CONSOLIDATION STUDY REPORT
____________
BY
____________
Wyandotte County/Kansas City
Consolidation Study Commission
Commissioners:
Rev. Robert L. Baynham, Chairman
Gary D. Grable, Vice-Chairman
Dr. Thomas R. Burke, Member
Aileen C. Eidson, Member
Richard A. Ruiz, Member
____________
January 13, 1997
Consolidation Study Report
Table of ContentsRecommendation Summary ..... xvi
CHAPTER 1. The Consolidation Study Process ..... xix
A. Consolidation Rationale ..... xix
B. History of Regional Consolidation Attempts ..... xx
C. Approach of Consolidation Study Commission ..... xxi
CHAPTER 2. Issues of Concern In Consolidation Effects ..... xxiv
A. Representation ..... xxiv
B. Finance and Budgeting ..... xxvii
C. Personnel ..... xxx
D. Community Growth And Development ..... xxxiii
E. Community Service and Quality of Life ..... xxxv
CHAPTER 3. Consolidation Study Recommendations ..... xxxix
A Unified And Simplified Structure ..... xxxix
Legislative Branch ..... xxxix
Executive Branch ..... xl
Judicial Branch ..... xli
More Responsive to the People ..... xli
Checks And Balances ..... xlii
Ethics Commission ..... xlii
Citizen Oversight ..... xliii
Retained Elected Officials ..... xliii
Nonretained Elected Officials ..... xliv
Retained Appointed Officials ..... xliv
Nonretained Appointed Officials ..... xlv
Effective and Efficient Government ..... xlv
Standing Committees ..... xlv
Cost Savings ..... xlvi
Employment Safeguards ..... xlvi
Managed Transition ..... xlvii
Conclusion ..... xlviii
Ballot Question ..... xlviii
Recommendation Summary
We recommend a Unified Government with Legislative, Executive and Judicial Branches that interact in a checks and balances system to provide a responsive, representative, efficient government that carries the County into the next century and the new millennium. []
I.
Legislative Branch
A.
Ten Commissioners:
1.
Eight nominated and elected in new districts with boundaries based on population.
2.
Two Commissioners elected at-large and nominated from newly created districts: north & south.
3.
Elections:
a)
nonpartisan.
b)
held in April.
c)
four year staggered terms of office - first election determines terms of office - two or four years.
4.
Compensation:
a)
in-district commissioners will receive $1000 per month
b)
at-large commissioners will receive $1200 per month due to extra duties and committee assignments.
c)
all receive reimbursement for car expenses, paid medical and dental insurance.
d)
all may participate in life insurance at own expense.
5.
Duties:
a)
approve codes, ordinances and budgets.
b)
make policies affecting the functioning of the government.
c)
serve as Mayor Pro Tem.
d)
adopt a Code of Ethics.
II.
Executive Branch
A.
Chief Executive/Mayor
1.
Elected at-large.
2.
Four year term of office.
3.
Compensation:
a)
at current rate with benefits of Kansas City, KS Mayor.
b)
use of a government car.
4.
Duties:
a)
presides over the Unified Board of Commissioners
b)
has veto power which can be overridden by 2/3 majority of Board.
c)
breaks ties by casting a deciding vote.
d)
appoints and removes County Administrator with consent of Board.
B.
Retained Officials
1.
Elected
a)
Sheriff - chief law enforcement officer, head of juvenile detention center, in nonpartisan elections.
b)
District Attorney - as current duties, partisan election.
c)
Register of Deeds - as current duties, nonpartisan election.
2.
Appointed
a)
Legislative Auditor (currently County Auditor) - performance and financial auditing.
b)
routine financial auditing done by Chief Financial Auditor on staff of County Administrator.
C.
Elected positions' duties will become appointed or assimilated
1.
County Clerk to be Unified Clerk.
2.
County Treasurer to be Unified Treasurer.
3.
County Surveyor - assimilated into Administration.
4.
Public Administrator - assimilated into Judicial.
D.
County Administrator
1.
Appointed by Chief Executive/Mayor with consent of Unified Board of Commissioners.
2.
Reviewed by Board annually.
3.
Reports to Chief Executive/Mayor.
4.
Selects and supervises key division heads.
5.
Executes policies developed by Unified Board.
6.
Uses activity based budgeting and accounting.
7.
Uses attrition to reduce employee numbers during transition period.
III.
Judicial Branch
A.
Municipal courts are part of the Unified Government.
B.
District Court Judges are elected in partisan elections.
C.
The elected office of Public Administrator is eliminated.
D.
District Court Judges appoint the Legislative Auditor.
E.
District Court Judges appoint an Ethics Commission.
IV.
Unified Government Integrity
A.
Checks and Balances
1.
All branches have elected officers.
2.
Consent to County Administrator resides in Legislative branch.
3.
A legislative auditor is appointed by the judicial branch.
B.
Ethics Commission
1.
Administers Code of Ethics adopted by Unified Board.
a)
all elected officials, applicable appointed board and commission members and committee members are subject to Code.
b)
Commission can censure violators.
2.
Serve a single, full four-year term of office.
3.
Can recommend Code improvements to Unified Board
4.
Recommends sanctions in cases of violation of Code
a)
subpoena power.
b)
can swear witnesses.
C.
Managed Transition
1.
An interim period - April 1, 1997 to October 1, 1997
2.
Joint Transition Committee - A transition team
a)
Kansas City, KS City Administrator and Wyandotte County Auditor will co-chair Committee.
b)
chief financial officers of both City and County, City Attorney, County Counselor, and other members as required will constitute the Committee.
c)
duties:
(1)
establish procedures for transfer of authority.
(2)
recommend priorities for policy formulation.
(3)
set a date for functional consolidation.
3.
Transfer of Authority.
a)
upon swearing in new consolidated government will assume existing authority of City ordinances and County resolutions.
b)
six permanent appointed committees recommend policy concerning community life.
D.
A study of consolidation issues concerning the BPU and the Unified Board will be made by a joint committee.
Chapter 1. The Consolidation Study Process
A. Consolidation Rationale
The leading national cause of movements toward city-county consolidation is the fiscal stress that local governments have been experiencing since the early 1990's. (Blodgett, 1995). As the federal government continues to devolve its responsibilities down to states and localities, local governments are faced with options of increasing revenues, cutting services, becoming more efficient, or some combination of the three. Since most citizens do not wish for a tax increase and are unwilling to tolerate a cut in the services they receive, efficiency seems to be the most popular path for approaching this dilemma (DeWitt, 1995). At an increasing rate, city-county consolidation appears to public officials and political entrepreneurs as a plausible solution toward efficient governance; the question then becomes how to explain whether or not a referendum on the issue of consolidation will succeed.
There are several reasons why a grassroots effort was formed in the case of Wyandotte County. These include geography of the area, a need for improved service provision, high taxes, population loss, decline of rooftops and a need for greater accountability of local government officials (See Appendix A for a document presented to the commission about the quality of life in KCK/Wyandotte County).
