The Urbanophile has an interesting post entitled “Are States An Anachronism?” The whole thing is worth a read, but I’ll relay a couple of thoughts here. He notes that state/city legislative power is different from state-to-state. In Illinois, Chicago dominates and the state laws tend to reflect this with policies that help a major, international city, but, in so doing, harm smaller cities in the state that have to compete against cities in Indiana. Tax policies that actually help Chicago and allow it to compete globally might harm small cities that have no hope of competing globally but have to look for economic opportunities more locally.
The reverse, he argues, is true in Indiana where, apparently despite the gripes of non-Indianapolis types like me, the state dominates the city. This allows policies that may help rural areas and smaller cities while hindering Marion County’s ability to compete globally. (He gives examples.)
Definitely worth a read.
Interesting read, though I think it is very flawed. in many respects. Because of the way Indiana set up the charter system, with Indy being the only first class city in the state, the legislature can pass specialized legislation particular to Indy. I’m an Indy resident and I don’t for a second believe that the rest of the state has been given favors at the expense of Indy…indeed I think it’s been the opposite.
I’m not sure what he’s saying about home rule. Indiana gives its counties and cities extraordinary power via home rule. No, they don’t have the power to unilaterally do a referendum, but they have just about every other power.
Paul,
First, keep in mind I plan to outline the opposite case in a future blog post. This was part of a point-counterpoint series.
I do know that Indiana can pass special legislation for Indianapolis – and it frequently does (though see below). I would disagree that Indianapolis has strong home rule powers. In fact, it has extremely weak home rule powers compared to many other cities around the country. For example, many other states provide for cities to have a self-amendable home rule city charter whereby they can make significant constitutional changes to their own governmental structure without state approval. Other states also enshrine home rule power in their constitutions, and state legislation that interferes with home rule governance can be overruled in the courts. Now you might not want Indianapolis to have many of the powers of other states’ home rule cities (Chicago and other home rule municipalities in Illinois are exempt from tax cap legislation, for example), but that doesn’t mean those types of powers don’t exist.
I don’t think Indianapolis has gotten a lot of special favors from the state. The typical “special favor” is simply to give Indy the ok to tax itself (but not the rest of the state) to do something. My argument is that the policies that are right for Indianapolis are very different from those that are right for Elkhart, Paoli, Gary, etc. because those are very different places with very different needs. I believe Indiana has adopted a model that best suits the struggles of small manufacturing cities, not large metros. Indiana actually needs more “special” rules for different types of places than it has.
Aaron.
The debate as to whether Indiana is truly a home rule state or not will continue but if ever involved in local governmental activities one quickly believes the state is into everything local. Each legislative session seems to allow less local control. That said, having not been actively involved in a non-home rule state at local level can not compare any difference.
I look no further than education funding to see how involved the state is or isn’t. I was floored a couple of years ago, when, where I live, the Hamilton Southeastern School District was simultaneously building an addition onto the then 4-year-old Fishers High School *AND* threatening to lay off teachers. How is it, I asked, that we can have tons of money for one, and not the other? Answer, I learned- state rules, that dictate allocation formulas, and prevent pulling money from Category ‘A’ into Category ‘B’.
But we had home rule, alright. We could pass an additional levy, which we did. Never mind that we had the money in Category ‘A’. Add on to that brand new building. Hey! Maybe build a sports palace next time!
First up, there are 4 regions of Illinois. Maybe 5. The Chicago ‘burbs are absolutely their own region, completely different than the city itself. Perhaps you would even consider the old inner ring ‘burbs different than the outer ‘burbs and exurbs.
The politics and economics of the ‘burbs is quite different than Chicago. Especially in the far outer suburbs, which are actually growing economically and demographically.
The idea that “cooperation” beats competition is foolish. There is no advantage to consolidation and regionalism. All it does is create harder to manage entities (because they are larger) that are controlled by insiders (particularly public employee unions). That is not the recipe for economic growth.
Personally, I think having your largest city also be the largest economic entity in the state is a recipe for disaster. Even if Indy is not as large a % of the state economy as certain other cities, it does dominate because it is the political capital, media capital, and economic capital of the state. It sucks all the oxygen out of the atmosphere as a result.
Example? The reason that home rule is so weak is that Indianapolis folks treat the state government like local government. They show up at meetings and make themselves heard. Thus, they get what they want and need from state government, and can stifle competition elsewhere in the state as a result.
Look at “Major Moves”. Indy sells the toll road, of which the majority of tolls are paid by folks in Northwest Indiana, and they use the money to build shit in Indy. And then when one of our major bridges needs to be closed because of neglect, they don’t even pony up to rebuild it.
As for “the real competition is in China”, I don’t see how that is relevant. First up, trade still isn’t that large a % of the economy. So it is wrong on the face of it. But even if it is true, how does that translate into policy? What is Illinois and Indiana going to do together that is going to be so great?
I’ll tell you what, Northwest Indiana hasn’t done so badly being the place where you can get the stuff you can’t get in Chicago (fireworks, cheap gas and cigarettes, gambling, lower sales tax, etc.) We certainly have lower property taxes now. The trend of white folks fleeing here from the South Chicago ‘burbs is increasing, resulting in a positive population growth rate. The town of St. John has been the fastest growing town in Indiana in recent years (it has good highway access to Chicago and lots of open space for development, and very low taxes).