A consolidated city-county is different from an independent city, although the latter may result from consolidation of a city and a county and may also have the same powers as a consolidated city-county. An independent city is a city not deemed by its state to be located within the boundary of any county and considered a primary administrative division of its state.[5] A consolidated city-county differs from an independent city in that the city and county both nominally exist, although they have a consolidated government, whereas in an independent city, the county does not even nominally exist.[4] Furthermore, a consolidated city-county may still contain independent municipalities maintaining some governmental powers that did not merge with the rest of the county.[6]
Consolidated city-counties are typically formed to address particular government challenges. Among the benefits of having a unified jurisdiction include potential cost savings, more efficiency, increased legal powers and revenue sources, and a more streamlined planning system.[4]
Most consolidated city-counties have a single chief executive who acts as both the city mayor and as the head of the county government, and a multi-district elected body that serves as both the city council and as the county legislative body.[4]
In many states, consolidated city-counties must be approved by voters.[4] According to information compiled by former Albuquerque mayor David Rusk, 105 referendums were held in the United States between 1902 and 2010 to consider proposals to consolidate cities and counties. Only 27 of these proposals were approved by voters.[7]
Wyandotte County, Kansas, uses the term "unified government" to refer to its consolidation with Kansas City, Kansas, and most of the towns within the county boundaries remain separate jurisdictions within the county. Individual sections of a metropolitan or regional municipality may retain some autonomous jurisdiction apart from the citywide government.
Often, in place of another level of government, local governments form councils of governments – essentially governmental organizations which are not empowered with any law-making or law enforcement powers. This is the case in the Atlanta metropolitan area, where the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) studies and makes recommendations on the impact of all major construction and development projects on the region, but generally cannot stop them. The Georgia Regional Transportation Authority (GRTA) is a true government agency of the state of Georgia, and does control some state transportation funding to the cities and counties, but otherwise has very little authority beyond this small power of the purse.
The case of New York City is unique, in that the city consists of five boroughs, each of which is co-extensive with a county. Each has its own district attorney; however, county-level government is essentially non-existent as all executive and legislative power is exercised by the city government throughout the five boroughs. The city, as currently constituted, was created in 1898 when the city of New York (then comprising what would become the boroughs of Manhattan and The Bronx) annexed Kings County, Queens County, and Richmond County as the boroughs of Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island, respectively.
In Russia, there are urban districts - territories consisting of a city and nearby settlements united by one mayor's office. As a rule, urban districts are the capitals of the constituent entities of the Russia and other major cities in the region. In 2020, there were 635 urban districts.
In nine consolidated city-county governments in the United States, the formerly independent incorporated places maintain some governmental powers. In these cities, which the United States Census Bureau calls "consolidated cities", statistics are recorded both for the entire consolidated government and for the component municipalities. A part of the consolidated government is called the "balance", which the Census Bureau defines as "the consolidated city minus the semi-independent incorporated places located within the consolidated city".[6]
In Georgia, consolidations often required multiple attempts, changes in procedures, and different local laws in the state legislature. They often did not include some smaller jurisdictions. They also retained characteristics of both types of government, e.g, a sheriff as required by the Georgia Constitution.[8]
City of New Orleans and Orleans Parish, Louisiana (The City of New Orleans has always served as Orleans Parish's government, though they initially were not coterminous. The city and parish have also annexed parts of neighboring Jefferson Parish.)
City and County of San Francisco, California (The City of San Francisco was the seat of San Francisco County until 1856, when the county was split into the consolidated City and County of San Francisco in the north, with the remainder of old San Francisco County becoming the new County of San Mateo.)
Hartsville and Trousdale County, Tennessee (Despite the consolidated city-county government, Hartsville is not coterminous with Trousdale County; Hartsville remains a geographically distinct municipality within the county.[16])
Houma and Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana[17] (Despite the consolidated city-parish government, Houma is not coterminous with Terrebonne Parish; Houma remains a geographically distinct municipality within the parish.[16])
Athens and Clarke County, Georgia (the cities of Winterville, which is entirely within Clarke County, and Bogart, which is partially within the county, retain separate governments)
Baton Rouge and East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana (three communities within East Baton Rouge Parish – Baker, Central and Zachary – retain separate governments. In addition, the City of Baton Rouge retains separate city limits, and its official census population only includes this area)
Lafayette and Lafayette Parish, Louisiana (In December 2018 voters amended the city-parish charter to split what was a single consolidated city-parish council into two councils — one to represent only the city of Lafayette and the other to represent the parish. The impetus for the change was the desire of city voters to take more control of city-related matters and general unease with the consequences of consolidation).
Louisville and Jefferson County, Kentucky[28] (all cities in pre-merger Jefferson County, other than Louisville, retain separate identities and some governmental functions, but all participate fully in the county-wide governing body, Louisville Metro Council)
Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee (six communities within Davidson County retain separate governments, although all participate in the metropolitan government in a two-tier system)
Petersburg Borough, Alaska (When the borough was created in 2013, the city of Petersburg was dissolved. However, the city of Kupreanof remains a separate entity within the borough.)
Five cities in the Hampton Roads region of Virginia were formed by the consolidation of a city with a county: Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Suffolk, and Virginia Beach (from Norfolk, Elizabeth City, Warwick, Nansemond, and Princess Anne counties, respectively). However, in each case an independent city was created and as such they are not consolidated city-counties. Instead, the Code of Virginia uses the term "consolidated city."[4][30] Similarly, Carson City was consolidated with Ormsby County, Nevada in 1969, but the county was simultaneously dissolved. The city is now a municipality independent of any county.[4]
Potentially consolidated
Aurora, Colorado, split among three counties, explored the creation of a new consolidated city-county in 1996; the effort subsequently failed in a referendum. However, five years later, nearby Broomfield was successful in creating a new city-county from portions of the four counties it had been a part of. Encouraged by Broomfield's experience, an Aurora city councilman again proposed consolidation in 2006.[31] This was not accomplished in 2006 or 2007, and no bills to accomplish consolidation were introduced in the 2008 session of the Colorado legislature.
