municipalities, such as New Kensington, Monessen and Jeannette, have lost more than a third of their populations -- and of their tax bases -- in the last 40 years but still have to maintain the same number of sidewalks and patrol the same number of streets.

"If a community can't keep its head above water, we want them to be able to share services with a neighboring community" or to dissolve itself, said board member Alexander Graziani, executive director of Smart Growth Partnership of Westmoreland County.

"People have the sovereignty to create a local government, but not to disincorporate," he said. "If a business decides that making buggy whips is no longer viable, it can get out of business and stop doing it, but a local government can't."

The only option now is to consolidate with a neighbor, an idea that often isn't appealing to either municipality.

"Pennsylvanians, in particular southwestern Pennsylvanians, are very skeptical about big government. There is a fear of losing their identity or their ability to make their own decisions," Mr. Graziani said.

The report also has recommendations for improving the state's infrastructure and consolidating tax collections.

Next, the planning board plans to broaden the discussion by seeking input from government officials and residents throughout the state. The board then will refine its recommendations and seek legislation necessary to enact them.

"This report is all about options and opportunities, not mandates," said chairwoman Judy Schwank, a Berks County commissioner. "Our recommendations are designed to provide a way ... for communities to take action if they choose to do so."

The full report is available at www.landuseinpa.com.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Tracie Mauriello can be reached at tmauriello@post-gazette.com or 717-787-2141. )

[EastSideHBG]

The news is not surprising, but I must say I would be VERY happy to see this happen and I do think it is the fix this state is looking for and many places could benefit from this. The article says it best:
"Pennsylvanians, in particular southwestern Pennsylvanians, are very skeptical about big government. There is a fear of losing their identity or their ability to make their own decisions," Mr. Graziani said.
...and I feel this is what keeps things at a standstill in many parts of the state.

Btw, South Central PA would benefit from this IMMENSELY! HBG is in dire straights, along with just about every borough that borders it. If they all could be part of a county system and/or easily merge, etc., it may just help greatly in the long run.

The point in all of this is PA needs some MAJOR change, and I really do think those days are just around the corner! :tup:

[wrightchr]

^ i completely agree dave. i've been saying for years that PA's biggest issue is its vast number of municipal entities. a huge reform is needed at the state level, if communities throughout the commonwealth are to have the resources to change. state government has always been negative towards municipal reform.

Harrisburg is definately a prime example. it's the regions focal point, a hub city and metropolis in its own right...yet the city itself is only 11 sq miles...8 of it actually land...with a declining urban population, supporting an immediate metro area of over 650,000. it's the only city/region of its kind in the nation that maintains such a ridiculous hierarchy of government, supporting a central city (48,000 pop) and business district of its size (over 10million sq ft of office space). is there any wonder why the city is broke???

i think PA needs to step in a direction similar to that of Maryland and Virginia...with large county governments and fewer incorporated cities/towns within them. streamline the public school districts from 501...down to 67 and get rid of the redundant administrative costs associated with them. in a few locals, such as Harrisburg, the Lehigh Valley, and Pittsburgh...you could have metropolitan governments that would cross county lines and follow more closely to the commuting base of a particular region. certainly, if cities such as Nashville and Jacksonville can do it, so can cities in PA. and i think it makes more sense!

[passdoubt]

Virginia and Maryland have pretty inequitable systems as well though. Virginia's cities are all independent. They aren't even in counties. So the poor ones are even poorer because they can't pull from county taxes. Maryland has the same deal with Baltimore City. It's not a part of Baltimore County.

[Evergrey]

the problem with PA is that every inch of land is incorporated... and it's pretty much impossible to unincorporate... as a corporation in PA... you have very strong powers and rights... and no other corporation can force you to merge and be annexed... in the South... annexations and city/county mergers are common because most Southern states developed a very different "strong county" system... where most areas remained unincorporated... and in effect, a "tenent" of the county... the county is responsible for delivering essential services to these areas... which is a much different role from PA counties... where the county is the local administer of the state

[Evergrey]

there are very few modern examples of mergers in PA...

in 1994... my hometown of St. Marys... in Elk County... merged the borough with surrounding Benzinger Township to create the city of St. Marys...

a few years later... in Cambria County... the small adjacent boroughs of Spangler and Barnesboro merged into the borough of Northern Cambria...

last year... an initiative to merge 5 adjacent municipalities in Mercer County (Sharon, Farrell, Hermitage and 2 others) failed...

tiny Cameron County (pop. 5k) in north-central PA is currently exploring the possibility of merging its 2 boroughs and 5 townships...