Geographic Feasibility
Wyandotte County is rather small and compact. This is an advantage because only three other municipalities (Edwardsville, Bonner Springs, and part of Lake Quvira) exist in Wyandotte County besides Kansas City, Kansas. These three cities only make-up about 6 percent of the population in Wyandotte County and could not override Kansas City Kansas if the issue were to come to referendum. This means that over 90 percent of the county's population and geographic area be within the city limits, thus there are unique opportunities for consolidation of services between the city and county which would not require participation by either Edwardsville or Bonner Springs unless those communities felt it was in their best interest to participate in consolidation efforts. The only unincorporated area to be incorporated is the 2.7 square miles which is the Loring area (DeWitt, 1995).
Better Service Provision That Costs Less
The state of Kansas has more than 3,892 governmental entities. Only four other states have more-California, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and Texas. This is an incredible number of governments per citizen if you take into account that Kansas has a much smaller population than any of the other four states. Wyandotte county alone has eighteen governments and they are geographically the smallest county in the state.
One of the goals of consolidation is to avoid costly duplication of services and to achieve economies of scale wherever possible to ensure that services are delivered as efficiently and effectively as possible. Service duplication may occur in street maintenance and bridge maintenance, park maintenance, and recreation opportunities, administrative services such as planning, zoning activities, building inspections, purchasing services and economic development (Taskforce, 1995).
B. History of Regional Consolidation [] Attempts
1968—1970:
Although Kansas City is itself a product of the consolidation of towns in the 1880s, no attempt to structurally consolidate the city with the county occurred until 1968. In 1968 the Kansas House of Representatives (K.S.A. 19-2670-74) mandated that a commission be formed to study the possibility of consolidating the city and county governments. The commission proposed four recommendations, including a recommendation for structural consolidation. Consolidation efforts did not receive enough public support at that time and the Commission was not authorized to put the issue of consolidation on the ballot.
1987—1988:
Wyandotte County Commissioners formed a study group on the issue of city-county consolidation to address concerns of fragmentation and duplication in the local governments. A six-person commission contracted with Scott Gard Associates, a consulting firm, to produce a comprehensive study on consolidation and its usefulness to Kansas City and Wyandotte County. Again, however, any results or recommendations of the study were not addressed, mainly because the commission did not have authority beyond developing the study.
1994—1995:
A Citizens' Task Force interested in the reduction of government cost and improvement of government services was initiated by private citizens early in 1994. Chartered and funded by both city and county governments, the CTF analyzed issues and alternatives concerning consolidation. The task force recommended that the city and county be structurally consolidated and proposed a framework, suggesting structural changes to the types and numbers of officials and offices. No direct action was taken on these recommendations; the task force also did not have the sanction to pursue the question of consolidation beyond its recommendations.
1996:
Senate Bill 464, signed on February 19, 1996 by Governor Bill Graves, mandated the creation of the Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas Consolidation Study Commission (CSC) and authorized Gov. Graves to appoint five members []. Originally, these appointments were to be ratified by the people during the 1996 Republican primary. The primary was not held and the appointments of Governor Graves were accepted by default. Beginning May 15, 1996, the Consolidation Study Commission held open meetings, citizen forums, and working sessions addressing the issues and alternatives related to the question of city-county consolidation in Wyandotte County, Kansas. Senate Bill 464 charged the Consolidation Study Commission to create a recommendation favoring or rejecting consolidation by January 13, 1997. If not rejected by the state Legislature by February 12, 1997, the recommendation of the Consolidation Study Commission will be voted on by the citizens of Wyandotte County on April 1, 1997.
C. Approach of Consolidation Study Commission []
The Consolidation Study Commission convened on May 15, 1996. With the guidance of an Executive Director and assistance from research and staff support, the Consolidation Study Commission began to consider a means of addressing the complex question of city-county consolidation. Input from citizens was critical, as was the expertise and experience of government officials and related professionals. The Consolidation Study Commission determined that forming the recommendation should proceed in stages. Given the time constraints imposed by Bill 464, the Consolidation Stud y Commission adopted a six-stage process for evaluating issues and alternatives regarding the question of consolidation:
Phase I: May 15—June 30 1996
Purpose: Gathering information relevant to the study of consolidation.
Method: The approach taken by the Consolidation Study Commission was to hear and collect firsthand accounts of city and county government functions, offices, organizational structures, budgets, personnel, etc. Officials from local government departments informed the Consolidation Study Commission of their duties, responsibilities, and functions.
Phase II: July 1—August 15
Purpose: Developing broad issues based on Phase I information.
Method: The Consolidation Study Commission discussed issues involved with the consideration of consolidation. Subject matter experts, guest speakers, community groups and private citizens presented various issues.
Phase III: August 15—September 30
Purpose: Analyzing existing city-county, consolidated governments in conjunction with information and issues developed in Phases I and II.
Method: The Consolidation Study Commission held working sessions, listened to subject matter specialists, and reviewed existing studies on city-county consolidation.
Phase IV: October 4—October 31 1996
Purpose: Developing Consolidation Study Commission recommendation.
Method: This phase employed working sessions of the Consolidation Study Commission which were open to the public. The Consolidation Study Commission synthesized the information gathered from Phases I, II, and III and formulated tentative recommendations for consideration of the public during the next phase.
Phase V: November 1—November 30 1996
Purpose: Publish and refine first draft recommendations.
Method: The Consolidation Study Commission conducted weekly public hearings. At these meetings, the public was invited to examine the recommendations and pose questions to the Consolidation Study Commission members regarding their decisions.
Phase VI: December 1, 1996—January 13 1997
Purpose: Finalizing the Consolidation Study Commission recommendations.
Method: Commission working sessions were used to examined drafts and alterations of the recommendation and study to be presented to the Kansas State Legislature on January 13, 1997.
This approach to the question of consolidation in Wyandotte County was comprehensive. Thirty-five sessions open to the public were held from Gov. Graves installation of Commission members through the presentation of the recommendations of the Consolidation Study Commission to the Legislature. The Consolidation Study Commission members spent more than five hundred hours working on the study and this included listening to citizens, officials, and others over eight month period. Fact-finding reports, information on other cases of government consolidation, and presentations by city and county officials provided a solid basis of information on which the Consolidation Study Commission could base its recommendation. After consideration of the issues important to the community and the government, sifting through volumes of information, and carefully weighing the alternatives, the proposal and study was presented to the Legislature and the people in 1997.
Chapter 2. Issues Of Concern In Consolidation Efforts
The Commission examined the current systems in Kansas City, Kansas and Wyandotte County in great detail. The Commissioners also considered the community's needs and concerns regarding the direction of government in the area. After Phase I, the Consolidation Study Commission established five broad issues for consideration as it created its recommendation for consolidated government. In its extensive study, the Consolidation Study Commission reviewed issues of representation, community growth, community service and quality of life, personnel, and finance and budgeting. All of these elements affecting the community and the government(s) were considered crucial to property understanding what would be best for the people of Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas.
