Forms of Georgia County Government

1
Forms of Georgia County Government
A Presentation for the State Senate Study
Committee on the Structure of DeKalb Government,
2006

• Carl Vinson Institute of Government
• The University of Georgia

2
Source Handbook for Georgia County
Commissioners, Carl Vinson Institute of Government
3
Source Handbook for Georgia County
Commissioners, Carl Vinson Institute of Government
4
Source Handbook for Georgia County
Commissioners, Carl Vinson Institute of Government
5
Source Handbook for Georgia County
Commissioners, Carl Vinson Institute of Government
6
Source Handbook for Georgia County
Commissioners, Carl Vinson Institute of Government
7
Forms of Georgia County Government
Source ACCG (Association County Commissioners of
Georgia) 2006. Prepared by the Carl Vinson
Institute of Government, Governmental Services
Division, August 2006.
8
(No Transcript)
9
Size of Georgias County Commissions
DeKalb has a total of 8 (7 commissioners plus 1
elected executive)
Source ACCG (Association County Commissioners of
Georgia) 2006. Prepared by the Carl Vinson
Institute of Government, Governmental Services
Division, August 2006
10
(No Transcript)
11
DeKalbs Structural History 1880s - 1980s

• 1886 - 5 member Board of Commissioners of Roads
  and Revenue
• 1896 - Repeal of 5 member board form, instituted
  Governance by a sole Ordinary
• 1902 - General Assembly Created 5 member Board
• 1904 - Act repealed by referendum, Board
  abolished
• 1906 - Sole Commissioner Form
• 1912 - Created 5 Member Board - elected by Grand
  Jury
• 1918 - Created 5 Member Board - by popular
  election
• 1953 - Referendum for proposed Board with Chair
  elected at large fails
• 1956 - Chair elected at large and Board
  instituted by General Assembly
• 1981 - Board of Commissioners and Chief Executive
  Officer form enacted

Source A Study of the Legal Structure of the
Office of Chief Elected Officer and the Board of
Commissioners of DeKalb County, Georgia. Carl
Vinson Institute of Government, October 1986
12
Elected Executive Form in other States

• While Georgia only has one true Elected
  Executive County Government this structure is
  employed in a number of other states.
• Alaska, Arkansas, Hawaii, Louisiana, Maryland,
  Tennessee, Texas, and Washington are some of the
  states where Elected Executive County Governments
  can be found.

13
Elected Executive Countieswith Comparable
Population
14
Elected Executive Counties with Comparable
African American Population
15
Elected Executive Counties with Similar
Population Density
16
Selected Comparison Elected Executive Counties
17
DeKalb County Incorporation

• John O'Looney, Ph.D.Senior Public Service
  AssociateCarl Vinson Institute of
  GovernmentUniversity of Georgia
• olooney_at_cviog.uga.edu

18
Outline of Report

• Fiscal Impacts
• Franchise Fees
• County Economic Impact
• Other Fiscal impacts
• Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations
• Non-Financial Impacts
• Legal Authority, Powers, and Liability
• Potential Legal Issues and Developments
• Governmental Coordination
• Scale of Representation and Citizen Interaction
• Possible Response to the Problem of Scale

19
Franchise Fees

• Original Purpose To allow cities to recoup some
  of the value of utility use of rights of way. In
  early 20th century only cities had the kind of
  densities that would support the development of
  utilities.
• General Principle Georgia law (and most states)
  allows municipalities, but not counties, to
  collect franchise fees.
• Exception In Georgia, both cities and counties
  can collect a franchise fee from cable utilities.
  
• Key Policy Impact Franchise fees provide the
  major financial incentive for consolidation
  and/or incorporation.
• Key Policy Controversy Most franchise fee
  revenue is derived from utilities that build this
  business expense into the rate base. Hence,
  residents of unincorporated areas contribute to
  franchise fees through payment of their utility
  bills.

20
Sources of Franchise Fees
21
Changes Since 1998

• Changes in the usage of cell phones vis a vis
  landline phones.
• A new method for calculating gas franchise fees.
• Previously assessed on gross receipts from
  sales of natural gas, excluding industrial
  customers.
• Now Generally based on needed capacity to
  deliver gas (i.e., Design Day Capacity Charge and
  the current franchise fee factor). The entire
  franchise fee is collected by the gas
  infrastructure provider not the natural gas
  vendor.
• Georgia Municipal Association negotiated a common
  agreement for cities that used historical
  franchise fees as a basis.
• DeKalb County (and new cities) do not have an
  historical recordHence, uncertainty.

22
Factors in Estimating Franchise Fees

• Franchise fee estimates are not commonly
  available from the utilities.
• Different communities have different needs for
  gas or electricity. (e.g. different climates,
  different levels of industrialization and
  commercializationsuggest different usages of
  electrical power).
• CVIOG Method 1) identify comparison cities
  (level of development/climate) 2) Establish avg.
  per capita fees. 3) Estimate fees for franchises
  whose sales are likely to be linked to
  population. 4) Estimate fees for franchises whose
  sales are likely to be linked to variations in
  property classes. 4) adjust for existing cable
  fees.