In 2006, a proposal was made to merge Johnson County and Wyandotte County in Kansas and the cities located in those two counties into a single consolidated city-county, with the name to be determined.[32]
Miami-Dade County, Florida, operates under a federated two-tier government, in which the county government operates as a superseding entity of county affairs and lower-tier incorporated municipalities operate civil and community services at the city level. However, the county provides city-level[clarification needed] police, fire-rescue, sanitation, and other services under contract to many of the municipalities within its borders.
The independent City of St. Louis, Missouri, and that of St. Louis County. The city of St. Louis seceded from the county in the 1870s and is not part of any county in the state of Missouri. Regional leaders have proposed several plans since 2006 to reunify the city and county, each one rejected by voters.[34]
Baltimore and Baltimore County, Maryland: Baltimore is established in the Constitution of Maryland as an independent city. A proposed constitutional amendment to dissolve the city and merge it into Baltimore County was introduced in 1999 but was withdrawn less than a month after the first reading.[36] Consolidation of the city and county was later proposed in 2019.[37]
Movements to consolidate these two jurisdictions has been popping up since the decade of the 1900s.[54] The 2006 proposal was approved by the Douglas County Board of Commissioners, but unanimously rejected by the Omaha City Council.[55] The 2011 proposal was introduced by a state legislator in The Unicameral, as LB344;[56] it was tabled in committee.[57]
Referendums passed in 1925, 1929 and 1939[60] that were blocked on technicalities by the state assembly. A partial consolidation of area school districts in 1956.[61] Currently has a task-force researching consolidation since 2005.[62]
Richmond (independent city) with Henrico County, Virginia (1961),[21] although the result would be an expanded independent city of Richmond rather than a consolidated city-county.
Roanoke County, Virginia, and the City of Roanoke, although the result would be an expanded independent city of Roanoke rather than a consolidated city-county
held referendums in 1969 and 1990 to consolidate the two governments.[35] Both times, city voters approved consolidation while county voters were opposed. The independent city of Salem, Virginia, which would have been surrounded by the consolidated entity, did not participate in the referendums. Vinton, Virginia would have retained its status as a town in the 1990 referendum. The consolidation issue has been dormant since 1990.[citation needed]
Prior consolidation referendum held in 1973 failed. The Georgia General Assembly is conducting a feasibility study towards consolidating the city of Savannah with Chatham County.[63]
St. Louis (independent city) with St. Louis County, Missouri (1926, 1962, In consideration in 2017[65])[21][23] In 2019, a proposal to merge the city and the county was put together by a group called Better Together with support from both the County executive and mayor at the time, but the proposal was withdrawn after the St. Louis County executive Steve Stenger, who would have become mayor of a consolidated St. Louis had the consolidation happened, was indicted and pled guilty to federal corruption charges.[66]
The City of Boston and Suffolk County, Massachusetts operated with a consolidated government for most of the twentieth century with Boston providing office space, auditors, budget, personnel and financial oversight for Suffolk County. This was not a true consolidation because three municipalities – Chelsea, Revere and Winthrop – were never annexed into Boston and remained separate jurisdictions within Suffolk County; however, the City of Boston held complete control of the county by law. The special relationship between Boston and Suffolk County ended in 1999 as part of the gradual abolition of county governments through much of the state with all county employees and powers transferred to Commonwealth of Massachusetts control. The only remaining powers and duties for the City of Boston in regards to the county is ceremonial in which the Suffolk County Register of Deeds is issued the oath of office at the start of a term as well as calls for a meeting to hold a special election to fill the office should there be a failure to elect someone to the office or should a vacancy occur.
From the 17th century to 1898, New York City was coterminous with New York County and was often referred to as the "City and County of New York". Both were coterminous with Manhattan until 1874, when the city and county annexed parts of Westchester County that would become the West Bronx, later annexing the remainder of the future Bronx. Upon consolidation in 1898, New York County was coterminous and consolidated with the boroughs of the Bronx and Manhattan, while the other boroughs were consolidated with their own respective counties. The Bronx was separated from New York County in 1914 to form its own Bronx County, and since then, each of the five boroughs of New York City is coterminous and consolidated with a county of New York state.
^Arnold Fleischmann and Jennifer Custer, "Columbus/Muscogee County, Georgia," in Suzanne M. Leland and Kurt Thurmaier, CASE STUDIES IN CITY-CONSOLIDATION (Armonk, NY, M.E. Sharpe, 2004), 46-59; Arnold Fleischmann, "Regionalism and City-County-County Consolidation in Small Metro Areas," STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVIEW 32:3 (Fall 2000): 213-226.
^ ab"Colorado Municipal Incorporations". State of Colorado, Department of Personnel & Administration, Colorado State Archives. December 1, 2004. Retrieved November 24, 2006.
^"[T]he city and county of Denver ... did not come into being until the day of the issuing of the Governor's proclamation, on December 1, 1902". City Council of the City and County of Denver v. Board of Commissioners of Adams County, 77 P. 858, 861 (1904).
^Allan v. Kennard, 81 Neb. 289, 298 (April 10, 1908) ("...it is, to quote the brief, 'a fact, common to the knowledge of all men that for years there has been a constant growing demand in Omaha and Douglas county [sic] for a merger and consolidation of city and county offices in the sense that similar duties pertaining to the city and county affairs should be performed by one and the same officers;' that such consolidation has been liad with reference to the office of city and county treasurer, and that the result has been satisfactory, and there is a demand for further consolidation.").