A. Representation
Wyandotte County citizens represent a variety of ethnic and racial groups. Within those groups a mix of economic and social groupings occurs. Each group contributes to the variegated culture that makes the County unique. These groups desire representation in the governing process. Retaining or improving the representative nature of the elected body was one critical issue confronting the Commission. Whether and how the people of a community are represented is vital to government structures and processes. The Consolidation Study Commission weighed many alternatives for best selecting representatives and considered many possible criteria and rules for these representatives. This broad issue has a number of smaller components that the Consolidation Study Commission addressed:
Method of Organizing Government
The unified government would be organized as a democratic system with separation of powers among the three branches. S.B. 464 listed (1) no action, (2) partial (functional) consolidation, and (3) structural consolidation as alternative propositions for organizing government in Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas in the future. The Senate bill exempted Bonner Springs, Edwardsville, and the northern tip of Lake Quivira from complete inclusion in the new government. All residents of the county were to be given some representation. If not rejected by the State Legislature, the proposal will be ratified or rejected by the people in a public vote.
Voting Districts: The decision to determine eight new voting and representative districts was made by the Consolidation Commission. To determine where the district lines were to be drawn options were provided. Those facts were presented to the public for review and comments and presented to the commission for a decision on which configuration would provide the best representation for the new consolidated government.
The Executive Director was directed by the Commission at the Commission meeting on October 21, 1996 to have the County Surveyor and the Information and Research Analyst of the City of Kansas City where the census data resides lay out several options for redistricting. The Executive Director gave broad guidance for outlining the districts to be achieved to the extent possible:
1.
Traditional neighborhoods kept within one district.
2.
Encompass each school district within one district.
3.
Population in each district would be nearly equal.
4.
Adheres to the two percent requirements for City Council districts.
5.
Districts would reflect ethnic makeup.
6.
Districts would provide for equal representation under the law.
Six alternative districting options were mapped and presented at the public meeting held on November 19 and 21, 1996. The public had an opportunity to comment. The Commission made a decision at the Commission Meeting on November 27, 1996 to accept Alternative Six that provided for eight districts of equal population size and two districts made of the four northern and four southern districts, each of the equal population districts.
Election of Officers
Frequent elections are crucial to the representation of the people. The Consolidation Study Commission had to consider three essential elements to an election in determining what type of elections were best for Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas.
Type of election: partisan/nonpartisan
The Consolidation Study Commission considered both partisan or nonpartisan elections and the benefits of each alternative. Both Wyandotte County and Kansas City, Kansas currently conduct partisan elections for its offices. There are benefits to each type of election. The Consolidation Study Commission judged the impact each type of election had on voter turnout as well as costs and timing of these elections.
Type of election: districts/at-large/mixed
The geographic area which officials represent was another important element to this decision. The Consolidation Study Commission looked at the implications of both elections by smaller districts within the county and elections from the entire county. The Consolidation Study Commission examined the potential campaign cost to the candidates in either type of election and the possible attitudes and interests of a district-level official versus an at-large official. The Commission also considered the benefits of a mixed system using both districts and at-large seats to compose the governing body.
Number of officials
A final aspect of the elections the Consolidation Study Commission examined was the appropriate number of elected officers the new government should have. The Consolidation Study Commission weighed the alternatives while looking at other cases of consolidation and the current structure of Kansas City, Kansas and Wyandotte County elections. The Commissioners also reviewed the potential compensation for these representatives, and kept in mind the importance of quality representation for the citizens of Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas.
Types of Officers
After analyzing the possible types of elections and number of representatives, the Consolidation Study Commission then had to examine the various potential institutional structures and posts used to organize the Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas government of the future. The Consolidation Study Commission found that the general method of organizing government should be through a unified government with separation of powers. They discussed what types of officers there would be in the legislative and executive branches and how these branches of government interact. The court system was excluded from the study and was mentioned as remaining as it now stands.
Alternatives for the interaction of executive and the legislative branches vary. The Consolidation Study Commission considered a number of these alternatives. A few of the more prevalent included: a Mayor-Administrator-Council format, where the strong Mayor and/or Administrator operate the day-to-day activities; a Commission format, where the executive is often drawn from the legislative body or the Commission rules jointly on executive matters. The structure of these two branches, including the number of officers and their relative powers, was an extremely important decision for the Consolidation Study Commission to consider. Finally, the Consolidation Study Commission addressed those officers whose duties, not actual offices or elected posts, are mandated by the Kansas State Constitution—the County Clerk, Sheriff, Register of Deeds, District Attorney, Treasurer, and County Surveyor.
Requirements and Responsibilities for the Officers
The Consolidation Study Commission examined some guidelines for the representatives. The Consolidation Study Commission relied on the general duties of elected representatives in the two current governments. Age and Residency requirements were discussed for various offices. The issue of part-time versus full-time positions weighed heavily on the Commission. It also examined the officers' compensation for their work. The Consolidation Study Commission discussed the different responsibilities and requirements for the different officers, attempting to balance responsibilities of the different officers with compensation. The executive's duties and responsibilities would not be the same as the legislature's. Finally, the Consolidation Study Commission considered the implications for including certain committees in the unified government. These committees would require the participation of these officers beyond normal legislative decision duties. However, the Consolidation Study Commission felt strongly that certain committees be included in the recommendation, particularly an ethics committee and a set of standing committees for oversight of government policies and actions.
Terms: succession/term limits/termination/election recall
After considering what was required of officers, the Consolidation Study Commission addressed the important issues affecting representation and the terms which Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas representatives would hold. All of these have implications for how the people are represented. The rules and procedures for succession, termination, and election recall used by the Kansas City, Kansas and Wyandotte County governments were considered as models for a unified government. However, added emphasis was placed on the idea of term limits. The Consolidation Study Commission examined the trend toward limited terms for public officers.
Incumbency Question during Transition
A final part of the issue of representation considered by the Consolidation Study Commission was how to address those officers whose terms began before consolidation but would last beyond the date(s) set for elections for officers of the unified government. The Consolidation Study Commission examined many alternatives, including staggering elections in the new government to accommodate these few officers. The difficulties of such a decision, as well as all of the other issues considered, were clear to the Commission. However, based on other cases of consolidation and the particular elements unique to the Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas case, the Consolidation Study Commission analyzed the possible alternatives with full consideration of the rights of the elected officers and citizens and the best interests of the community.
Summary
The issue of representation is critical in designing a democratic government. The Consolidation Study Commission thoroughly examined the many components a representative democracy in its study. By carefully considering the general method of organizing government, the types of elections, the types of officers, and the many requirements, responsibilities and procedures associated with a representative system of government, the Consolidation Study Commission began to develop, with the input of the citizens of Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas and current public officers, a clear picture of what the issue of representation means to the people of the community as well as how to best design a representative, unified system for the people of the community.
B. Finance and Budgeting
A vital component to any government is how it obtains and spends money. Considering consolidation of two governments means that the processes of obtaining and spending money by the two governments must be reevaluated. It also means that the assets and debts already obtained by the two governments must be combined in some way. The Consolidation Study Commission had to assess the aspects related to finance and budgeting in order to develop their recommendation.
Assets and Capital
The city and county governments each possess certain assets and capital. In considering consolidation for Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas, the Consolidation Study Commission looked at the various ways in which a unified government could deal with these issues. The general idea of consolidation would lead to a simple combination of these assets, such as vehicles and buildings, as the holdings of the newly unified government. The Commissioners had a few related points to considered about finances and the budget that were more complex.
