SUMMARY OF DISPARITIES

The many factors considered in this report are difficult to merge into a concise summary, but a number of differences have been observed among governmental units that appear to indicate disparities. The most obvious is that all governmental units employ different accounting procedures, making comparisons among them difficult at best. Other, more pertinent differences are considered in eight ways: (1) county-county; (2) county

city; (3) city-city; (4) central city versus suburban communities; (5) state government policies; (6) regional government policies; (7) local government policies; and (8) federal government policies.

Relationships Among Counties

The two urban counties of the SMSA, Fulton and DeKalb, can be characterized as being high income, high education areas as compared to the three more rural counties. Their revenue and expenditure levels are generally higher on a per capita basis, and they contain refined county government units which offer many services. DeKalb County provides outstandingly high levels of fire protection and sewerage services, and Fulton County offers a sophisticated health and hospital system. Gwinnett County is at the other extreme, characterized by a low level of income and education and by a high need for welfare funds.

None of the counties has incurred a level of debt that might be deemed excessive, although Gwinnett County, the least wealthy of the five, is subject to a lower Moody's rating on debt obligations than the others. Debt ceilings imposed by the state have not created significant limitations upon counties in the SMSA (except for two board of education problems in Fulton due to low assessments), and a recent change leading to higher tax assessment levels will increase the ceilings far beyond the level of current needs.

The Total tax burdens upon property within all of the counties have been increasing in recent years, although a high dependence upon personal property taxes has kept the effective burden rate to a level between 1.05 percent and 1.33 percent. Only DeKalb County has been at the 1.33 percent level, with the other counties operating at a level of 1.25 percent or less. A 1967 move to effect uniform assessment among all Georgia counties may cause DeKalb County's assessment level to decline, while those of all other counties will increase. Intercounty tax burden disparities are expected to be lessened substantially by this action.

Fulton County has been the predominant industrial county in the SMSA for many years, followed by DeKalb and Cobb Counties. Clayton and Gwinnett Counties are not industrial centers, although Clayton does have a sizable amount of land zoned industrial.

County governments in the Atlanta SMSA provide a substantial portion of the area's governmental needs. The differences in activity level among them have not provided many points of common interest, and suggestions that nearby Douglas and Rockdale Counties should be made part of the SMSA have met with little interest. The counties cooperate in few areas, the most notable being the joint hospital (and some sewerage treatment) efforts between Fulton and DeKalb Counties.

Relationships Between Counties and Cities

Joint county-city efforts to accomplish governmental goals are found only between the city of Atlanta and the counties in which it lies, Fulton and DeKalb. Virtually a complete separation of activities is found in Clayton, Cobb and Gwinnett Counties, and DeKalb County performs the lion's share of the services needed by most of its municipalities. These service differentials lead to a significant disparity among city dwellers

and residents of unincorporated areas. The city dweller in Fulton County must help pay for services provided to unincorporated areas of the county, while the resident of unincorporated DeKalb County helps pay for services rendered to municipalities (other than the DeKalb County portion of the city of Atlanta). This is also true of debt. In addition, Atlanta residents assist in providing the Fulton County Board of Education with operating funds. Both systems appear to have merit; however, a need for an optimal balance is indicated.

Atlanta provides water service to parts of unincorporated Fulton County, and it assists the county in maintaining fire and police protection. The city and the county work together closely in planning, and their separate school systems are likely to be merged within the next few years.

The county governments tend to operate at a much lower per capita cost in providing needed services than the cities. Only Doraville (DeKalb County) and Forest Park incurred lower total per capita expenditures than the highest cost county (DeKalb). These differences are most notable in the expenditure categories for general administration and sanitation and sewerage. The differences do not indicate efficiency or inefficiency; the categories merely indicate the governmental unit that provides these services.

Relationships Among Cities

Disparities among suburban communities with regard to sources of revenue and provision of services are few. The City of Marietta expends much higher per capita amounts for administration, police protection, and fire protection than do the other cities studied. The DeKalb County cities spend the lowest amounts, primarily because of the extensive service levels of the county.

A significant difference arises among communities with regard to the sale of power and water. East Point sells power to many commercial users and to the City of College Park, providing a large source of revenue. This eases the requirement for high property taxes, while bedroom communities such as Decatur and Forest Park must rely very heavily upon property taxes. A general conclusion can be drawn that city power distribution and sale operations are highly desirable, although East Point has the advantage of a large number of industrial power users to increase its revenue. Marietta also provides power, but its total revenues from power sales are significantly lower than East Point's, yet still higher than those of cities not providing such services.

