Hamilton County's new mayor, Jim Coppinger, could hardly have picked a better time and circumstance to assume his new post.
Major new plants here, along with a recovering national economy, augur a welcome increase in job growth. The county has just been informed that it has the best bond rating, and among the lowest per-capita debt, of any county in Tennessee. And the new mayor is fortunate to have a veteran staff of department directors whose expertise frees him to continue the business recruitment role that his predecessor, Claude Ramsey, pursued to such great benefit.
That doesn't mean that Coppinger has little else to do. Indeed, he can, and should, pursue at least four major goals that without his vigorous support likely will not be accomplished at anywhere near the level the county needs. These include:
Countywide smart-growth
Growth planning in the unincorporated areas of the county so far has mainly been taken to mean simply roads, core utilities and industrial parks and the services and transportation access they need. Smart growth and comprehensive land use planning for an expanding work force and residential and commercial growth demands planning that is far more detailed and visionary to accommodate the tsunami of development and cope with the congestion that is bound to occur over the next decade.
A sharply focused effort is demanded in this area - an area Ramsey, in the old-style county government tradition, largely shorted in his tenure. Smart growth must envision and anticipate the needs for new classrooms, parks and playgrounds; commercial hubs that more wisely serve residential sprawl; a comprehensive countywide sewer system, infrastructure and vital public services (fire, police, water, waste and public transportation).
Failure to undertake this challenge will result in haphazard growth, and lead to basic urban services being missed for too long, or left out entirely, or shoehorned-in in later years at much greater government cost in expensive do-overs.
Consolidate core services
Hamilton County, Chattanooga and the county's nine smaller municipalities must look to consolidation of core urban services as a key to the county's future prosperity. This is key to smart growth, and it doesn't have to mean a metro government that requires the smaller municipalities to surrender their charter or their community autonomy.
Done wisely, it should bolster both the service and cost efficiency of police, fire, public works and water utility services. A countywide fire department, for example, could follow the service-area path of our now well-established countywide emergency service, which was the first countywide service to be established. A similar arrangement for a countywide fire department, with its upgraded rating and 24-hour staffing, would provide a net savings in insurance premiums to most residents outside the city. And that's just the tip of the iceberg for consolidating essential services.
Countywide tax equity
Tax equity for all county residents should, at last, move to the top of county government's agenda. Fully 71 percent of county residents now live in one of the county's 10 municipalities. They all pay the countywide property tax, but they get none of the benefit of the portion of countywide tax revenue that goes to support several key services. The Sheriff's Department patrols, for example, are provided only in the unincorporated areas of the county. (Municipalities like Walden that contract for Sheriff's Department patrols must pay a separate feed for such service, over and above the countywide property tax they pay.)
Similarly, county government uses its countywide taxpayer base to build and maintain roads only in the unincorporated areas of the county. The countywide property tax also subsidizes volunteer firehalls chiefly in the unincorporated areas of the county. The Water and Wastewater Treatment Authority uses county bonds financed by countywide taxpayers to capitalize the cost of sewers that it lays mainly in unincorporated areas. Municipalities that use the WWTA generally float their own financing bonds.
These and other subsidies for services only in unincorporated areas of the county cheat county taxpayers in the municipalities, and give county residents on their borders a sweetheart tax-subsidized ride.
County officials have wrongly ignored this inequity for decades, even though six of the nine commissioners answer mainly to municipal residents, and even though state law requires district-based financing for non-municipal fire departments, which are mostly volunteer units.
The county's financial estimates of the cost of these sweetheart tax subsidies, moreover, are grossly skewed: They wrongly show state and federal money that funds about two-thirds of the schools budget as "county funded." Since the total school budget eats up the lion's share of the county's total budget, that makes non-school expenditures in the unincorporated county look small-bore.
Were county-only budget funds actually considered for the school budget, the percentage of county taxpayer revenue absorbed by services provided only in unincorporated areas would be significantly higher.
In any case, any inequity in county spending in unincorporated areas should be remedied as a matter of taxpayer fairness, period. Were that done, municipal tax rates could be lowered.
With the pending expiration this summer of the city-county agreement on the split of the countywide sales tax, moreover, it is even more important to fairly resolve the issue of tax equity. Otherwise, the county mayor will have a hard time leveraging a fair sales agreement from the city, whose commercial sales tax base is dominant.
Stronger support for schools
Ramsey made a point of leading a countywide school "summit" process of public hearings and vision plans to improve county schools a few years ago, but the County Commission, led by Fred Skillern and his kindred anti-school system followers, refused by 5-4 votes to fund Ramsey's plan unless and until the could install a superintendent of their choosing - rather than the school board's choosing.
This anti-school, anti-superintendent bias hasn't changed. Yet it is a travesty, a gross example of a small-minded, old-style County Commission that resents efforts to strengthen largely black urban schools, and that undermines academic progress by fostering a negative political dynamic for funding.
With the pending wave of growth, and more businesses seriously considering locating here, county government needs a strong education focus to capitalize on the city's and county's economic momentum. Unfortunately, the results of the state's weak academic standards, which have now been revealed, show just how badly school systems in Hamilton and most other Tennessee counties trail the national norm.
If Hamilton County is to take the quantum leap forward that now seems within the community's grasp, it must make a more serious effort to improve county schools.
If Mayor Coppinger is to successfully tackle this docket and demonstrate the stewardship necessary to lead Hamilton County to the next level, he will have his hands full. With the county's continued prosperity and the hopes of so many riding on his shoulders, we wish him well.