Debt Servicing and Debt Acquisition
The Commissioners addressed the alternatives available for paying back loans. A new form of government would be obliged to continue payment on loans incurred by previous governments. The Consolidation Study Commission accounted for the various debts held by each government in its recommendation for consolidation. It was important to the Commission that they evaluate the amount held by each government, whether or not the debts could be combined, and how issues of debt would affect the future finances in the unified government. The issue of bond offerings was also important. This is a basic means for governments to incur new debts. Finally, the Consolidation Study Commission considered whether or not a limit on the amount of debt could be established and, if so, at what amount would this cap be set.
Revenue Management
The Consolidation Study Commission considered how exactly the capital possessed by a new unified government would be handled. One of the presumed benefits of consolidation is a broader base of revenue for one government to manage. The study of consolidation in Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas addressed alternative ideas for revenue management and monitoring the finance and budget processes. The Commissioners considered the creation of officials with job descriptions requiring oversight and auditing duties. It also developed various types of committee structures designed to oversee the handling of revenue. By evaluating the current finance and budgeting operations and listening to officials and citizens, the Consolidation Study Commission thoroughly examined the issue of revenue management.
Revenue Collection
A final finance and budgeting issue the Consolidation Study Commission considered was the collection of revenues by the new unified government. This issue has two parts:
First, the aspect of revenue collection considered by the Consolidation Study Commission included taxation issues. The Consolidation Study Commission diligently examined whether or not consolidation would decrease the tax burden on each citizen. By looking at other cases of consolidation and listening to experts on the issue, the Commission was able to assess the impact of consolidation on this part of revenue collection.
The second aspect of revenue collection the Consolidation Study Commission considered was the process of actually assessing and collecting taxes on citizens of Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas. The Commission considered whether or not the unified government would have more or less taxes. It also addressed whether the process of tax assessment could be streamlined in a consolidated government. The Consolidation Study Commission listened earnestly to the views of the citizens on this issue.
The public asked the Consolidation Study Commission to consider whether or not the cost of government would be decreased by consolidation. That question relates directly to the question of whether or not revenue collection will decrease on a per person basis. In order to respond to the public, the Consolidation Study Commission considered alternatives of simplifying revenue collection and decreasing the amount collected per person. Among other alternatives, the Commissioners locked at the possibility of establishing a percentage that the unified government would be required to save the taxpayers over a given time. This percentage would be based on the current budget and would reflect a decrease in the amount of total taxes collected from each citizen. Thus, after listening to citizens' concerns and the reports of experts on budgetary and finance matters, the Commission was prepared to develop its recommendation for consolidation in Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas.
Summary
The Consolidation Study Commission had to consider important finance and budgetary issues. How the new unified government would combine old assets and debts was important to the Commission's recommendation. The Commissioners also had to take into account issues of managing the revenue of the government and collecting it from Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas citizens. The recommendation of the Consolidation Study Commission regarding these issues reflects the input of citizens and the information presented by experts on finance and budgetary issues.
C. Personnel
The individuals who run the daily operations of the government are vital to the city and county governments. A number of personnel issues had to be considered by the Commission in order to best develop a recommendation for the future of Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas. The Consolidation Study Commission addressed two important questions regarding personnel issues involved in the consideration of a consolidated government. First, how would current personnel be affected by a recommendation for, and the possible transition to, a consolidated government? Second, how would the personnel operating in the newly consolidated government be organized? The Consolidation Study Commission took the needs of present government personnel very seriously while attempting to examine the various personnel issues involved in a recommendation for a consolidated government.
Staffing
The consolidation of city and county governments would require new, unified methods for dealing with staffing issues. The Consolidation Study Commission considered the many possible changes involved with consolidating the staffs of related city and county agencies and departments. The guidelines involving personnel in a new system as well as the implications for altering staffing procedures, rules, and regulations were addressed. The Consolidation Study Commission considered very carefully the following issues related to personnel and staffing in order to create the recommendation for consolidation:
Attrition versus layoffs
The first question the Consolidation Study Commission considered in looking at personnel was the impact of consolidation on current government employees. The new consolidated government would not need as many employees as the two previous governments had. Thus, the Consolidation Study Commission had to look at ways in which a new consolidated government could arrive at a smaller number of government employees than the city and county governments combined. The Consolidation Study Commission evaluated two alternative ways a smaller government could decrease the amount of its personnel.
One alternative is layoffs. The result is an immediate decrease in the number of employees. A second alternative is attrition. The Consolidation Study Commission examined this possibility where the amount of total government employees in the new consolidated government would be decreased gradually through employee retirement, employee resignations, and other means. After listening to citizens' comments and expert testimony regarding personnel issues, the Commissioners examined these two alternatives with the personnel currently working for the city and county in mind.
Pay Equity
A second aspect of the broad personnel issue considered by the Consolidation Study Commission was the issue or equalizing pay scales between city and county personnel performing similar functions. The Consolidation Study Commission examined the differences and similarities in salaries between the city and county. A newly unified government would need a unified pay structure. The Consolidation Study Commission therefore had to examine the various ways the pay scales between city and county workers could be equalized.
The two general alternatives evaluated by the Consolidation Study Commission were immediate equalizations in pay scales and gradual equalizations. The Consolidation Study Commission also benefited here from presentations by experts on the subject and the input of citizens and officials.
Classification of Personnel
Directly related to the issue of pay equity is the issue of the classification of employees. A government often devises a listing of job descriptions and duties relevant to the operations of the government. These descriptions typically include a base salary as well as detailed procedures for increasing the base salary according to seniority, skills, and/or achievements of an employee. Classification of personnel is crucial to the consolidation of the personnel from two or more governments. It is important that the new consolidated government pay its employees equally for equal services. Understanding the duties of individual employees as listed in a classification scheme also provides an excellent resource for unifying departments during the consolidation; the new government can more easily determine which personnel duties of the previous governments overlap. The Consolidation Study Commission listened to the Personnel Directors of the city and the county in order to understand how to address classification schemes in the recommendation.
Worker Training and Retraining
The transition from two governments into a unified government might require some changes for certain personnel whose positions overlap but whose employment will not be terminated. The Consolidation Study Commission considered the alternatives available for making current personnel fit into the new unified system.
First, the Commissioners addressed how much worker training would be necessary for every employee. All personnel would have to learn about the consolidated government's operations. Second, the Consolidation Study Commission considered the idea that certain employees may need to be retrained in order to fit new personnel needs or to be capable of switching from a previous job which overlapped with others into a new job. The Consolidation Study Commission judged these issues with respect to the potential costs involved in the retraining against the benefits derived from a more productive and effective personnel structure.
Patronage versus the Merit System
Changes in personnel involve issues of attrition versus layoffs, pay equity, and classification schemes. Changes in the staffing of governments also involve a further issue—how to determine who gets what job. The Consolidation Study Commission was faced with two possibilities for staffing the new consolidated government.
