Sandy Springs Eternal

Over at Out of Control, the Reason Foundation's policy blog, Geoff Segal has replied to my article on Sandy Springs, the newly independent Georgia suburb that is delivering nearly all its services via private contractors. He makes a good point when he notes that the new government isn't taking on any new functions, and therefore isn't an ideal specimen of the pitfalls of the contract model of privatization. (Indeed, the hypothetical example I offered of a private monopoly -- trash collection -- is a basically free market in Fulton County, and the new town doesn't plan to change that.) He also acknowledges that the city is still involved in areas even a moderate libertarian would consider objectionable, but suggests that "at least under the contractual arrangement they're doing it for much less."

I'm less sympathetic to his argument that "Sandy Springs is simply enforcing the codes and laws on the books." For one thing, where the local "adult" industry is concerned, they're adding new regs as well as reviving old ones. More importantly: If the old rules were essentially a dead letter, why revive them now? Where genuine nuisances are concerned -- fire hazards, pest magnets -- I can appreciate the neighbors' frustrations. (Believe me, I can appreciate them. I live in the Rat Capital of the United States.) But where it's just a matter of not wanting to see an old car or a shaggy lawn, we've moved beyond the realm of harmful spillover effects and into the area of minding other people's business.

To reiterate my article's conclusion, it's probably best to regard Sandy Springs not as an example of full-fledged privatization but as an experiment in decentralization. I can defend it, and the other incorporations that might follow, on federalist grounds. But that doesn't mean I'm going to defend everything the new governments do.

Further reading:

* Geoff's original article on Sandy Springs is here.

* I stuck up for another wave of incorporations here.

* I wrote about the benefits and perils of another brand of devolution here.

* Robert Nelson deals with many relevant issues in his excellent new book, Private Neighborhoods and the Transformation of Local Government. Buy a copy today!

Comments

[Jennifer]

I refuse to believe Baltimore has more rats than New York City. Maybe the Baltimore rats just aren't as good at finding places to hide.

[thoreau]

If I ever found a rat in my apartment I'd probably go and do something really crazy. I'd come home with every poison known to man, a shotgun, and a bobcat.

[thoreau]

And I realize that the measures I just described might not be very wise or effective. Like I said, I'd do something crazy.

[Jesse Walker]

It's not unusual to see rats scurrying along the sidewalk just north of our neighborhood dog park. Thankfully, we live on the southern side of the park, where the dominant pests are merely mice.

[thoreau]

It's not unusual to see rats scurrying along the sidewalk just north of our neighborhood dog park.

I'm guessing it's illegal to hang out along the sidewalk with a shotgun?

[Dave W.]

So why doesn't Sandy Springs switch contractors to a different contractor who agrees to forbear from putting on (anti-democratic) pressure for profitable but onerous new regs? Why didn't Sandy Springs municipal government carefully and transparently forbid its contractors from lobbying so that there is no funny biziness on the regulatory side?

Ans: market failure

[Jesse Walker]

I'm guessing it's illegal to hang out along the sidewalk with a shotgun?

Technically illegal, yes, though you wouldn't guess it from the murder rate.

[Jennifer]

It's not unusual to see rats scurrying along the sidewalk just north of our neighborhood dog park.

Still better than New York. True story: a few years ago a friend and I went to NYC for a day trip, and at dusk we went to Madison Square Park (NOT to be confused with Madison Square Garden). It was the classic lovely Manhattan mini-park, surrounded by gorgeous architecture and everything, and so I was thoroughly enjoying the atmosphere as my friend and I sat on a bench and--uh--regulated some interstate commerce.

I saw some squirrels scampering around. One tiny part of my brain thought "Hmm, there is something odd about the way those squirrels are moving," but I was more concerned with matters of commerce regulation at the time. Until a few minutes later, when one of the squirrels ran right past my foot and I noticed that its tail was skinny and hairless, rather than fat and bushy. The whole park was full of rats.

The next time I went to New York I went to Madison Square Park during the day and looked around--all over the park you could see holes in the ground, which were the entrances to the rat burrows.

[Warren]

Rats! Ugh :p
I've waged year long battles against ants. I've endlessly chased the cockroaches into the dark corners. I've baited death traps for any mouse that dare trespass in my domain. But having to face off against a rat, in my castle, that's asking a lot of the sovereign.

