We need to consolidate the dozens of government entities into one

Local governments are beat up: Costs keep rising, citizens won’t pay more but won’t accept less service. To save local government, some communities have redefined the boundaries. Maybe we should do the same.

Pierce County has 800,000 people and 60 units of government (excluding 13 school districts, the Port and Tacoma Public Utilities), with more than 300 elected officials. These 60 governments spend $1.6 billion annually (or $2,000 per person). When this isn’t enough, we get layoffs or higher fees and taxes.

Essentially we citizens cross our fingers, hoping the economy recovers or the demand for service slows down. Ah, and we really hope bridges and sewers don’t break despite decades of deferred maintenance. And we hope pension investments keep pace with baby boomer retirements in the next 10 years. Bad luck in either infrastructure or pension funds could cripple towns and cities.

In a way, local government finances are based on hope. Perhaps we should govern differently.

One way to change the dynamic is to scale up. Instead of many small units of government, create a single large one. Bigger government, but fewer governments. And overall, less government spending. The approach is obvious, and it isn’t new. Metro government has worked for 100 years in places such as Denver, San Francisco and Atlanta. In the last 10 years Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Des Moines and other communities have started to “metropolitan-ize.”

Pierce County has 20 cities and towns (and parts of four others), a county government, 16 water and sewer districts, 13 fire districts, six parks and recreation districts, and a library district, for a total of 60 units of government. This patchwork spends $1.6 billion a year, 80 percent of it on personnel.

If we combine these units of government, we can save more than $40 million a year, or 2.5 percent, without sacrificing direct-service jobs like beat cops or counter clerks. The savings come from reducing duplicative management. And the money is enough to erase budget shortfalls across the county and put the brakes on rising taxes.

There’s another reason to integrate local governments: effectiveness. Our important issues transcend municipal boundaries. Crime, pollution, growth management, economic development – one focused government can deal with these issues more effectively than lots of little ones.

OK, how?

We have a few basic models of metropolitan government. In one, municipalities “buy” services from a central source. We do this now to a limited extent. LESA – the Law Enforcement Support Agency – and the Tacoma-Pierce Health Department are examples.

In a second model, cities, towns, water and fire districts and the county essentially merge. This is how bigger metro areas achieve cost-effectiveness.

Complicated? Oh, yeah. It would take years. Civic groups need to study the issues, local governments debate and ultimately the voters decide. We’d need enabling legislation from the state, and there are lots of operating issues to untangle.

But while the pace is deliberate, it’s also humane. Slow transition lets employees and elected officials phase out gradually rather than suddenly lose their jobs. And it ensures we understand the best way to re-create our government.

It seems hard to argue against metropolitan governance. Small local governments made sense when information took days to cross the county and laws varied widely. But today, decision data is instantaneous and laws are almost entirely uniform.

Of course some towns formed to restrict school boundaries. A suburban area, for example, didn’t want its students mingling with urban kids. Assuming this desire for homogeneity still exists, leaving schools out of the discussion removes the threat.

Then there’s the gored ox: more than 300 elected officials and several hundred managers whose jobs will be affected. Government itself is unlikely to lead a major change. Leadership – at least in the beginning – will come from outside government, from the community itself.

Is metropolitan governance in our best interest? It seems so. It’s cheaper, and more effective. Can we create it here it? Of course. The change process is well understood, and consulting firms stand by to take our call.

The essential question is whether we have the civic and political will to change, or whether we prefer the gnashing of teeth and renting of garments that often pass for government these days.

Ken Miller of Tacoma took part in re-engineering efforts at Weyerhaeuser Company. He’s a Tacoma Housing Authority commissioner.