Beyond the City–County Divide: Examining Consolidation Referenda Since 2000
Author | Christopher Acuff |
DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X221115361 |
Published date | 01 December 2022 |
Date | 01 December 2022 |
Subject Matter | Research Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X221115361
State and Local Government Review
2022, Vol. 54(4) 287 –309
© The Author(s) 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0160323X221115361
journals.sagepub.com/home/slg
Research Article
1137322SLGXXX10.1177/0160323X221115361State and Local Government ReviewAcu
research-article2022
Beyond the City–County Divide:
Examining Consolidation
Referenda Since 2000
Christopher Acuff
Abstract
Despite the relative infrequency of successful city-county consolidation campaigns, local govern-
ment officials and reformers continue revisiting the possibilities and perceived benefits associated
with consolidation. While studies analyzing campaigns for and against consolidation efforts exist, lit-
tle is known beyond factors at the city and/or county level. For this reason, it is important to dig
deeper and explore the differences at smaller geographic levels. Utilizing demographic, geographic,
and electoral data, this study examines the factors which contribute to support (or opposition) to
consolidation at the voting precinct-level in reform efforts over the last two decades. Results indi-
cate that factors related to higher levels of education, home values, and larger Hispanic populations
tend to increase the vote share in favor of consolidation, while areas with larger median household
incomes demonstrate lower levels of support. These findings help extend our understanding of
boundary change and voting in local referenda in the United States.
Keywords
local government, consolidation
The Quest for Consolidation
Consolidated governments encompass a wide
range of geographic, demographic, and political
characteristics, ranging from urban to rural, tradi-
tionally conservative to traditionally liberal, and
extremely diverse populations in terms of race,
ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Yet, despite
a wide range of characteristics, scholars have
found that consolidating governments can have a
disparate impact on certain populations—particu-
larly racial and ethnic minorities, and those of
lower socioeconomic status (e.g. Bollens 2003;
Clarke 2006; Martin and Schiff 2011; Swanson
2000). In general, voters within the city limits typ-
ically favor consolidation, while voters who reside
outside of the city typically oppose the referenda;
however, analyses of consolidation votes typically
stop at comparing the votes between the city and
county, or differences between broad subgroups
in the community as a whole (e.g. Carr and
Feiock 2004; Leland and Thurmaier 2004;
Leland and Thurmaier 2010).
Despite the abundance of research on cam-
paigns and elections (particularly at the
national-and state-levels) local campaigns are
typically more difficult to examine due to the
The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, 615 McCallie
Avenue, Dept. 6356, Chattanooga, TN 37403-2598, USA
Corresponding Author:
Christopher Acuff, The University of Tennessee at
Chattanooga, 540 McCallie Avenue, Dept. 6356,
Chattanooga, TN 37403-2598, USA.
Email: Christopher-Acuff@utc.edu
288 State and Local Government Review 54(4)
intricacies involved in what often amount to
small-scale, low-turnout elections. Political
science has long established the importance of
party identification, partisan cues, elite attitudes,
socialization, and individual attributes such as
education, race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic
status that ultimately contribute to vote choice
and electoral successes on the part of
candidates and political parties. Aside from the
administrative and economic issues involved,
consolidation referenda often take on attributes
of typical political campaigns, with various
groups and interests advocating for or against
passage. However, simply comparing voters in
their respective cities and counties, or urban to
suburban areas, ignores a great deal of variation
between different sub-city and sub-county
groups. For this reason, much can be gleaned
from exploring factors at the sub-city and
county levels. Thus, this study examines charac-
teristics at the precinct-level which ultimately
contribute to the approval or rejectionof consol-
idation referenda in the last two decades.
Campaigns and Consolidation
Referenda
As Hawkins (1966) explains, “it is sometimes
suggested that the success or failure of proposed
changes in governmental structure rests in large
measure with the proponents of change”
(p. 79). In many of the cases to date, this perspec-
tive still holds true, as many of the consolidation
campaigns analyzed from an empirical perceptive
have shown that issues identified by reformers,
relative campaign strength, and the ability
to effectively convey the need for change to the
electorate are often identified as deciding
factors. However, it should also be noted that,
as Swanson (2004) argues, “interpretations of
outcomes generally go to the victors,”and it
“often takes years for clarifications to emerge,
and then outcomes generally reflect the views
of those in prominent positions”(p. 41). For the
most part, comprehensive analyses of consolida-
tion campaigns and referenda come from sources
such as Rosenbaum and Kammerer (1974) and
Leland and Thurmaier (2004), both of which
have developed and refined models of successful
consolidation, or case studies of one particular
locale, in the case of works by Hawkins (1966)
and Lyons (1977). Subsequent updates to the
Rosenbaum and Kammerer (1974) model have
been suggested; however, the Leland and
Thurmaier (2004) model is the most comprehen-
sive and thorough of these updates, and includes
contributions from many scholars who have
worked to improve our understanding of these
occurrences.
Another consideration is that many consoli-
dated governments have never been studied, as
they are often too small or have occurred too
recently to have undergone comprehensive
study. Other analyses are somewhat less compre-
hensive, and as Swanson (2004) noted, are
subject to change based on time, and the interpre-
tations used. That is not to say that individual
cases are not informative—many of them are—
however, with many analyses related to consoli-
dation, the focus tends to be primarily on
outcome variables related to efficiency, effective-
ness, or economic development, with the narra-
tive of events surrounding the consolidation
referenda in these cases serving only as a back-
drop. Thus, many of the prevalent studies specific
to consolidation campaigns and referenda employ
the Rosenbaum and Kammerer (1974) model, or
are tests of that model (Johnson 2004; Johnson
and Feiock 1999). Additionally, earlier cases
which were the result of legislative action and
not referenda are excluded (e.g. Owen and
Willbern 1985; Rush 1941).
Compared to other forms of local govern-
ment reorganization—such as establishing
special districts, interlocal agreements, and
annexation—Scott (1968) classifies consolida-
tion as the “most radical”approach to govern-
ment change (p. 254). According to Scott
(1968), this “radical”change impacts a great
deal of people and “threatens (or is perceived
as threatening) the political-governmental
world that citizens, governmental employees
and officials, and political leaders have learned
to live with and like”(p. 255). In most cases,
voters are more likely to reject such proposals,
as reformers are either unable to make the case
for consolidation, or opposing forces—political,
socioeconomic, geographic, or otherwise—are
2State and Local Government Review 0(0)
To continue reading
Request your trial