RE: PEL request for written input regarding our assessments

Transcription

1 From: Kathleen McQuaid Date: 4 July 2006 RE: PEL request for written input regarding our assessments After the July 5 meeting, I will be away on vacation for the next four weeks (July 12 thru Aug 2). As requested by the PEL, I want to provide my written input into the GSC deliberations. Below are the questions I examined these past seven months. Questions: 1. What explains the fiscal condition of CC? Is it a function of Government structure? 2. Given the rapid change in the role of county governments in Pennsylvania and nation-wide; diminishing inter-governmental funding; and mandates (both funded and unfunded); can the commission form of government function effectively in rural Clinton County where minimal economic or population growth is predicted? 3. Would a change in government structure significantly improve the governance of Clinton County?

2 McQuaid Comments 2 1. What explains the fiscal condition? Is it a function of Government structure? Politics : No one enjoys paying taxes. Public perception of a tax increase as unwarranted, or resulting from official mismanagement, fuels public reaction. No elected public official wants to raise taxes. It is perceived to be political suicide, with good reason. A simple partial explanation of the Clinton County property tax history could be that, because a tax increase was politically dangerous, the elected Commissioners consistently avoided increasing property taxes (12 years) then had to implement a hefty (36%) increase. This simply political explanation of county revenue policy raises concerns re: the conduct and quality of municipal management, leadership, and services. It is ironic that those very concerns led good government reformers in the early 20 th century to advocate that communities take the politics out of administration by adopting the Council/Manager form of government. Ironic because, just as the structure of the Commission Form of government enables politics by requiring the election of the commissioners; so too do the structures of both the Council/Executive and the Council/Manager forms of government by requiring election of Councils in all models, and of an Executive as well in that model. To the extent that the Clinton County property tax history is explained by politics, a change in the structure of county government accomplishes nothing.

3 McQuaid Comments 3 Qualified Officials: As a County of the 6th Class Clinton County is one of the smaller, more rural counties in the state. Yet Clinton County government today is a $20 million per year operation. While government is NOT a business, there are many business-like aspects to the effective and efficient operation of county government. In areas such as financial management, capital management, human resources, and information technology the public sector should and has employed many practices developed in the private sector. A 21 st century county official must be capable, and able to effectively lead our 21 st century county enterprise. Does the Commission structure of County government preclude the selection of qualified officials? No. It is incumbent upon the citizens of a county, as a responsible electorate, to establish the standards of qualification for their public officials by the votes they cast. Does the commission structure prevent effective management of county government? No. Although the fragmented structure created by the separately elected row officers poses serious challenges to effective management, mechanisms exist to facilitate coordination between departments. In Clinton County, the use of the budget as a financial management tool appears effective. Additionally, the elected row officers face the same voters as do the commissioners, providing an incentive for cooperation with the commissioners as well as effective administration within their respective departments. The commissioners have the authority to staff the government with qualified specialists and capable generalists, and to structure the administrative

4 McQuaid Comments 4 organization to capture efficiencies and economies. Again, facing the voters every four years provides a powerful incentive. Would the Council/Executive or Council/Manager structures of government be better able to assure the selection of qualified officials? No. The Council/Executive model employs elections to select both the council and the executive. No difference here. However, the executive appoints the heads of all departments. The voters are removed from the selection process. The department heads report to the executive, not the voters. Direct popular accountability of department heads is eliminated. The Council/Manager structure, the preferred model of the politics/administration separation proponents, does provide the framework for selection of the top administrative actor based singularly upon professional qualifications. It does not however assure that Council will apply objective hiring criteria, nor that they will allow the manager operational autonomy. Additionally, a Council (the only elected branch in this model) structured to serve as a part-time, low paid citizen council will be reliant upon the Manager for policy guidance, and have diminished capacity to effectively oversee government operations. Direct poplar accountability is reduced. To the extent that the Clinton County fiscal condition is attributable to the qualifications of elected officials, or their ability to effectively manage in this form of county government, a change in the structure of county government gains little and loses much..

5 McQuaid Comments 5 2. Can the current form of Clinton County government function effectively? Yes. Judging from the scholarly literature, the materials obtained by the GSC, the testimony presented to the GSC, the demographics of Clinton County, and my awareness of other county governments, it is my opinion that the current Commission Form of Clinton County government can be made to continue to function effectively for the people of Clinton County. The GSC obtained very little comparative data upon which to base a decision to change the form of county government. We know that the challenges that face this county are confronting most of the 66 other counties in the state. Citizens across the state, in both Home Rule and Commission run counties, face issues of rising property taxes, growing tax burdens, and deteriorating public services. All counties are effected by declines in inter-governmental funding, and continued federal and state mandates. All counties, whether Home Rule or Commission are under the same state legislative constraints. Has our county structure disadvantaged Clinton County and caused us to pay more for less? The GSC did request comparative tax burden data be developed for the GSC by the PEL. The data portrayed all 22 of the 6 th Class counties and the six home rule counties. The data, did reveal Clinton County to be among the highest tax burden counties in the sample when ranked by total tax burden for family (CC ranked third). However, three of the six Home Rule counties were among the top ten highest tax burden counties studied! County structure made no clear difference in tax burden.

