City-county consolidation is an administrative reform prescribed to improve the fiscal health of local governments in the United States. However, city-county mergers are rare political events, and scholarship has presented mixed findings regarding the effectiveness of the reform as a fiscal tool. In the history of the nation, only around 40 cities and counties have merged, and this relatively small number imposes limitations on research into the phenomenon (Jespon, 2008). In this paper, we examine the effectiveness of consolidation in improving the fiscal health of local governments using a case study analysis, examining pre- and post-measures of fiscal health in Augusta, Georgia, in the period from 1990–2002. These measures were based on work by Rivenbark, Roenigk, and Allison (2010), Smith and Afonso (2016), and Kelly and Adhikari (2012). The findings from this study are of interest to public administrators regarding the effectiveness of city-county consolidation as a fiscal tool.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CampbellR. W., GillespieW., & DurningD. (2004). Financial crisis, racial accommodation, and the consolidation of Augusta and Richmond, Georgia. In LelandS. M. & ThurmaierK. (Eds.), Case studies of city-county consolidation: Reshaping the local government landscape (pp. 193–222). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
2.
CampbellR. W., & SeldenS. C. (2000). Does city-county consolidation save money? The unification of Athens-Clarke County suggests it might. Public Policy Research Series, 1(2), 1–2.
3.
CarrJ., BaeS., & LuW. (2006). City-county government and promises of economic development: A tale of two cities. State and Local Government Review, 38(3), 131–141.
4.
CarrJ. & FeiockR. C. (2004). City-county consolidation and its alternatives: Reshaping the local government landscape. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
5.
DurningD. (1995). The effects of city-county government consolidation: The perspectives of united government employees in Athens-Clarke County, Georgia. Public Administration Quarterly, 272–298.
Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). (1999). GASB statement No. 34. Basic financial statements and management's discussion and analysis-for state and local governments. Norwalk, CT: Author.
9.
HawkinsB. W., WardK. J., & BeckerM. P. (1991). Governmental consolidation as a strategy for metropolitan development. Public Administration Quarterly, 253–267.
10.
HeimC. (2006). Border wars: Tax revenue, annexation and urban growth in Phoenix. Amherst, MA: Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts.
JepsonE. J.Jr. (2008). City-county consolidation: Does it lead to better planning?Planning, Practice & Research, 23(1), 147–162.
13.
KellyJ. M., & AdhikariS. (2012). Indicators of financial condition in pre- and post-merger Louisville. Journal of Urban Affairs, 35(5), 553–567.
14.
LelandS., & ThurmaierK. (2004). Case studies of city-county consolidation: Reshaping the local government landscape. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
15.
LelandS., & ThurmaierK. (2005). When efficiency is unbelievable: Normative lessons from 30 years of city-county consolidations. Public Administration Review, 65(4), 475–489.
16.
LeRouxK., & CarrJ. B. (2007). Explaining local government cooperation on public works: Evidence from Michigan. Public Works Management & Policy, 12(1), 344–358.
17.
LoweryD., & LyonsW. (1989). The impact of jurisdictional boundaries: An individual-level test of the Tiebout model. Journal of Politics, 51, 73–97.
18.
LoweryD., LyonsW., & DeHoogR. H. (1992). The politics of dissatisfaction: Citizens, services, and urban institutions. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
19.
MurphyK. (2012). Reshaping county government: A look at city-county consolidation. National Association of Counties, 7–8.
OsborneD., & GaeblerT. (1993). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
22.
OrfieldM. (1997). Metropolitics: A regional agenda for community and stability. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
23.
RivenbarkW. C., RoenigkD. J., & AllisonG. S. (2010). Conceptualizing financial condition in local government. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 22(2), 149.
24.
RuskD. (1993). Cities without suburbs. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.
SavitchH. V. (2011). Analysis and comment: Task force on merger 2.0. Report submitted to Darryl T. Owens, Representative House District, 42.
27.
SavitchH. V., & VogelR. K. (2004). Suburbs without a city: Power and city-county consolidation. Urban Affairs Review, 39(6), 758–790.
28.
SavitchH. V., VogelR. K., & YeL. (2009). Beyond the rhetoric: Lessons from Louisville's consolidation. The American Review of Public Administration, 40(1), 3–28.
29.
SmirnovaO., & IngallsG. (2008). Annexation, incorporation and the health of central cities in North and South Carolina. North Carolina Geographer, 16, 5–23.
30.
SmithR. M., & AfonsoW. B. (2016). Fiscal impact of annexation methodology on municipal finances in North Carolina. Growth and Change, 47(4), 664–681.
31.
StephensG. R, & WikstromN. (2000). Metropolitan government and governance: New perspectives, empirical analysis, and the future. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
32.
WangX., DennisL., & TuY. S. (2007). Measuring financial condition: A study of U.S. states. Public Budgeting & Finance, 27(2), 1–21.
33.
ZimmermanJ. F. (1973). Meeting service needs through intergovernmental agreements. Municipal Yearbook, 79–88. Washington D.C.: International City Management Association.