[wrightchr]

Virginia and Maryland have pretty inequitable systems as well though. Virginia's cities are all independent. They aren't even in counties. So the poor ones are even poorer because they can't pull from county taxes. Maryland has the same deal with Baltimore City. It's not a part of Baltimore County.

i don't doubt the fact that the county systems in the South are not without problems; however, i see them as being much more efficient than the current system of municipal gov't in PA. i will say that cities like Nashville, Indy, and Jacksonivlle have the right idea.

the problem with PA is that every inch of land is incorporated... and it's pretty much impossible to unincorporate... as a corporation in PA... you have very strong powers and rights... and no other corporation can force you to merge and be annexed...

great point Evergrey...the fact that nearly all boroughs and townships in the state are incorporated, makes it that much difficult to change.

another example of a municipal you didn't mention:
West Fairview was an incorporated borough that merged with East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County in 1998. see:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Fairview

[donybrx]

It's a salient topic in the Wyoming Valley, too, one that has been tossed around for decades, but now looking more like a necessity if some communities are to survive.....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted on Sun, Jan. 14, 2007

COMMENTARY
One people, one vision for the future, one city COMMENTARY TOM BIGLER

DURING the past century, there have been occasions when a few Wyoming Valley citizens have asked for a better way to provide municipal services. The effort could be summed up in one word: consolidation.

However, each of the municipalities spread across the valley has its own political system. Many members of these political systems bitterly oppose any idea of consolidation.

After all, they have their own mayor, council members, police and fire departments, etc. -- all of which provide employment and political patronage regardless of how ineffective they have become.

As a consequence, many of the consolidation or shared-services proposals have been rejected.

Yet, as time went on, it became increasingly evident that many municipalities could not afford independence. The independence of each of these small municipalities was affirmed by political leaders, and one community even carried the slogan, “Shawnee against the world,” regardless of how little it could afford such claims.

We have seen shrinkage in, for example, police protection, and increasingly fire departments are dependent on volunteers. While we deeply appreciate volunteers who make fire protection possible, they lack the money and support to purchase new technology that would help them be more effective.

One result is that during the past two decades, several municipalities have considered forming a Council of Governments.

Generally two or more municipalities consider coming together in these instances for police and fire protection. Inevitably, they face the questions, “Who is in charge? Who is going to make the final decision?” And the COG often falls apart.

Through the years there have been many proposals, formal and informal, for how to deal with the challenges of so many disparate Wyoming Valley municipalities. Some of these proposals have had merit and have been considered. Other ideas remained as backroom discussions among a few.

My vision is a for new city, a city with a new charter that creates for the major municipality a much more efficient and effective form of government than now is possible as it is spread into more than 20 independent parts.

The new city would have one mayor who would be the chief executive in charge of all of the municipal services.

At the same time, each of the 20 or so participating municipalities would be rid of the mayor and council members, city clerks and other expenses of city government.

They would be replaced by a council representative from that municipality who would have an office and staff to answer questions, and receive complaints and suggestions -- all of which the representative would carry to the council of representatives.

This full-time body would then comprise a body co-equal to the administration, just as we now have at the state and federal levels.

The mayor could propose, the council dispose, or vice versa, but the council’s main responsibility would be to write the laws that would govern the new major city.

The result would be a city government in which everyone in the valley had a voice, and would have a full range of services.

It would amount to a very substantial creation, but a much more efficient and effective government.

Among other things, a new city with a resulting large increase in population would have much greater clout in Harrisburg and Washington, which could ensure a substantial increase in the amount of state and federal aid for such things as public schools, economic development initiatives and even infrastructure support.

Everyone in this valley shares the same history, culture, present experiences and inescapably the same future.

On one hand, we have in our multiple governments a steadily deteriorating form of local government.

On the other, with such a proposed new city, we would have a much more modern government that fully serves everyone’s needs in the valley.

I know that this is an old song to most of you, but it hasn’t lost its validity.

It reverses the path we are following to at least enable us to be part of the changing America.

And once again, the choice is up to you.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Bigler is a professor emeritus of Wilkes University. His column appears on Sundays.





© 2007 Times Leader and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.timesleader.com

[bpg88]

New York could certainly look into this as well. They metro areas should at least form some kind of regional government with a regional tax sharing system.

[pj3000]

Interesting site on regionalism:

http://www.citistates.com/index.html

[phillyskyline]

I would love to see a blueprint for this idea - doesn't PA have the most counties of any state? Correct me if I am wrong.... I feel like we live in the dark ages withc such fragmented local governments.

For example, my town Huntingdon Valley doesnt have its own local government but is part of the Lower Moreland Township. Lower Moreland is part of Montgomery County. However, small parts of Huntingdon Valley belong to Southampton which belongs to Bucks County. This complicates matters for simple things like getting access to cable TV. It can be infuriating for residents w/ all this red tape.

[Evergrey]

No, Pennsylvania does not have the most counties of any state... in fact... PA's counties are rather large by eastern standards... and the county governments have little to do with the governmental fragmentation on the municipal level. Probably to most people's suprise... counties and municipalities are generally regarded on an equal level within the state... each offering a different set of services... since every inch of PA is incorporated into a municipality. The counties generally act as local agents of the state... seperated into 67 jurisdictions... though their role and power continues to evolve especially with the relatively new concept of the "Metropolitan Statistical Area".

Just a few states off the top of my head that have more counties than PA...

Ohio has 85... Georgia has... A LOT... and of course... Texas.

[ColDayMan]

^Ohio has 88, not 85.

[Evergrey]

^Ohio has 88, not 85.

sorry... i was thinking about good 'ole Wayne County... which is No. 85 :cheers:

[Wheelingman04]

PA does have some pretty big counties.