Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Intergovernmental Cooperation for the Delivery of Services


Published on

This presentation served as the introduction to a 3 hour workshop on Intergovernmental Cooperation for the League of Wisconsin Municipalities. Local leaders from around the state attended the workshop and learned about 4 key elements to successful intergovernmental cooperation: Leadership, Analysis, Negotiation and Implementation. Other presentations from this workshop may be found here:

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Login to see the comments

Intergovernmental Cooperation for the Delivery of Services

  1. 1. Intergovernmental Cooperation for Service Delivery Bringing Local Governments Together to Serve League of Wisconsin Municipalities Conference October 15, 2014
  2. 2. Panelists •Henry Veleker, Administrator, City of Waupaca •David Varana, Corvus Insights •Matt Dregne, Stafford Rosenbaum •You…..
  3. 3. Program 1.Introduction to Cooperative Service Delivery (Gary Becker) 2.Leadership (Henry Veleker) 3.Analysis (David Varana) 4.Negotiating an Agreement (Matt Dregne) 5.Implementation (panelists and audience)
  4. 4. Local Government Institute •Wisconsin Towns Association •Wisconsin Counties Association •League of Wisconsin Municipalities •Urban Alliance
  5. 5. Local Government Institute Purpose: Collaborate with others to find solutions for the efficient delivery and funding of local government services consistent with the needs of our citizens.
  6. 6. Why Cooperate? •Service delivery can be more effective and lower cost than individual units providing the same service. •Bottom-up approach to regional issues requires cooperation – alternative is top-down approach. •Adopting a mindset of regional collaboration is linked to economic success and global competitiveness.
  7. 7. Legislative Authority Legislative authority for local cooperative action in Wisconsin can be found in these statutes: •66.0229 – Consolidation •66.0301 - Intergovernmental Cooperation (including joint action agencies and regional service delivery organizations) •66.0303 - Municipal Interstate Cooperation •66.0305 – Political Subdivision Revenue Sharing •66.0307 - Boundary Agreements (also addresses service delivery)
  8. 8. Legislative Authority •66.0813 – Provision of Utility Service Outside of Municipality •66.0823 – Joint Local Water Authorities •66.1105 – Multi-jurisdictional TIF Districts •33.21 – Public Inland Lake Protection Districts •200 – Metropolitan Sewerage Districts •91.86 – Agricultural Enterprise Areas •92.12 – Soil & Water Conservation
  9. 9. Legal Impediments •Uniformity Clause – prevents differential tax rates within same jurisdiction. •Municipal-County cooperation for road work prohibited.
  10. 10. Forms of Cooperation for Services •Contract –One jurisdiction enters into a contract to provide services to another jurisdiction. –Responsibility for provision of services to an area agreed to as part of a boundary agreement. •Joint Action/Consolidation –Multiple jurisdictions join together to form a regional service organization that they jointly control – e.g. sewerage district. –Two units of government become one
  11. 11. Cooperation in Practice LGI Findings: •Focus on the way services are delivered, not the number of local government units. •Cooperation is “in the genes” of local government – long history •Cooperation must be voluntary and organic – not mandated. One size does not fit all.
  12. 12. Lessons Learned •Cooperation can result in significant efficiencies over long-term, but not in short- term – not a quick fix. •Cooperative service delivery not always the best solution – depends upon context. Factors include: –Association with community identity –Geography: Scope and Limitations –Operating & Capital Costs –Ratio of Line Staff to Customers –Mandates
  13. 13. Lessons Learned Obstacles to cooperation include: •Turf •Competition for Revenue/Growth •Perceived Differences •Perceived Loss of Identity, Access, Reduced Control and Accountability, Threat to Employees
  14. 14. Lessons Learned Many obstacles can be overcome, but it takes nearly all of the following: •Demonstrate improved service •Clear fiscal benefit •Shared perception of need •Community support •Trust •Collaborative Leadership
  15. 15. Common Services •Public Safety – police, fire, EMT •Recycling •Library •Health •Landfills •Wastewater Treatment •Stormwater Management •Economic Development
  16. 16. Workshop Material Online Use this link to download material from today’s workshop:
  17. 17. LGI Resources • •Case Studies of Local Government Collaboration (agreements online) •Roadmap for Government Transformation •Lean Government Conferences •Upcoming Events
  18. 18. Gary Becker Executive Director Local Government Institute (608)831-1662