Shared Services

CITIES WORK WITH THEIR NEIGHBORS TO SAVE MONEY

Last night, the Columbus city council also approved an agreement with eight suburban communities to share fleet services. It allows participating suburbs to pay to use Columbus’ vehicle-repair facilities, and vice-versa. Here is the link to the story.

State Fire Marshall Grant and Loan Application Packages

The Ohio Department of Development is pleased to announce several Local Government Innovation Fund program updates!

Local Government Innovation Fund Program Advisory

LOCAL GOVERNMENT INNOVATION PROGRAM SCHEDULED WORKSHOPS

 The next Local Government Innovation Council meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, January 31 at 1:30 pm. The meeting will be held at the Vern Riffe Center, 77 South High Street, 31st Floor, Columbus, Ohio, 43215.

 The LGIF application, draft project selection methodology, and frequently asked questions are now available electronically on our website at http://development.ohio.gov/Urban/LGIF.htm. The website can be used to access the most recent and up-to-date program information.

 The Local Government Innovation Fund’s Regional Information Sessions are now scheduled. The invitation and webinar registration information is forthcoming.

If you have any questions about any of the program material, please feel free to contact me directly.

Thank you.

Nyla Potter
Loan Officer
Office of Redevelopment

77 South High Street
Columbus, Ohio 43215
614-728-0989 F 614.466.4172

Nyla.Potter@development.ohio.gov

From Hannah.com, an example of Shared Services

Central Ohio Local Governments Pledge Cooperation on Jobs, Services

The mayors and city managers of Columbus and nine bordering suburban cities signed letters this week pledging to cooperate on service delivery and share tax revenue when large companies move among their jurisdictions, an effort to curtail the effects of job poaching.

The mayors began meeting in January to find ways to cooperate on economic development and service delivery. Signatories include the mayors or managers in Columbus, Dublin, Gahanna, Grandview Heights, Grove City, Hilliard, New Albany, Upper Arlington, Westerville and Worthington.

According to Columbus Mayor Michael Coleman's office, the local government leaders signed two non-binding letters of intent. The first indicates a desire to find ways to more efficiently deliver serves through cooperation in such areas as recycling, government vehicle fleets, courts, purchasing, technology and health insurance.

The second letter is aimed at clamping down on job poaching. It calls for a 50-50 split of payroll tax revenue when a business with a payroll of at least $10 million moves from one city to another. The letter also states a desire to prepare job-ready sites and set policies to promote redevelopment.

“Working with our neighbors, I am confident we can agree on new ways to deliver our neighborhood services more efficiently and to reduce the zero-sum practice of job poaching,” Coleman said in a statement. “Together we will save public resources while making Central Ohio one of the best regions in the nation for employment opportunities.”

Many local governments are looking for any way to save money and avoid service cutbacks after the state budget cut payments from the Local Government Fund by 25 percent this fiscal year and 50 percent next year. The budget also included elimination of the estate tax in 2013; most of the revenue from that tax flows to local governments.

State leaders have also sought to encourage more such cooperation in other ways. The General Assembly created a Local Government Innovation Fund in the state budget to encourage collaborative projects, and approved a bill Wednesday to tweak that program. Auditor Dave Yost has also sought to make his office a clearinghouse of ideas for improvement government efficiency, setting up the skinnyohio.org website.

A group of local officials worked through much of 2009 and 2010 to craft recommendations as part of the Commission on Local Government Reform and Collaboration, a creation of the capital budget in the 127th General Assembly. (See The Hannah Report, 8/27/10.)
Story originally published in The Hannah Report on December 15, 2011. Copyright 2011 Hannah News Service, Inc.

The following questionnaire was borrowed from the Ohio Shared Services Model- Association Stakeholder Input Session.

Please fill out the following questionnaire and return it to the League so that we can post the information on our website.

In each of these broad shared service categories:
• Technology
• Administration
• Public Works
• Public Safety/911 systems
• Education-Instructional Support
• Economic Development
• Health & Human Services
• Fleet Management and Operations
• Facilities
• Miscellaneous

Do you have a sponsored program or service or member (or group of members) who can lead in providing the shared service as either a “Center of Excellence” or because it is already a Leading Provider?

In either case, please describe how it is scalable or replicable and indicate some level of its effectiveness.
Use the template on the following page to submit your responses. Copy and paste as necessary to create multiple responses.

Here is an example response:
Submitting Organization and Contact: OBM, Randy Cole

Submission 1

1) In which of the 10 shared service categories does the program/service best fit?

a. indicate one from the list – Public Safety/911 systems

Technology, Administration, Public Works, Public Safety/911 systems, Education-Instructional Support,
Economic Development, Health & Human Services, Fleet Management and Operations, Facilities, Miscellaneous

2) Name of Program/ Service:MARCS

3) Brief description (no more than a paragraph):MARCS is a statewide first responder radio system

4) Number and types of current participants:Hundreds of local political subdivisions and all state agencies currently use the MARCS system.

5) Scalability/Capacity (how many additional entities can participate?):After upgrades necessary to develop a p-25 system, almost all of Ohio’s 1306 discrete radio systems could utilize MARCS as their primary platform through the development of a “system of systems”

6) Constraints (geographic or other limitations): Statewide

7) Benefit- (cost savings or other related measure): Studies have indicated that $500 million to $1 billion in savings to ongoing capital and operating expenses could be achieved through migration to the MARCS platform.

Please use the previous form as a guide when filling out the submission forms. Thank You.

Submitting Organization and Contact:

Submission 1

1) In which of the 10 shared service categories does the program/service best fit?
a. indicate one from the list -
Technology, Administration, Public Works, Public Safety/911 systems, Education-Instructional Support,
Economic Development, Health & Human Services, Fleet Management and Operations, Facilities, Miscellaneous

2) Name of Program/ Service:

3) Brief description (no more than a paragraph):

4) Number and types of current participants:

5) Scalability/Capacity (how many additional entities can participate?):

6) Constraints (geographic or other limitations)

7) Benefit- (cost savings or other related measure)

Submission 2