A merit system is in place when the decisions to hire or fire employees are based on the merits of a potential employees' past or present achievements and potential related to the requirements of the job. Personnel staffing done by patronage systems tends to lead to hiring and firing decisions based on the family background of potential employees or actions of the potential employees not particularly related to the duties required by the job. The Consolidation Study Commission addressed these two types of staffing procedures in order to create its recommendation for the consolidated government.
Union Relations and Negotiations
The importance of unions when considering personnel issues could not be overlooked by the Consolidation Study Commission. The Commissioners listened to many of the unions holding membership in the city and county governments and concerned citizens. The Consolidation Study Commission considered whether or not union contracts enacted before consolidation would change if a transition to a unified government occurred.
Equal Employment Opportunity
Any recommendation by the Consolidation Study Commission dealing with changes in personnel would have to comply with federal regulations regarding equal employment opportunity. It is crucial to the organization of any personnel structure that the laws related to hiring and firing procedures be considered thoroughly. Affirmative action policies, the Americans With Disabilities Act, and the Civil Rights Act are a few of the most important guidelines any recommendation must meet. The Commissioners examined whether or not a proposed change in government meets these federal guidelines.
Summary
Issues involving personnel were thoroughly examined by the Consolidation Study Commission. The Commissioners realized the importance of current personnel as well as the need to reevaluate and alter future personnel structures and procedures in a unified government. The Consolidation Study Commission carefully considered the possible staffing procedures from which the new consolidated government would have to choose. The decision between attrition and layoffs, as well as the decision between merit systems and patronage systems, was considered in great detail by the Commission. Pay equity and classification schemes for a unified government also were examined to determine the most efficient and effective means of creating a unified personnel in the consolidated government. By addressing these aspects of the broad issue of personnel, the Commission determined what was important to the community and for the development of their recommendation.
D. Community Growth And Development
The Commission believed that the development of the Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas area was one of its most important considerations. The desire for consolidation among some of the community focused on the idea that perhaps consolidation could improve the city and county. In fact, the idea of consolidating government in order to make a more efficient and effective structure was a driving force in the early movements to get the consolidation referendum on the ballot. The Consolidation Study Commission feels that community growth is essential in evaluating current governments and proposing a new consolidated government. In addressing the broad issue of community growth, the Consolidation Study Commission considered many related issues:
Revitalization of Neighborhoods
A common concern among Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas citizens present at the many public hearings was the decline in many of the neighborhoods in the county. Population decreases, migration out of the county, and a corresponding increase in tax burdens hinder growth in many neighborhoods around Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas. These changes in the neighborhoods also creates a real barrier to effective government for Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas. The Consolidation Study Commission considered devising a new government that would restore parts of the county which had declined in recent decades while promoting further growth in the rest of the county. The Consolidation Study Commission examined, through the input of experts in city and county governments and citizens, whether these neighborhoods could be revitalized by addressing a combination of issues:
Economic Development:
The Consolidation Study Commission analyzed the situation in Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas with respect to the counties around it. The Commission examined other counties in the area which had developed economically. These counties also obtained overall improvements in the process. A key issue considered by the Commission was how to acquire and then to foster economic development in our county. The goal of the Consolidation Study Commission was to determine whether or not consolidation of the two governments would lead to a new government more effective at bringing economic development to Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas and more efficient at managing development projects. The Consolidation Study Commission studied the possibilities and the alternatives and found that a more streamlined, unified government would be best at bringing economic development to Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas. Their study of the issue of economic development focused on several functions of government important to economic development:
Strategic Planning
The Consolidation Study Commission spent a great deal of time analyzing the two current governments and how they function. One area of overlap and disunity the Consolidation Study Commission found was in strategic planning. The Consolidation Study Commission considered the importance of strategic planning to economic development; long-term and short-term planning are crucial to the development of an area because they set out a road map for the government to follow toward increased economic growth. With a strategic plan, the government designates ways in which it can attract, promote and maintain economic growth. The Consolidation Study Commission considered whether or not a unified government would be more effective and efficient in this important area because the city and county were not unified in the development of their strategic plans. Thus, a very important issue considered by the Consolidation Study Commission was the idea of unifying strategic planning.
Planning, Codes, and Zoning
Another important component to economic development in the area is the set of rules for developing real estate for commercial and residential uses. The government plays a vital role in how investors can develop the land in the county. The Consolidation Study Commission considered the rules presented by two governments—the city and the county. Certain public officials noted their support for a unified office that would handle a uniform set of rules for planning, codes, and zoning. The idea presented to the Consolidation Study Commission was that such a unified office could provide simplified services to investors interested in developing the county.
Issues related to development of real estate have important consequences the growth of the community. Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas could be made more accessible to investors through a simplified and unified office handling land use issues. The Consolidation Study Commission considered whether the possibility for community growth would be enhanced in a unified system or in the present system.
Housing Construction and Inspection
Related to the issue of planning, codes, and zoning is this equally important issue. Housing construction and inspection are important to the growth of the community, economic development, and the revitalization of neighborhoods. The Consolidation Study Commission studied the utility of two different sets of regulations as well as two different offices responsible for housing construction and inspection versus the utility of a unified set of rules and a unified office. The Consolidation Study Commission had to determine whether a more unified structure for all important elements involved in housing construction and inspection would be beneficial to the growth of the community.
Infrastructure Equalization
The Consolidation Study Commission considered community growth in Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas as a whole and as the sum of its parts. The need for revitalization of neighborhoods illustrated to the Consolidation Study Commission that various areas of the county had fallen into greater disrepair than others. Some of these "parts" were found in need of more assistance. Thus, the Consolidation Study Commission had to consider whether or not community growth and economic development could be devised to help those areas that needed more assistance.
Summary
The importance of community growth to the Consolidation Study Commission in its study of the possibility of consolidation in Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas was clear. The need to promote economic development in the area and stop the decline of neighborhoods around the county was a major reason behind the creation of this and earlier groups studying potential consolidation. The Consolidation Study Commission also considered more specific parts of community growth, such as construction and zoning. The Commission considered whether a unified office under a unified government would better serve the purpose of promoting community growth in the county by making investing easier. With the input of elected officials and private citizens, the Consolidation Study Commission examined the possibilities for community growth through various sets of rules and structures, unified and held separately in the city and county governments.
E. Community Service and Quality of Life
Maintaining the services and infrastructure in Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas is an important duty of the city and county governments. The Consolidation Study Commission considered the issue of whether or not the provision and maintenance of these functions and public infrastructure would be better obtained through government unified functionally and/or structurally. The Consolidation Study Commission evaluated the ways in which the city and county maintained the community as two separate governments and looked at how a unified government might improve the services, infrastructure and quality of life in Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas. The Commission examined many related issues in determining whether or not consolidation would be more useful in providing for community maintenance than the present governments.
Interlocal Agreements
One issue the Consolidation Study Commission considered relates to community maintenance and the possibility for consolidation was the number of functions in Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas which had already been consolidated. The city and the county do provide some services which are consolidated. Through interlocal agreements, policing and jailing functions, certain functions are currently being provided jointly or exclusively by one government or the other in order to provide more efficient and effective services and maintenance of infrastructure. Many of the areas covered by these agreements have shown success in providing for community maintenance of services and quality of life at a lower cost to the citizen. The Consolidation Study Commission looked at those areas where these interlocal agreements exist and those areas where a structurally unified provider of services or maintenance would be beneficial to the Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas area.
