An interesting article relevant to SC Cities (Columbia, St. Andrews: real estate, 2015)
Columbia areaColumbia - Lexington - Irmo
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've often wanted Columbia and Richland County to consolidate or at least for annexation laws in South Carolina to be relaxed, but this article makes some great points about why that might not be such a great idea. I don't think anyone denies that thought processes are different between those who love the city and those who love the suburbs or exurbs. I still think the city and county should consolidate, but this does give me some pause.
Some 20 years ago the State of MA did away with county government (they kept county jails). They felt it was an unnecessary overlay of services/cost. While I advocated they do such in MA (I lived there then), I am not sure such would work in SC, especially in the more rural areas. In many SC counties the local government does not have a pot to pee in nor the resources to handle managing things likes road, schools, etc. even if they had the money.
The more rural a state, the more a county government makes sense.
Some 20 years ago the State of MA did away with county government (they kept county jails). They felt it was an unnecessary overlay of services/cost. While I advocated they do such in MA (I lived there then), I am not sure such would work in SC, especially in the more rural areas. In many SC counties the local government does not have a pot to pee in nor the resources to handle managing things likes road, schools, etc. even if they had the money.
The more rural a state, the more a county government makes sense.
Connecticut did away with county governments in the early 70's.. with the state taking on some responsibilities ... but the individual towns and cities getting the bulk of the activities. Seems to have worked out well... cutting a layer of government and its cost ..out..but then there were only 7 counties
South Carolina has too many counties ... some so small population-wise and resource-wise ... they wouldn't be able to manage much as you rightly point out ....I think we could easily reduce the number here by half and strategically merge some of those counties so they could manage their affairs accordingly.
Unfortunately ... theres a lot of vested interest in maintaining the status quo...
for lots of reasons ... none of which make for efficient government.
Connecticut did away with county governments in the early 70's.. with the state taking on some responsibilities ... but the individual towns and cities getting the bulk of the activities. Seems to have worked out well... cutting a layer of government and its cost ..out..but then there were only 7 counties
South Carolina has too many counties ... some so small population-wise and resource-wise ... they wouldn't be able to manage much as you rightly point out ....I think we could easily reduce the number here by half and strategically merge some of those counties so they could manage their affairs accordingly.
Unfortunately ... theres a lot of vested interest in maintaining the status quo...
for lots of reasons ... none of which make for efficient government.
An article that states that more government is bad.
I can go along with that.
Not necessarily, in my opinion. My version of less government is likely a little different than yours - fewer layers, but more services, especially for the less fortunate. It's absurd how many governmental entities there are - commissions, towns, cities, counties, states and federal government. There should be fewer cities and counties and I'd rather get rid of states, altogether and have fewer subdivisions. 50 is ridiculous and 46 counties in a little state like South Carolina is absurd.
This raises some very good points and I think each of 3 metros have large issues with this...Columbia especially.
The lack of cooperation amongst governments around the Columbia metro area is not only just immature, but it has hindered growth in the past and will continue. The worst part about it is that there is absolutely no need for it.
Not necessarily, in my opinion. My version of less government is likely a little different than yours - fewer layers, but more services, especially for the less fortunate. It's absurd how many governmental entities there are - commissions, towns, cities, counties, states and federal government. There should be fewer cities and counties and I'd rather get rid of states, altogether and have fewer subdivisions. 50 is ridiculous and 46 counties in a little state like South Carolina is absurd.
Some counties could be merged (Calhoun into Orangeburg, Bamberg and Allendale into Barnwell, McCormick into Edgefield, a few more I can't think of right now), but the real consolidation needs to happen with special purpose districts.
Seems like consolidation would be less government than more no? Though I would like Columbia and Richland to merge.. I can see West Columbia, Cayce, Springdale, and Pine Ridge being more applicable in this case.. There is no real reason why all of these cities should be separated other than to keep politicos and a few bureaucrats in their jobs. That said, the residents of these communities havent been able to move towards consolidation.. so they must be content with it.
Efforts to incorporate St. Andrews, Lower Richland, Richland Northeast and Ballentine have also failed so there seems to be some interest in the status quo...though I wonder how or why Blythewood was succesful. I guess it was trying to stop encroachment of a growing NE Columbia.. now it seems to embrace it by cherry picking off the more lucrative and desirable developments as they are created. This is likely the same reasons, among others, why Forest Acres and Arcadia Lakes exist. I was told that part of the reason Forest Acres incorporated was to stop any form of public housing from entering the area likely promoted by the creation of Saxon Homes and Gonzalas Gardens as war housing.. and as a real estate venture to control the allocation of federal funds for infrastructure projects in a manner that benefited major landowners during and after the war.....which could be best controlled as an independent town than as part of Richland County or the City of Columbia. After the war, we all know of the suburban boom that occurred which fueled the City;s initial growth.
Acadia Lakes is a glorified HOA that was horrified by the urbanization of unincorporated area of Dentsville thus used invisible boundaries to insulate themselves...
Last edited by Woodlands; 05-19-2015 at 07:52 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