23
Per Capita Franchise Fee Estimate
Total Expected New Revenue 51.07 X 602,730
30,783,668
24
County Economic Impact

• An economic impact occurs when new monies come
  into a local economy.
• Communities that have a very high proportion of
  their property/population that is incorporated
  receive a larger share of the revenues that go
  into the franchise fee pool.
• Because DeKalb has a lower proportion of the
  population in cities 10 versus 40, it is a net
  exporter of franchise fees. With incorporation it
  will go from 10 to 100 and become a net
  importer of fee revenue.

25
Economic Impact

• Using the Georgia Economic Modeling System, we
  forecast economic output over a six year period
  beginning in 2006. The input to the model was
  25 million a year in new general administrative
  services expenditures.
• This model forecast approximately 10 million per
  year in new indirect or economic multiplier
  impacts.
• The total annual economic impact is approximately
  35 million (25 million direct and 10 million
  indirect).

26
Long-term and Equity Results

• Utility Companies could argue for an increase in
  the rate base so as to recoup new franchise fee
  costs.
• DeKalb County will go from being a county that
  benefits substantially less than a proportional
  share of franchise fee revenues to a county that
  collects substantially more than a proportional
  share of these revenues.

27
Other Fiscal Impacts

• Regulatory and Enforcement Fees none
• Grants minimal
• Taxation of Depository Financial Institutions
  city loss of potential future revenues
• Transition Costs and Benefits insignificant

28
Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations

• DeKalb County is unique in Georgia in that
  intergovernmental fiscal relations are governed
  by a local constitutional amendment rather than
  the Service Delivery Strategy Act.
• Georgia General Assembly defines an assessment
  that residents and property owners in the cities
  of DeKalb County will pay for the urban-type
  services that these cities may be receiving from
  DeKalb county.
• The existing local Constitutional amendment
  could potentially allow the state legislature to
  include the new City of DeKalb in any future
  local legislation specifying the special service
  district assessments.
• Service delivery and annexation coordination
  costs would tend to be stabilized and/or
  eliminated since the opportunities for service
  boundary changes would be minimized.

29
Non-Financial Impacts Legal Authority, Powers,
and Liability

• Major distinctions between cities and counties in
  terms of powers generally do not exist in Georgia
  law.
• Charter specific differences do exist.
• Incorporated DeKalb would have some minor
  advantages in terms of choosing city versus
  county liability rules as would be advantageous
  in the circumstances.

30
Potential Legal Issues and Developments

• Cobb County and the Association County
  Commissioners of Georgia have filed a petition
  with the Public Service Commission challenging
  the way in which franchise fees are included as
  part of the total rate base.
• Currently, the HOST specifies that 80 percent of
  the funds have to go to county homestead
  exemptions.  Were DeKalb County to be
  incorporated, what would be the relationship of a
  county that is both a county and a city
  government with regard to HOST? 
• For example, would the letter or spirit of HOST
  require that the county budget strictly separate
  countywide service expenditures (e.g., on courts
  and the sheriff) from expenditures on
  municipal-type services (e.g., police and fire)
  and require that the HOST exemption credit only
  apply to countywide services and not services
  that are municipal in nature?

31
Potential Legal Issues and Developments

• DeKalb is governed by a local constitutional
  amendment and related legislation that specifies
  the percentage of the special services districts
  ad valorem millage for which each city will be
  responsible.
• Were DeKalb County to be incorporated, there may
  need to be some determination of how
  incorporation might impact the relationship of
  the county part of the government with the
  city part.
• For example, would the constitutional amendment
  require that the new incorporated entity comprise
  a special services tax district as is the case
  with existing cities?

32
Governmental Coordination

• Incorporation has the impact of eliminating the
  ability of any city in the county from expanding
  its jurisdiction through annexation.
• Positive Eliminates uncertainty and costs of
  annexation. Improves potential for long-term
  planning due to the reduction of
  intergovernmental gamesmanship
• Negative Eliminates ability of cities to reach a
  desirable size and scope or achieve related
  economies of scale. Eliminates citizen choices
  with regard to jurisdictions and reduces their
  ability to be part of a smaller scale government.
  

33
Scale of Representation and Citizen Interaction
with Government

• Full County Incorporation changes the traditional
  pattern of municipal growth and stabilization.
  Traditionally, cities played a role in terms of
  keeping the scale of representation (i.e., the
  number of citizens represented by a single
  representative) and the scale of interaction
  (i.e., the distance that a citizen would need to
  travel to meet with government officials) fairly
  small.

34
The New Cities Movement

• Part of the motivation for the incorporation
  movements in Fulton and DeKalb counties is based
  on citizens desires for smaller scale and scope
  in the provision of services and representation.
  

35
A Possible Response to the Problem of Scale

• Carl Vinson Institute of Government has conducted
  extensive research on Unincorporated Towns and
  other alternatives to traditional cities.
• Purpose of these Alternatives to enable county
  governments to begin to address needs of local
  communities for self-determination, without
  having to undermine the essential sovereignty of
  county government.
• Implementing the unincorporated town concept in
  Georgia might require changes in Georgias laws
  depending on the nature of the powers and
  responsibilities that are devolved onto the town.

36
The end
37
Thank You for Your Attention

• Carl Vinson Institute of Government
• The University of Georgia