[ig]

While I don't necessarily want to live in one of those "planned community" with a lot of restrictive covenants, (and there are PLENTY around here, Williamsburg VA) I am in complete agreement that towns or cities are much like the provider of a product (lifestyle) and that each consumer/resident has the choice to patronize them. And before anyone starts that "poor people don't have the choice.." stuff, bear in mind that most of these places are upper income snobatoriums that require a substantial financial commitment to participate in in the first place. So long as nobody is starting that I'll take your property via ED (blight) crap which is the most insidious byproduct of these sorts of environments.

[linguist]

Another rat story...

I was walking home in Detroit one afternoon and saw a dead animal in the street. I was curious, because it was the size of an opossum but didn't look quite right (and opossums tend not to hang out in Detroit that I'm aware). Perhaps a big cat? But the tail wasn't right. When I finally got close enough, I realized it was indeed a rat. It must have been over 18 inches long.

Weird thing is, that was the ONLY time I ever saw a rat in Detroit.

Hypothesis: most people can be divided into three categories by the creatures they fear irrationally. In my experience, the order of prevalence in the U.S. is 1) spiders, 2) snakes 3) rats. I always question people on this, because even people who say they fear all of them or none (or say bees/bugs/something else) eventually admit to having a bit of an irrational fear of one of the top three.

Correllary hypothesis: (via Matt Ridley and Steven Pinker, among others) these phobias are partly genetic. People who feared rats, for instances were much more likely to have survived the plague, and to pass on their phobic genes.

[Warren]

as my friend and I sat on a bench and--uh--regulated some interstate commerce.

Oh Jennifer, you little minx. You can preserve my wetlands anytime.

[thoreau]

linguist-

I actually like spiders. They eat other bugs, so they're fine by me. Snakes and rats I hate almost equally, but at least snakes eat rats. So snakes are a lesser evil.

[Michael A. Clem]

What really drives me crazy are these stupid, long-term contracts my city makes: 20, 25, even 30 years. Good gosh, there's no telling how many changes will take place in the intervening time.

[Warren]

I welcome spiders in my home. I leave them alone for the most part. Dusty webs, and webs in traffic areas get taken down of course, but the spiders are cool with that. I once had a spider get fruitful above my dinner table. Hundreds of little spiders hatched and stationed themselves about the web for a couple of days. Then one day I came home and they were all gone. I never saw any sign of them again. This anti-arachnophobic attitude had been a source of animosity with more than one woman.

[Jennifer]

Oh Jennifer, you little minx. You can preserve my wetlands anytime.

I thought I would be the one with wetlands in this scenario? I'll have to dig out my old biology textbook to be sure.

[fyodor]

But where it's just a matter of not wanting to see an old car or a shaggy lawn, we've moved beyond the realm of harmful spillover effects and into the area of minding other people's business.

I wish you could convince my neighbor that. He's turned in other neighbors to the city for their unmowed lawn. Being a Republican, you might think he'd understand property rights. But then, maybe he has no problem with minding other people's business!

Out of curiousity, and not that I don't have any ideas myself, but what is the official/standard response to the claim that old cars and shaggy lawns are spillovers in the form of reduced property values for neighbors?

[Jesse Walker]

The suck-it-up response is that it isn't the government's job to guarantee anyone's property values.

The more sympathetic response is that there are private developments whose covenants require the neighbors to maintain their property in particular ways. If you want insurance against your property values declining, buy a house there.

The too-detailed-to-get-into-here response is that Nelson's book explores some ways similar controls might be brought into neighborhoods that previously lacked them.

[bill]

But where it's just a matter of not wanting to see an old car or a shaggy lawn, we've moved beyond the realm of harmful spillover effects and into the area of minding other people's business.

I see I pulled the same quote as fyoder. But I do so to note that directly across the street from the new Sandy Springs City Hall is a seedy-looking massage parlor.

I'd suggest the new government is a bunch of moralist busybodies tired of paying for Atlanta's inner city. Now they get to play at creating a city based on their own interventionist wet dreams, instead of someone elses.

[Warren]

Being a Republican, you might think he'd understand property rights.

The hell? What could possibly make you think that?

[downstater]

i would be very wary of supporting incorporations just to stave off the expansion of surrounding municipalities.

the resultant paper cities offer nothing substantial in services and can become political basket cases of the worst kind. ever go 1 mph over the limit in a city like this? bad idea.

decentralization is fine, until it becomes such a politically fragmented landscape that no real functioning body exists. this is a very real problem in my neck of the woods.

