One city, three communities

The Reorganization Committee has a great chance to try something new. The merged city that is being studied will not have just two distinct areas, rural and urban, but three. One community is the existing City of Greenwood, which is accustomed to full service and a full set of regulations, let’s call it “Greenwood East.” Then there are the urban, but unincorporated areas of White River Township, or a community we could call “Greenwood West.” This area is accustomed to a lower level of service and greater freedom in how they use their property. Finally, there is “Greenwood Farms” a community that consists of those areas that have already, tentatively, been already identified as rural, and are proposed to receive a different level of taxation and service.

The Reorganization Committee should consider how they can meet the needs of the citizens and keep costs low through creative service provision. This list of ideas is not comprehensive nor definitive, but intended to provoke thought on some alternative ways to meet the needs of the city. For example, Greenwood East would continue to be served by the Greenwood Police Department. Greenwood West and Greenwood Farms could continue to be served by the Johnson County Sheriff’s department, which the committee recently noted they had heard nothing but good reports about their responsiveness. Of course, this would not come free, because Greenwood West and Greenwood Farms would now be part of the city, the County may have to take on additional officers and would have to be reimbursed by the city, perhaps at a profit to the County. But, it is reasonable to expect this would cost less than bringing the number of Greenwood Police officers in the area up to the number now patrolling Greenwood East.

Now let’s look at another scenario, snow removal. The City of Greenwood can currently services its customer base, but serving all of White River Township will severely challenge the current capacity. It appears the merger committee currently plans on hiring more people and buying more plows to meet the expanded need of Greenwood West. Let me propose and alternative. While few have been disappointed with the service by the County, we might better be served by a small army of private contractors who could service the various neighborhoods of WRT. There are lawn service and other entrepreneurial companies in the area that have or would be willing to invest in the equipment needed to clear the streets of Greenwood West. What would happen if we contract with these companies for snow removal? It would have a number of advantages: First, it would provide year-round employment for business owners who now are largely seasonal. Second, it would avoid the cost of hiring more city employees and purchasing more capital equipment. Third, the residents would get a higher level of service than they now experience. Finally, depending on the contract, we might only have to pay for the times they actually remove snow. Some years, they will make a great deal of money, for a great deal of work. In other years the snow and the work may be a bit sparse. (Yes, there may be situations where heavier equipment than a push blade will be required, but that just means that the contracting base needs to be expanded to those with the equipment needed.)

What about snow and Greenwood Farms? Again, we can call on the County. This has already been proposed by the Reorganization Committee. Intergovernmental agreements are a key component in keeping costs low and should be considered in as many areas as possible.

Are Greenwood and White River Township, identical? Of course not, so why should it be assumed that all the ordinances of Greenwood would automatically apply to the residents of Greenwood West? Why not determine which, ordinance, rule, or law really needs to be applied to Greenwood West? Why not require the new City Council to review all laws, over a three-year period to decide whether a given ordinance should apply to Greenwood West, while leaving the current law in place in the interim? Why paint with such a broad bush, and before there is full representation of the people of White River Township?

State law allows broad discretion to the Reorganization Committee to apply innovative approaches to the reorganization, but they have to be willing to look toward Chairman of the Committee, Pat Sherman, the Greenwood Common Council and White River Township Board for leadership and support.

No related posts.