A chief aim of the Consolidation Study Commission was to examine issues involved in maintaining the community and improving Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas residents' quality of life. The Commission studied whether or not increased benefits could be obtained for the community by consolidating the services and maintenance of infrastructure in Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas through a unified government.
Safety and Protection
Police and fire protection are vital to the well-being of any government and its citizens. These two aspects of community maintenance also represent very large percentages of the city and the county governments' budgets. The Consolidation Study Commission considered these two aspects of community maintenance carefully.
The Consolidation Study Commission found that the Sheriff's Office in the county handles issues related to the jail, serving bonds, and transportation of inmates and suspects. The city's Police Department performs the other important safety issues—traffic control, criminal investigations, and other law enforcement services. The Fire Department, Sheriff and Police Department also agreed to using a common dispatcher for emergency services. The Consolidation Study Commission considered the possibility for and the potential savings from further consolidation between the Sheriff and Police Department.
Social Services
Another crucial aspect of governments is how they provide for and administer social services. The Consolidation Study Commission realized that its study must consider the implications of its recommendation on the provision of social services to the community. The Commission looked at whether or not a unified government would be more capable and efficient at providing social services. This would lead to better quality of life in the area as well.
Utilities
The Consolidation Study Commission considered in great detail whether or not to include the issue of utilities in their recommendation. One of the fundamental services a government provides or at least regulates is utility service. The cost and quality of these services are important to the citizens of any county. Utilities are also important to businesses, industry and potential investors. Hence, the Consolidation Study Commission had to scrutinize the alternatives available on the issue of utility services before developing its recommendation.
The situation in Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas is rather unique. A separate elected body, the Board of Public Utilities (BPU), manages all public utilities in Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas. The Commission first had to consider whether or not to include the BPU in their recommendation. Second, if the BPU was to be included, the Consolidation Study Commission had to analyze how, if at all, the BPU would be altered to fit into the newly recommended form of government. The Commissioners closely examined the issue of utilities and its unique nature in Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas with the assistance of public officials, BPU employees, and citizen input.
Summary
The Consolidation Study Commission addressed many important issues when it evaluated the impact of consolidation on community services and quality of life. Safety and protection issues are a large part of the current budgets in the city and county and are vital to maintaining a high quality of life in Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas. The Consolidation Study Commission also found that social services provided by the government are crucial to citizens in Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas. Through careful consideration of the alternatives and the structures already established in the two governments, the Consolidation Study Commission could determine a sound proposal regarding community services and the quality of life in its recommendation for consolidation.
Chapter 3. Consolidation Study Recommendations
P reserving the history of Wyandotte County, the ethnic diversity that is its strength and the cultural past of each of its cities;
B uilding on the legacy of past and current governments while recognizing the need for affordable, simple, and responsive government for the future;
U nderstanding the need for a more efficient and effective form of government to identify and respond to citizen and community needs;
S trengthening the checks and balances in government and providing for independent assessments of the organization, its policies and its elected and appointed officials;
B elieving in the wisdom, integrity and intelligence of the voters and their right to choose their representatives and their form of government.
The Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas Consolidation Study Commission recommends:
A Unified and Simplified Structure
The newly created government shall be called the Unified Government and will have a Legislative, Executive and Judicial branch directly responsible to the citizens of Wyandotte County. The proposed structure unites the County and City governments into a streamlined administration. It provides the elected officials with the authority to respond directly to its citizens in the most efficient and effective ways. Consolidated departments make it easier for citizens to obtain the necessary services and to receive prompt response to their requests.
PLAN:
Legislative Branch
Legislators: The new Unified Government will have a legislative branch which will consist of the Unified Board of Commissioners elected in Nonpartisan elections held in April of odd numbered calendar years. Eight of the Commissioners will be nominated and elected in-districts newly designated (see Unified County Commission District map, Alternative 6, change 2) in order to increase the diversity of representation in the new Unified Government. Two more Commissioners will be nominated from within two newly designated Unified County Commission districts and elected at-large by eligible County voters. These two new County-wide districts will comprise the four Northern most Unified County Commission districts and the four Southern most Unified County Commission districts of the County. The Chief Executive/Mayor will act as the eleventh member and will be elected at-large.
Succession: In the case of a vacancy, the Unified Board of Commissioners will solicit recommendations from eligible voters in the district affected. The Unified Board of Commissioners will appoint from that list an individual to serve as that Commissioner until the next election.
Duties: The Unified Board of Commissioners will have the power to adopt codes and ordinances and approve and adopt a budget. The Board will retain all County policy-making authority except those administrative duties which will be handled by the County Administrator. The Unified Board of Commissioners will review and revise, as required, the Commission districts at the conclusion of each Federal Census period.
Terms: The Commissioners will serve four-year staggered terms, with the exception of the very first election. In the first election, the four Commissioners receiving the highest number of votes will serve a four-year term. The four Commissioners receiving the next highest number of votes from the eight "in-district" areas will serve a two-year term. The "at-large" Commissioner receiving the highest number of votes will serve a four-year term. The "at large" Commissioner receiving the next highest number of votes of the two "at-large" areas will serve a two-year term and will be designated Mayor Pro Tem for the first two-year period and will rotate the position to the remaining "at-large" Commissioner. The Mayor Pro Tem position will rotate thereafter every two years among the two "at-large" Commissioners.
Compensation: All commissioners will serve part-time and will be eligible to receive medical and dental insurance for themselves and participate in KPERS if they so choose. They may participate in a life insurance program at their own expense. The eight Commissioners elected from "in-district" areas will receive $1000 a month as compensation. The two Commissioners elected from "at-large" districts will receive $1200 a month in view of their additional responsibilities and extra committee assignments. (See Standing Committees). All Commissioners will be reimbursed for car expenses by a per-mile rate set by the Federal Internal Revenue Service.
Executive Branch
Chief Executive/Mayor: The Chief Executive/Mayor is the visible head of Government. The Chief Executive of the County provides unified vision and leadership to the people in the community. As Chief Executive/Mayor of Kansas City, Kansas, he/she represents and officiates on behalf of the City at all official functions and events.
Succession: In the absence of the Chief Executive/Mayor, the Mayor Pro Tem will assume daily responsibilities of the Chief Executive/Mayor. In the event of a vacancy of the office, the Mayor Pro Tem will serve as Chief Executive/Mayor until the next scheduled election.
Duties: 1) The Chief Executive/Mayor will preside over the Legislature. 2) Like its national counter part, the Chief Executive/Mayor of the new Unified Government will have veto power which can be overridden by 2/3 of the Legislature. 3) In the case of a tie within the Unified Board of Commissioners, the Chief Executive/Mayor casts the deciding vote. 4) The Chief Executive/Mayor is an ex officio member of all committees. 5) The Chief Executive/Mayor appoints and removes the County Administrator with the consent of the legislative body.
Term: The new Chief Executive/Mayor will be elected by the voters of the County in a Nonpartisan, at-large election in April and will serve a four year term.