[Michael A. Clem]

It's the state laws that make incorporation more desireable than being annexed by nearby cities. So once again, it's not a problem of decentralization, but of a lack of decentralization.

[Jeff P.]

I'd just like to say that Hartford is rapidly becoming the Northeast rat capital. Look out America!

[Douglas Fletcher]

Now to bring the thread back on subject, which is RATS--

I live in the Rat Capital of the United States

I had the impression that the area round the fish market in DC was pretty spectacularly infested with rats, but who knows. We haven't heard from the New Jersey delegation yet.

Call me crazy, but I've always thought that it might be a good solution to the rat problem in cities would be to use ferrets -- also, it seems to me you could do something to make nest building for small birds of prey like hawks & falcons possible in the cities. The birds of prey would have an added benefit in that they'd also take out a lot of pigeons, aka flying rats.

[thoreau]

I've always thought that it might be a good solution to the rat problem in cities would be to use ferrets

Finally, a truly libertarian solution!

[Geoff Segal]

Dave W. - the contractor is NOT enforcing the regulations, nor are they creating new ones. Rather, the elected mayor and city council have ordered that existing code be enforced, as well as bolstering or creating new ones. Nor has the contractor lobbied for new regs to make their business more profitable. So it is not a case of market failure as you suggest.

Michael A. Clem - long-term contracts make a lot of sense. If nothing else it shifts the risk and potential capital investments onto the private sector. Like you say, there's no telling how much things will change so why should governments leave themselves open to risk?

[quasibill]

"The too-detailed-to-get-into-here response is that Nelson's book explores some ways similar controls might be brought into neighborhoods that previously lacked them."

And don't forgot the Coase response:

Pay for them to clean it up. If it's worth it to you, you'll do it.

[Dave W.]

Nor has the contractor lobbied for new regs to make their business more profitable. So it is not a case of market failure as you suggest.

How do you know this?

Let me be clear about why I am suspicious: I see a clear financial incentive for the contractor to do this lobbying. On the other hand, I don't see a big political push for the new regs. Ya put things things together and you get suspicion. Now there are plenty of ways that Sandy Creek can dispel my suspicion, but a conclusory post from Geof Segal ain't goan cut it here. I think actual rules (eg, double blind bidding, short term contracts only, minimum number of bid requirements, multiple sourcing requirements, citywide referendums on new regs) would help a great deal, but I doubt there are any.

And I am sure that neither the city officials and OMI would assure us that their contacts don't amount to "lobbying." Cause they think we're stupid.

[linguist]

Hundreds of little spiders hatched and stationed themselves about the web for a couple of days.

Yes. All the Type 1 (arachnophobic-tending) people who just read that probably had an internal voice going, "AAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!!!"

Thanks for that. Eeek!

[JD]

The problem with predatory birds is that they just don't kill enough rats. The density of hawks and falcons just doesn't get high enough. We have some red-tailed hawks and peregrine falcons in NYC (including some nesting near my apartment!) but it doesn't make a serious dent. Personally, I think that they should just let us go into the subways with air rifles.

[Rhywun]

Those disgruntled Tennesseeans should simply move to New York 🙂
Annexations just don't happen here (not since the 19th century, at least). Buffalo, for example, has had the same borders since 1853. We also have "town" government, though (counties are divided into towns), so that might have something to do with it. Basically, the cities are already kept in their own tidy little packages, free to fester on their own while the suburbs go their merry way, free of any possibility of annexation.

[Geoff Segal]

Dave W.

I know, because I was there...helping them put the city together. I'm the director of government reform for Reason Foundation. We worked closely with the commission that helped establish the city.

The contract is only a five year deal - there were multiple bidders and it was blind bidding as you suggest. Furthermore, the contractor bid on the premise of using many sub-contractors, to some degree there are multiple providers. From the city's point of view, however, having a single source of accountability is very valuable. It makes oversight easy.

The RFP, the competition process, and the contract are all a matter of public record if you care to review.

The regulations that have been enforced were already on the books. Sandy Springs simply adopted existing Fulton County regulations, they however, have begun enforcing them. In addition, despite your beliefs there is signficant community support for the new regulations - the community fought for 30 years for incorporation. There is a long news trail about their complaints and their issues if you don't believe me. 94% of the community voted for incorporation - given the news and the reasons given for incorporation (including better code enforcement), that's as close to a referendum you're going to get.