6 McQuaid Comments 6 Of particular interest in this data set was what it revealed regarding the relationship between a county s level of tax burden and the year of the county s last real estate reassessment. With few exceptions, the more recent the county property tax reassessment, the lower the county resident s tax burden. My conclusion in reviewing this data is that the property tax increase and current tax burden in Clinton County more likely results from the outdated 1972 property tax base than from a problem in the current structure of Clinton County government. Could financial management be improved? Of course. Just as no structure of government is perfect, neither is any one administrative decision-making process. According to the information gathered by the GSC, among the actions already taken by the current Commissioners to improve financial management was obtaining the services of a financial advisor upon whose recommendations the county implemented a more appropriate accounting system, and developed a strategic plan that is used to guide budgeting decisions. These are among the best practices noted in financial management literature. I think Clinton County needs the services of a full-time chief financial officer to further enhance financial management. This can be done within the current structure of government. There is no need to change the form of county government to accomplish additional improvements in financial management.

7 McQuaid Comments 7 3 Would a change in government structure significantly improve the governance of Clinton County? There is an extensive scholarly literature on the subject of municipal and county government. With over 3,000 county governments in the US, repeated attempts have been made to objectively identify the best governmental structure and practices. To date, there is NO widely accepted consensus among scholars or practitioners as to which is the better form of county government. What is good for one county, fails in another. The particular context of the county and goals of the citizens must be central to any evaluation. As the Clinton County Government Study Commission we are charged to: Judge whether change could strengthen and make Clinton County government more clearly responsible or accountable to the people. In the current Commission structure we technically have a form of no executive government. The powers of the legislative branch and executive branch are merged in the three elected commissioners. The lack of a single, powerful actor to accomplish the executive function is seen by critics as a flaw of the commissioner model. They note the lack of checks and balances. What the critics do not mention is that in the commission model, somewhat similar to the basic workings of a parliamentary model, the people elect the three commissioners in an at-large (county-wide) election; the elected commissioners then proceed to implement the people s preferences as co-executives of the county government. In the non-separation of powers commission structure, the three very visible commissioners operate within a structure designed to facilitate the accomplishment of public tasks. The check on the commissioners is the popular vote and the limiting power

8 McQuaid Comments 8 of the division of functions across the other elected row officers. The high visibility afforded by having only three commissioners responsible for governmental decisions makes the commission structure of government the most directly accountable over all. Both the Council/Executive and Council/Manager government models are examples of applied checks and balances structures. They do establish the distinction between the legislative and the executive function. However, the structural separation of functions alone does not enhance either accountability or responsibility. Rather, they increase the possibilities for inter-branch conflict and gridlock (council/executive) or significantly reduce public accountability over the policy implementation function (Council/Manager). Typically, these models provide for part-time, low-paid, elected, five-to-seven member citizen councils with few support resources. This will reduce the ability of elected council members to closely monitor government and respond to voter concerns. Power shifts to the executive. Thus, the power of the people to influence their government through their directly elected legislators may well be reduced. The larger council size diffuses accountability across a larger group, possibly enabling the avoidance of responsibility (finger pointing). A change to either Council/Executive or Council/Manager forms of government is more likely to weaken the ability of the citizens of Clinton County to monitor their government actions, assign responsibility, or hold their officials accountable.

9 McQuaid Comments 9 As the Clinton County Government Study Commission we are also charged to: Judge whether Clinton County government operation could become more economical or efficient under a changed form of government After reviewing the materials collected by the GSC to evaluate the financial condition of the county, after interviewing scores of witnesses, I remain unaware of any documented instances of economic failures or major inefficiencies, per se, let alone any fiscal problems that can be demonstrated to be associated directly with the commission structure of county government. After seven months of study, countless hours of GSC meetings, and two public hearings, neither witness testimony, public input, nor my fellow GSC members have articulated a coherent list of problems that speak to a fatally flawed structure of county government. What the witnesses did say, and what the loud silence of the public says is: it isn t broken. I cannot identify any major economies or efficiencies that cannot be accomplished in the commission form of government that would be assured by change to either the Council/Executive or Council/Manager. There is no guarantee that Clinton County government would be more economical or efficient under a changed form of government. Conclusions: There are significant disagreements over the wisdom and/or efficacy of policy decisions made by the incumbent commissioners. Policy decisions are made by

10 McQuaid Comments 10 incumbents, not governmental structures. Policy conflict is inherent in all the forms of county government being considered. The mechanism to change incumbents exists in Clinton County: in the political arena at the polls. With any form of government, what you have is the known, what you would change to, although carefully planned and well thought out, always contains an element of the unexpected, a number of unanticipated outcomes. Before one contemplates putting this community through the ordeal and expense of proposing to change the structure of county government, one should have very compelling reasons, one should carefully weigh what one knows will be lost, what one can be reasonably certain to gain, and what consequences one is willing to inflict. I do not think the commission structure of government has failed Clinton County. I do think it is possible to improve upon the professionalism, financial and capital management, and public accessibility within the current structure of county government. The structure of Clinton County government is not the problem. Prepared for the GSC in July, 2006 by Kathleen McQuaid