Compensation: The new Chief Executive/Mayor will be compensated at the same rate as the current Mayor of Kansas City, Kansas. The same benefits that are authorized to the Mayor now will be authorized to the new Chief Executive/Mayor. However, a government car will be provided for the official use of the Chief Executive/Mayor in lieu of mileage reimbursement.
County Administrator: A County Administrator will be appointed and dismissed by the Chief Executive/Mayor with the consent of the Unified Board of Commissioners. The County Administrator will report directly to the Chief Executive/Mayor and will be reviewed by the Unified Board of Commissioners for retention on an annual basis. The County Administrator is directly responsible for the daily functions of the Unified Administration. The County Administrator will organize the Unified Administration. The County Administrator will select/dismiss key division heads (cabinet level positions). All other department head selections/dismissals and personnel actions will be in accordance with the personnel classification system under the sole jurisdiction of the County Administrator.
Judicial Branch
A Judicial Branch consisting of a municipal court and, to the extent authorized by law, the districts courts shall serve the community. The Municipal Court Judges will be appointed by the Unified Board of Commissioners. Since the elected office of Public Administrator will not be retained, that position and its functions will transferred to the Judicial Branch for proper alignment within that branch.
More Responsive to the People
The Unified Government should provide more representation for its citizens while preserving the cultural, ethnic and neighborhood affiliations that have molded the community. It should provide for the local authority of each district while maintaining the historic flavor of the County as a whole. The County and each city in the County should retain their own identities.
PLAN:
In every case, the voters of Wyandotte County will select their own representatives to govern them on a Nonpartisan basis. The roles and functions of each branch of the Unified Government will ensure systemic checks and balances. Mechanisms for grievances established in an Ethics Commission and a Legislative Auditor will provide direct access into the system for the citizens suspecting organizational failure or personal improprieties of government officials.
Checks and Balances
The three-tier approach (legislative, executive, and judicial) to government will provide the community with the traditional, democratic safeguards of our country. By differentiating roles and functions of a Unified Government, the people of Wyandotte County can be assured that their interests will be represented fairly. The unique powers of each branch of government to perform the functions required of it provide the checks on the other two branches and offer the balance for the community.
PLAN:
All branches of the new government are directly elected by the voters of the County. The Legislative Branch - the Unified Board of Commissioners - has the responsibility to consent to the appointments and dismissals of the Chief Executive/Mayor. The Executive Branch - the Chief Executive/Mayor, with the consent of the Unified Board of Commissioners, appoints the County Administrator. The County Administrator has the responsibility of executing the policies of the Unified Board of Commissioners through the functional divisions and departments of the administration. The Chief Executive/Mayor, presiding over the Legislative Branch, has veto authority over policies enacted by that body. That power is tempered by a 2/3 over-ride authority of the Legislative Branch. The Judicial Branch enforces State, County and Kansas City, Kansas municipal laws. The Judges of the District Court, through the Administrative Judge of the Court, also appoint and dismiss the Legislative Auditor and appoint and dismiss members of the Ethics Commission. The District Court Judges themselves are responsible to the voters through the election process.
Ethics Commission: An Ethics Commission will be created as an additional safe guard against unethical behavior in the new Unified Government. The new Unified Board of Commissioners will draft and adopt a Code of Ethics. The Ethics Commission members, appointed by the Administrative Judge of the District Court with the consent of the sitting District Judges of Wyandotte County, will serve a single, full, four year term. The terms will be staggered at the initial appointment with one-half of the Commission serving a two-year term and one-half serving a single, full, four-year term. The Ethics Commission may recommend ways to improve the Ethics Code to the Unified Board of Commissioners. The Ethics Commission will have the power to make recommendations for actions to be taken for violations of the Ethics Code to the Unified Board of Commissioners. The Ethics Commission will also have subpoena power, the ability to swear witnesses and have power to censure those in violation of the Ethics Code. All elected officials, and any appointed board and/or committee member as the Unified Legislature may include, will be subject to this Code.
Citizen Oversight
Two additional safeguards will ensure each citizen can question, challenge and seek redress for unethical or illegal behavior of its government officials. An Ethics Commission is established to up hold the responsible behavior of its elected officials. A Legislative Auditor will provide independent scrutiny of the performance and operations of government offices and employees. Mindful of the right of the citizenry to demand the highest standards of conduct from its public servants, these safeguards give the community its own checks and balances.
PLAN:
The current governing positions of County Commissioners, City Council and City Mayor will be eliminated and replaced by the Unified Government structure in Nonpartisan elections conducted in April of odd calendar years. The first election will be a special election. The new governing positions, 8 in-district County Commissioners and 2 at-large County Commissioners will serve four-year staggered terms, with the exception of those elected in the first special election. The Chief Executive/Mayor will serve a four-year term.
Retained Elected Officials: Several offices have been retained for county-wide elections: Sheriff, District Attorney and the Register of Deeds. These offices provide unique functions for the County as a whole and are not duplicated within the Kansas City, Kansas municipal structure. Budgetary and administrative support for these offices will be the responsibility of the County Administrator.
Sheriff: The Sheriff is the Chief Law Enforcement Officer in the County and retains all current responsibilities. In addition, the Sheriff will assume overall responsibility for the Juvenile Detention Center insuring that it is kept separate from the Adult Detention Center. Elections for this position will be Nonpartisan and held during the regularly scheduled April election period. The term of office will continue to be for 4 years. The Sheriff will serve out the current term of election and will be extended in office until the election period held in April 2001. Compensation will be determined in the same manner as it currently exists under the Unified Board of Commissioners. The Under Sheriff will succeed the Sheriff in the event of a vacancy until the next election period.
District Attorney: The District Attorney position will be retained as it presently exists.
Register of Deeds: This office will retain the same duties and responsibilities that currently exists. Compensation will be determined in the same manner as it currently exists under the Unified Board of Commissioners. Elections for this position will be Nonpartisan and held during the regularly scheduled April election period. The term of office will continue to be for 4 years. The Register of Deeds will serve out the current term of election and will be extended in office until the election period held in April 2001.
Nonretained Elected Officials: The current elected offices of County Clerk, Treasurer, Public Administrator and Surveyor will become appointed positions. The County Clerk, County Treasurer, and County Surveyor will be incorporated into the Unified Administration's departments of the Executive Branch. The Public Administrator's position and functions will be incorporated into the appropriate element of the Judicial Branch. The County Administrator will establish positions of Unified Clerk and Unified Treasurer in order to consolidate the duties and responsibilities of the present County and City Clerks and the current County and City Treasurers.
All functions currently performed by these offices will be retained in a reorganized administrative structure to best serve the community as a whole. The County Administrator will be responsible for the appointment of the reorganized department directors and will ensure a separation of County functions through an activity based accounting system. This system will become a management tool for analysis of efficiency and effectiveness and will provide other cities in the County a means to review County support costs.
Retained Appointed Officials: The County Auditor will be retained under a new title of Legislative Auditor and the Election Commissioner will be retained as it currently exists. Budgetary and administrative support for these offices will be the responsibility of the County Administrator.
