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.

Local Government Collaboration Case Studies


Published on

This presentation provides an overview of the work of the Local Government Institute, lessons learned from recent studies, factors for success in intergovernmental cooperation for service delivery and a review of some case studies.

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

Local Government Collaboration Case Studies

  1. 1. Local Government Collaboration for Service Delivery Presented By: Gary W. Becker WAPA Conference June 13, 2013 B r i n g i n g L o c a l G o v e r n m e n t s T o g e t h e r t o S e r v e
  2. 2. Local Government Institute • Wisconsin Towns Association • Wisconsin Counties Association • League of Wisconsin Municipalities • Urban Alliance
  3. 3. 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.
  4. 4. Why Collaboration? • Bottom-up approach to regional issues requires collaboration – alternative is top-down approach • Collaborative approach is generally more effective and lower cost than individual units each addressing an issue on their own. • Adopting a mindset of regional collaboration is linked to economic success and global competitiveness
  5. 5. Collaboration in Practice LGI Findings: • Collaboration is “in the genes” of local government – long history • Collaborations must be voluntary and organic – not mandated. One size does not fit all. • Focus on the way services are delivered, not the number of local government units.
  6. 6. Lessons Learned – General Collaboration • Collaboration can result in significant efficiencies over long-term, but not in short-term – not a quick fix • Not all services are suitable for collaboration. Factors include: – Association with community identity – Geography: Scope and Limitations – Operating & Capital Costs – Ratio of Line Staff to Customers – Mandates
  7. 7. Lessons Learned – General Collaboration Obstacles to collaboration include: • Turf • Competition for Revenue/Growth • Perceived Differences • Perceived Loss of Identity, Access, Reduced Control and Accountability, Threat to Employees
  8. 8. Lessons Learned – General Collaboration 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
  9. 9. Legislative Authority Legislative authority for local government collaborative 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)
  10. 10. 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
  11. 11. Case Studies
  12. 12. Case Studies • Formal Collaboration Much More Prevalent in Urban Areas • Collaboration in Rural Areas Most Often at County Level
  13. 13. Case Studies DeForest/Windsor Cooperative Plan • 66.037 Cooperative Boundary Agreement • Years of Conflict – Primarily Over Development • Irregular Boundaries Created Problems – Community Identity, Planning, Service Delivery, and Budgeting • Also History of Working Together – Community/Senior Center, Joint Municipal Court, Fire/Police Protection – These Agreements Became Touchstones for Building Trust • Pro-development Forces Formed DAWN – To Bring Rationality to Development Process for Area
  14. 14. Case Studies • DAWN Pressured Both Jurisdictions to Come to a Resolution • 2004 Annexation Settlement Agreement Committed The Jurisdictions to Develop A Cooperative Boundary Agreement • Six Years to Reach Agreement on A Plan – Approved by DOA in Oct 2010 • In Addition to Boundaries & Land Use, Boundary Agreement Established a Joint Planning Mechanism, Common Police Protection Standards and Agreement on the Provision of Shared Services
  15. 15. Case Studies Benefits: • Greater political stability regarding land use decisions and new development • Increased private investment in area – greater tax revenue and increased funding for school • Expand intergovernmental agreements around key services • Greater protection of water quality through a coordinated approach to stormwater management
  16. 16. Case Studies Forums: Intergovernmental Cooperation • Brown County – Municipal Initiatives Committee • Racine County – Heads of Government Group (HOG) • Green Lake County • Western Wisconsin Intergovernmental Collaborative – 99 LUGs in St. Croix, Polk and Pierce Counties • Inter-county Coordinating Committee – Sauk, Columbia, Jefferson, Dodge, Green Lake & Marquette Counties • Good Neighbor Committee – Black Earth Creek Watershed Western Dane County
  17. 17. LGI Resources • • Case Studies of Local Government Collaboration • Training for Local Elected Officials In WI • Roadmap for Government Transformation • Lean Government Conference • Regional Collaboration Initiative • Upcoming Events
  18. 18. Gary Becker Executive Director Local Government Institute (608)831-1662