Central City Versus Suburban Communities

Atlanta contains a variety of high and low income residents, with a high concentration of nonwhites. Welfare costs are exceptionally high in the central city, and the attendant problems of crime, public health needs, et al., are much more severe than those of the suburban municipalities.

A substantial portion of the SMSA's industrial and commercial activity is concentrated in the central city. The suburbs have been attracting some of this activity, however, and many problems have beset the city administration regarding the business of transporting people to and from their place of employment. The Negro has an identity in the central city, and although his job might move to the suburbs, he tends to remain an urbanite.

The central city has experienced higher per capita costs in the areas of administration, police, and parks and recreation. In fact, Atlanta is the only city in the SMSA that provides a sizable amount of recreational facilities.

Among all the differences between the central city and its suburbs, the major problem is that of caring for the low income Negro population. The city's top priority

problem is to develop a program for feeding, clothing, housing, training, transporting, and employing this segment of the population.

State Government Policies

The state of Georgia is a "nonurban policy" state. Legislation regarding consolidation of communities is strictly ad hoc, and matters dealing with annexation and other governmental affairs are usually treated through special (class) legislative acts. A leadership vacuum exists because of the lack of state policy regarding urban matters.

The state is attempting to equalize disparities among governmental units in a number of key areas, namely welfare, education, and health, but it has not taken action to allocate highway funds to the areas of greatest need. Within the Atlanta SMSA, Gwinnett and Clayton Counties obtain a greater per capita revenue for highways than the others, although Atlanta and Fulton County would appear to have a greater need. The state works to supplement federal funds rather than provide a comprehensive plan for all funds.

Regional Government Policies

Regional policy in the Atlanta SMSA results from nonpolicy decisions in most cases. Comprehensive plans for the region have been prepared, but they have not been adopted by the local governments. The lack of such a plan or policy drawn from a plan has led to significant imbalances in areas covered by water and sewerage services.

The Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission has worked to develop regionwide plans and programs, but intergovernmental jealousies have prevented significant coordination. The state has not entered this arena, and a significant reduction in local provincialism will have to occur before regional planning can become effective.

Local Government Policies

The counties and cities in the SMSA compete actively to attract heavy duty taxpayers. Zoning practices and property taxing (inventory) procedures are not consistent among governmental areas, and changes are made to accommodate the needs of individual land users.

The central city has worked to develop a plan for housing and employing its Negro population in light of the commercial and industrial shift to the suburbs. Rapid transit lines are proposed to transport central city Negroes to suburban jobs, and urban renewal efforts are being made to improve their living conditions. This is necessary in light of anti-integration pressures from the suburbs. The program will likely continue

in this manner.

Federal Government Policies

The federal government is applying substantial pressures to eliminate the disparities between the central city and the suburbs. Anti-segregation of schools and of housing are required to obtain certain federal funds, and these funds are essential to Atlanta's growth and prosperity. The pipeline between federal agencies and the SMSA has been connected only to Atlanta, and Atlanta has expressed the desire to desegregate. Other cities are beginning to realize a need for federal funds, and their attitudes toward race will have to change to obtain them. The central city-suburb problem is one of Atlanta's most serious, and federal activities will likely provide an increasing amount of relief during the next few years.

RECOMMENDED REMEDIAL ACTIONS

Public Actions

The problem of curing disparities will not really reduce itself to any simple action, or group of actions, by various public or private bodies. The remedy must be accomplished through a wide variety of activities performed at every level of government. Probably the most important activity is at the private communication (and conditioning of citizens) level. Until people become concerned, and through their concern express a willingness to act, disparities will continue to grow.

The elimination of all disparities is not the complete objective of the authors of this study. Certain disparities should be permitted--maybe even encouraged. Assuming that separate communities (public organizations and bodies politic) will continue to exist--at least in the short run-- then it seems proper to permit the citizens of communities to have something to say about whether or not they should live with, for example, a concrete block city hall or a city hall finished in marble. Similar choices should be available in other aspects of government, but it is not the purpose of this study to detail the choices.

The authors are concerned with the quality of public services, especially as a higher or lower quality of service might create significant disparities in the metropolitan area. The various sources employed in this study did not disclose differences in finances that could be associated with facts demonstrating whether or not a service was being offered at an acceptable level. The authors have no way of determining from a financial report information about the quality of, and frequency of, garbage collection. The quality of the effluent from a sewage treatment plant was not described, nor was the percentage of a city's (or county's) sewage that gets treated, nor the quality of water downstream from a political jurisdiction. Obviously, a high quality of performance could breed a great disparity if most governments performed at a lower level or refused to undertake the function.