Legislative Auditor: The routine financial auditing functions of the present County Auditor will be transferred to the Chief Financial Officer of the Unified Administration. The Legislative Auditor will retain all performance and financial auditing functions that may be required to oversee, examine or inquire into any aspect of the Unified Government in order to prevent or discover irregularities of the system or individuals in the system. The Legislative Auditor will be appointed and dismissed by the Administrative Judge of the District Court with the approval of a majority of the Judges of the District Court of the Twenty-ninth Judicial District. The appointment and retention of the Legislative Auditor will be for a two-year period. The Legislative Auditor will report all findings to the Unified Board of Commissioners.
Nonretained Appointed Officials: The appointed County Offices of the Appraiser, Counselor and Coroner will be absorbed into the Unified Administration structure. These functions will be retained in accordance with the Kansas State Statutes under which they operate.
Effective and Efficient Government
The careful scrutiny of functions and offices by the new government will provide for a more streamlined and cost effective operation. This will allow for realignment of functions or services to prevent duplication and improve services.
Plan:
Standing Committees: The Unified Board of Commissioners will establish six permanent committees to address all aspects of community life. The Chief Executive/Mayor will appoint at least two of the eight "in-district" Commissioners to each Committee. The two "at-large" Commissioners will serve on three separate committees each and will determine the Chair for each of their Committees. The Committees will discuss aspects of community life according to their areas of responsibility and will recommend policy or policy changes for action to the Unified Board of Commissioners as a whole. These Committees will review applicable existing County Resolutions and Kansas City Ordinances and will recommend appropriate changes to the Unified Board of Commissioners for adoption. Upon enactment by a majority of the Board, these Unified Resolutions will supersede existing County Resolutions and Kansas City, Kansas Ordinances and will be effective immediately.
Committees:
1)
Rules and Government Support
2)
Human Services
3)
Economic, Community and Neighborhood Development (Committee includes 1 BPU board member as a voting member and at least one member from each of the other five standing committees.)
4)
Public Safety
5)
Public Works (Includes 1 BPU Board member as a voting member)
6)
Finance and Budget (includes BPU board member as a voting member. The Chair of the Finance and Budget Committee will serve as a voting member of the BPU Finance and Budget Committee)
Appointed Boards and Commissions: The Unified Board of Commissioners will set the number of members on each Board/Commission and will determine how the appointments will be made, except those specified by contract or outside authority. All existing Boards and Commissions will continue to function as currently mandated until such time as they are reviewed and re-appointed by the Unified Board of Commissioners.
Joint Legislative-BPU Committee: Functional consolidation issues between the Unified Board of Commissioners and the BPU will be studied by a joint committee composed of six voting members-three elected BPU Board members and three Unified Board of Commissioners (excluding the 2 "at-large" Commissioners and the Commissioner from the Bonner Springs/Edwardsville district. This is because the BPU does not provide electric retail service to Bonner Springs and Edwardsville). The joint committee will make recommendations to the Unified Board of Commissioners for their decision. The Unified Government Attorney may hire an attorney to report to the General Manager of the BPU to assist the BPU in deregulation.
Cost Savings: The Consolidation Study Commission recommends: 1) that the Unified Board of Commissioners target a minimum of 8% reduction in per capita costs of daily operations over a five year period based on 1997 budget figures (an estimated $8.7 million savings). These savings will be targeted at 2% per year after the first year of transition; 2) that the Unified Board of Commissioners cap the general obligation debt service at $20 million per year, and 3) that the Unified Board of Commissioners be the establishing authority for user fees for sanitary and storm water.
Employment Safeguards
The Unified Government is founded on the principle of employee protection. Reduction in job positions will be accomplished over time and through attrition. The County Administrator will ensure that a personnel classification plan is developed which allows the Unified Government to systematically and fairly identify and select individuals with the proper level of skills, abilities and knowledge associated with each position that is required for the new government. A compensation plan which corresponds to the classification system will also be developed. This plan will provide a just wage for graduated levels of skills and responsibilities. During the transition period — from the effective date of unification to full integration — employees will continue to provide the services they currently do until such time as their positions are considered for consolidation and they are re-classified into a new system. Attrition-based reductions will provide current employees with a sense of stability while allowing the Unified Government the flexibility to adjust to new situations in governance and service. All current union negotiated contracts will be honored.
Managed Transition
The "Interim" period between an affirmative vote of the community - April 1, 1997 - and the effective date of Unification - October 1, 1997 - will allow sufficient time for a Joint Transition Committee to establish procedures for a smooth transition of power into the hands of the newly elected government.
This transition team will also recommend and prioritize policy issues that the new government will undertake in the first period of governance.
PLAN:
Effective Date: New elections will be held July 8, 1997, for the primary election and September 9, 1997, for the general election. The newly elected unified officials will take office on October 1, 1997, which will be the effective date of consolidation.
Joint Transition Committee: Immediately following the passage of this recommendation, a transition team shall be formed and will serve until October 1, 1997. The City Administrator and the County Auditor will co-chair the transition team. The team will also include both Chief Financial Officers of the City and the County, the City Attorney and the County Counselor, and other members as required. The team members will establish procedures for the transfer of authority to the Unified Government, recommend priorities for policy formation during the first period of governance, and will set an effective date for functional consolidation. The Consolidation Study Commission will remain in effect until October 1, 1997, to serve as an advisory board to the transition team.
Transfer of Authority: Immediately upon swearing-in of the Unified Board of Commissioners and the County Chief Executive/Mayor, all authority inherent in existing County Resolutions and City Ordinances will transfer to the Unified Government.
Transfer of Property: On the effective date of consolidation, title to all real and personal property currently vested in Wyandotte County and Kansas City, Kansas, together with other rights, claims and assets of the two governmental entities, shall vest in the Unified Government. If necessary, the appropriate public officials shall execute documents of conveyance.
Assumption of Debt: In accordance with the provisions of Senate Bill no 464, any bonded indebtedness and interest thereon incurred by the city or county prior to consolidation shall remain an obligation of the property subject to taxation for the payment thereof prior to such consolidation.
Method of Amendment: In the event that this recommendation needs to be modified, the Unified Board of Commissioners may do so with a vote of not less than 8 of 10 Commissioners voting for amendment. The citizens of the County may petition for an amendment under existing referendum processes established by the Kansas Legislature for cities and counties.
Severability: A single provision of this recommendation or separate aspects that may be found to conflict with existing laws shall not void other provisions or aspects of this recommendation.
Conclusion
The Consolidation Study Commission strongly believes that the Unification of Governments of Wyandotte County and Kansas City, Kansas will provide its citizens with the kind of representative, efficient, and responsive government they need to carry them into the next century and the new millennium.
Ballot Question: Proposition 1.
CONSOLIDATION of the Governments of Wyandotte County and Kansas City, Kansas
Shall the following be adopted:
That the governments of Wyandotte County, Kansas and Kansas City, Kansas be consolidated into a single entity known as "the Unified Government", as authorized in KSA 1996 Supp 12-340 through 12-346 and in-accordance-with the Final Recommendation for the Unification of the Governments of Wyandotte County and Kansas City, Kansas dated January 13, 1997?