Simple meger or true reorganization?

Are we going to take advantage of what reorganization has to offer?

Have you noticed a difference in the way the Greenwood and White River Township (WRT) leaders speak of our current cooperative effort? Greenwood Mayor Charles Henderson consistently calls it a “merger”; while WRT Board Chair Mark Messick made it a point at a recent meeting to emphasize the correct term is “reorganization,” and this has much broader implications than a “simple” merger. Mr. Messick is right.

The recently formed committee will be guided by Indiana Code 36-1.5 Chapter 4: Reorganization by Referendum. This law defines what the final recommendation can contain. For example, it says that the boundaries of the “political subdivisions” can be adjusted. Nothing too surprising here, in fact, this is exactly the most fundamental change we all expect but, as you dig into the law a bit further the possibilities become more expansive and interesting. You can check the law for the entire list, the link is provided above, but here are some of the more interesting powers:

Establish a joint service area with another political subdivision
Today Greenwood, and in turn parts of WRT, received sewer service from Indianapolis and other parts of WRT get similar services from Bargersville, there is no need to change these arrangements. Beyond that, perhaps there are services that could better be provided by Johnson County. For example, do we need an independent purchasing department? Might we be able to work with the County to provide these services? I recently learned of a municipality that made significant savings on the purchase of copiers by purchasing under the County agreement rather than an independently negotiated price. What other opportunities are out there waiting for us? Let’s find out.

Transfer the functions of an office to another office
Nothing is harder to get rid of than an established political office. It is in the officeholder’s best interest to perpetuate its existence, sometimes long after its original intent has been fulfilled. The reorganization provides opportunities to carefully look at the structure of government and ensure that each office has a legitimate purpose that cannot be provided by another office, potentially saving taxpayers significant costs in the process. By extension, there is nothing that would prevent the study committee from recommending that services provided today by municipal employees, be transferred to one or more private providers. Every option to improve services and lower cost needs to be examined.

Change the name of the political subdivision or select a new name
The new entity does not have to be named Greenwood. Centerwood anyone? What about Green Grove? Not very original, I’ll admit. But, changing the name is permitted and should be considered as one way to bring greater unity to the reorganized entity.

Results of reorganization
IC 36-1.5-4-6 defines what happens when the reorganization is effective. Again, the impact of a reorganization are far broader than a merger. First, all of the participating political subdivisions, except the reorganized political subdivision, cease to exist. No more Greenwood (as it exists today), no more White River Township. These entities will “cease to exist.” It is also possible that all those currently holding political offices will be out of work. Sub-point (2) says “unless the plan of reorganization provides for the continuation of the term of office, the term of each of the elected offices of each of the reorganizing political subdivisions is terminated.” It is also possible for entire offices to be abolished. If the services are no longer required or are transferred to another office, the original office is eliminated. This is an opportunity to streamline government to a degree that is not generally possible without the broad provisions of the reorganization statute. The same applies to the executives, legislative bodies, and fiscal bodies of the reorganizing entities. For example, a professional city manager and staff could take over responsibilities from various appointed or elected officials, if there was a solid justification for such a change.

Finally, and this is going to be something that will need to be carefully examined during the next year, the property and liabilities of the reorganizing political subdivisions become the property and liabilities of the reorganized political subdivision. In other words, you can think of it as a marriage with everything held in joint custody. All assets and bills become the responsibility of the new entity. This may prove to be very beneficial for one party or the other or it could turn out to be rather neutral when viewed over a period of years.

It’s much too early to provide concrete answers of what must happen or what must be avoided. But, it is not too soon to be thinking about the broad spectrum of opporutnities that are avaiable to us. If we enter into this exercise looking only at how we can merge WRT with Greenwood, we will miss a great opportunity to improve the services, and lower the cost of those services, for all who will be affected by this reorganization.

No related posts.