1. Metropolitan Fragmentation and Fiscal Competition
PBAF/URBDP 560
Metropolitan Fragmentation and Fiscal Competition

2. Recap and Today Participation Assessment Recap Today
Yet on more sprawl
ISTEA and its successors (or their lack)
Transportation policy and equity
Today
Metropolitan Fragmentation

3.
Recap Sprawl

4. Sprawl vs. Growth
Los Angeles, CA
Los Angeles

5. Natural Color Image of Sprawl

6. Bogotá, Colombia July 2009
8.5 million metro area, City of Bogota 7.3; view of the city from Cerre de Monserrate, 3152 above sea level
By 2030, 2 out of every three people will live in an urban environment globally.

7. Former “Pirate” Neighborhood Bogotá, Colombia July 2009
In Usme, at the south of the metro area. At the rear of the photo are places that were quarried for sand or building clay. And construction at the top of a hill is illegal.

8. More “pirate” development
Usme. Note the housing going on the tops of these hills. This is outside Bogotá’s Urban Growth Boundary and sprawling into its main urban watershed.

9. More in the “Pirate” Neighborhood
Also in Usme. Pirate does not mean shanty…

10. Another sprawl definition
Sprawl is about the rate of urban expansion occurring at a rate greater than population growth.
Without regard for regional environmental needs.

11. Transportation Equity

12. Metropolitan Fragmentation and Fiscal Competition

13. Number Local Governments 2007
Type of Local Government
In WA
In US
County 39
3,033
Municipal
281
19,492
School District
296
13,051
Special District*
1,229
37,381
Total
1,845
89,476
*Special Districts in WA include: 170 Natural Resources, 387 fire protection, 41 Housing and Community Development
Source: 2007 Census of Governments Accessed 1/20/2009

14. Metropolitan Fragmentation & Fiscal Competition
Percent Local Taxes of
General Revenues from Own Sources
19,400 cities; 89,000 local govs in federal system.
Local diversity in policy, tax burden, services
Changing revenue mix-- decreasing tax dependence
Diversity leads to policy experimentation?
Fragmentation-> Disparity? Inefficiency? Efficiency?
Policy efforts to deal with efficiency and equity issues
Political (& practical) feasibility questionable
1967
1992
2007
Local
76%
64%
63%
School District
83%*
81%*
Counties
77%
60%
Cities
61%
As of 2007, about local governments.
About how to finance the city? Area?
What’s the problem with fragmentation?
*97% of school tax revenue is local property tax

15. Local Reactions Fiscal zoning Competition for tax base Lead to
Economic stratification
Land use planning that pushes growth outward
And, therefore
SPRAWL
Local reactions—what is the result at a regional level? Leads to stratification, land use planning that encourages outward growth, and thus sprawling development patterns (Orlfield).

16. Solutions: Efficiency or Equity in Fragmented Metro Region?
Market
Banfield/Tiebout, Public Choice
Privatization
Consolidation
Annexation, Elastic cities
Two-Tier
Regional Government
Regional Tax-base Sharing
State redistributive solutions
Intermunicipal cooperation
Feasability of these?? In WA?
Tiebout depends on exit rather than voice. Not everyone can exit. Works for those with wealth and mobility.
Market solutions tend to reflect inequality among municipalities in the metropolitan region.
(Privatize what—garbage? Police?) supposed to increase voice.
State redist solutions (institutional aid) does not seem to benefit central cities./revenue sharing (formula)
Regional gov—loss of voice.
All of these deal with inequality in different ways.
Fair provision of public services. Reduction of wasteful competition, reinvestment in disadv. Communities.
BUT loss of local control
ALL DIFFER IN THEIR…
Collective social choice making
Choices of services
Participation in process
Production efficiency
Market model = many jurisdictions
Income redistribution/Fiscal equity
Representation/voice

17. For discussion
Orfield is concerned with reducing metropolitan fiscal disparities in order to reduce the burden on the hardest- pressed jurisdictions and increase services for the most underserved populations.  
Can policies that promote regional equity also help in mitigating sprawl? How?  
Could revenue sharing promote/accelerate gentrification?
Is it possible that our desire to characterize the various metropolitan forms (Hanlon, et al.) contributes to metropolitan fragmentation and disparity? 
How might policies designed to promote fiscal equity (institutional aid programs, state-aid programs, and tax-base sharing) work with the New Metropolitan Reality Model? 
Can fiscal zoning policies be used to create more equitable regions? How?