It

Probably the most significant action that can be taken to cure the financial disparities, and quality of service disparities if they exist, in the Atlanta metropolitan area--or in any other metropolitan area--lies in the field of education. Citizens, e.g., voters, must be educated, within and outside of the school system, to the problems of government. Too many times have Aldermen of the City of Atlanta campaigned for reelection on the grounds that property taxes were too high and should not be raised. seems to the authors that public relations programs from the governments of the metropolitan area or from the state should be mounted to express the true costs of government--and the true level of public service being received by citizens. The "mystique" of high property taxes in the Atlanta metropolitan area is not justified by facts uncovered and analyzed by the authors. Yet, as this report is being written, citizens of Fulton County and Atlanta are protesting increases in annual taxes of about ten percent in most cases. Some of the most vigorous protests are apparently being delivered by people who are feeling the diminished effect of a homestead exemption when higher assessments are made. Some of the protesters are paying real estate taxes for the first time! The attitude that encourages such reaction to very modest taxes (or tax increases) should be overcome. Apparently the public officials of the Atlanta metropolitan area, including those of Atlanta and Fulton County, have not come to recognize the fact that it costs more to operate an urban or suburban government than it does to run a rural county.

The recommendations which follow are oriented to the philosophy that a series of actions must be taken at all levels of government. The fact that fiscal disparities among local governments do exist does not place the responsibility on any one level of government to cure them. Probably actions can be taken at any level to minimize the disparities with some effect, but cooperative and collaborative actions are required to

get to the bottom of the disparity problem--the nonequities and injustices of local government.

Local Remedies

Therefore,

Many disparities are created by actions that are more than purely local. very little can be accomplished locally to overcome them. The "economic accidents" of a tax base, or an industrial employer, or a commuting pattern, might have been important to the creation of a disparity in a locality. Other disparities might have been created by social attitudes--the race problem for example, but also the white suburban attitude. Little opportunity exists to overcome these attitudes by local actions. Atlanta's attitude about annexation presents another example of a strange attitude that really should be changed.

The following specific actions should be taken.

1. Adopt a unilateral annexation program for Atlanta.--Any territory that qualifies under the Plan of Improvement annexation procedure should be taken into the city as soon as possible--even areas which were once given an opportunity to vote. County lines should not be respected. Atlantans can no longer be worried about appearing to be "nice guys" and about the "we don't want you if you don't want us" attitude.

The justification for an Atlanta annexation program is based on the fact that Atlanta's governmental costs are increasing faster than the city's ability to raise money through taxes. While annexation by Atlanta will expose more people to overlapping taxing authority, the procedure would keep the taxpayers of Atlanta from bearing an even higher tax burden than is now the case. This would help minimize the growing disparity between the Atlanta taxpayer and all other metropolitan taxpayers. There is no good reason for the city of Atlanta to permit its citizens to carry increasing tax burdens when annexation would help to diminish that burden--if other taxpayers, in DeKalb County for example, can be annexed and made to share Atlanta's responsibilities.

The annexation authority available to the City of Atlanta through the Plan of Improvement provides a device through which some of the disparities associated with being a taxpayer of both the city and Fulton County can be minimized. Annexation of territory would permit the City of Atlanta to increase its tax base without diminishing the Fulton County base. An annexation program mounted by the city, coupled with a merger of the two school systems (Atlanta and Fulton County), would essentially combine the two governments. This idea was suggested recently in the public press by a departing county

manager.

A formal merger of the governments of Fulton County and Atlanta has not been suggested by the authors because of the problems that might be created with regard to several of the small municipalities that exist within the county. Cities such as East Point with its 40,000 residents will suffer unique problems if the county is "taken out from under" them. The problem of College Park and Hapeville might also be difficult to resolve. City-county merger is a long range idea which might be very productive to pursue in long range terms. It obviously would provide one procedure through which certain disparities and taxing inequities that now exist between Atlanta, Fulton County, and some other cities of the county could be eliminated.

2. Merge the Atlanta and Fulton County school systems.--A merger would eliminate a small amount of tax overlap, i.e., the small tax paid by city residents, and it would permit the inequities between the two systems to be resolved.

3. Remodel the Atlanta city government.--The city is in need of a modification of its form of government. It should change to a strong executive form, probably by some sort of gradual process. The machinery as it now exists is clumsy and operates essentially without a chief executive. This accents the problem of inequities because the