As far as OMI's financial incentive - their contract is a fixed price, not per unit. Therefore they do not receive additional revenue by enforcing regs or writing citations etc.

Again, perhaps I have an advantage because I've been there and don't have to speculate.

[James]

Oh, Sandy Springs. It can't get any better than '88 and '89. Food bar at happy hour at Good Old Days. Ten people gulping down food and drinks with a 200 yard stumble home to the Sands apartments. And free AC! which helped me land my lovely wife. Those were the days.
To the point of the post, adding an extra level of government always sucks, unless you're in Fulton County GA.

[Dave W.]

Geof Segal:

Thanks for the more detailed story. I thought I wrote last night to thank you for straightening me out. It sounds like the things I wanted done were generally done, either literally or by proxy.

However, this morning I noticed that Jesse Walker thinks some of the regs may be new, or at least to have fallen into such (what's that word) dusetude (hope that it) that they really are new regs. I don't know if Walker is correct about this, but if he is, then please lobby to have the new regs referendum'd. Referndums cost money, ai-ight, but when you get in bed with a profitseeker sometimes you have to expend a lil of that ol efficiency windfall just to maintain democratic integrity.

[Jesse Walker]

Dave: The restrictions on strip clubs and adult video stores are new. The code regs were already on the books but are being enforced with much more vigor.

[poco]

San Diego is, judging by the local news articles, inundated with rats right now, including my mom's lovely suburban house and my more urban apartment. Bait-stealing, nose-thumbing rats. Her dachshunds help her in that respect sometimes, but my boyfriend's allergic to fur, so no rat-killing mammals chez nous. Maybe we should get the snakes in. Or some hawks. At least we don't have cockroaches (ghet-to!)

Jen, you smoked out in the middle of MS Park? Daring! Did you groove on the Flatiron Building?

[James]

Jesse,

For all the love espoused love for "contractual government" in Sandy Springs the incorporation is really just a cash for services play. For years unincorporated Fulton county has paided tooth and nail for many public services they felt were not delivered in the manner received in incorporated areas (Atl, Alpharetta, Roswell, even south county Tri-cities govs of East Point College Park etc.)and therefore reduced relative quality of life in residence opinion (ask them).

These taxes often have a for better, or for worse a redistributive element in them.

The trash contractors example is a great, however, the ATl/Fulton water authority is a fantastic example in state planning. And the Fulton country school system is far from an efficient model.
I being a product of both its positive and negative attributes.

Unfortunately, under the agreement with the county they will continue to service many of these obligations for years at the same time as build a new layer of gov a.k.a. new taxes.

This is really a squishy upper-middle-class quality of life issue for Sandys Springs residents (polices and parks etc), that will result in all the wonders of local governments in the area. You know, the ususal bored cops pulling over High School kids at the mall, local watering holes closing at 1am instead of the current4 am, stricter zoning on "adult stores," and of course, higher taxes.

I hope they can find some models for other local governments to learn from, but I remain pessimistic that they will fall under the spell of the tyranny of local government mantra, more often practiced, everywhere in this country.

For the anti-sprawl, anti-growth "quality of life" tyranny advocates are ironically gaining footing throughout north GA, despite the fact that much of the new wealth created in north GA is due to the connections to sprawl industries.

[Dave W.]

The code regs were already on the books but are being enforced with much more vigor.

I am still pretty willing to believe Mr. Segal that the disused regs (tat is, wanting them enforced) was part and parcel of the incorporation movement in Sandy Springs. If so, then no referendum needed to my mind. On the other hand, if they are bringing back regs that nobody was crying out for, then a new referendum should be held on those. Since Mr. Segal has been so patient and forthcoming here, I kinda trust him to use good judgement about what regs should be re-ratified by the population and which ones the citizens didn't realize they were getting "back" at the time they voted to break off. He should make a good faith effort on that. democracy and all.

[Corrections Dep't]

"did realize"

[Michael A. Clem]

If this is really "competitive", somebody please tell me an incorporated town or city that is unabashedly low-reg and low-tax. Most seem to be a jumbled mix of good and bad with the bad slight outweighing the good.
I still say power corrupts, even at the local level. The trouble is that incorporation is a trap. They incorporate to protect themselves from county or neighboring city governments, and then everything gradually becomes political, encouraging more fighting and power grabs, losing sight of protecting individual rights.

[Geoff Segal]

James - if you're correct, about this being nothing more than a "squishy upper-middle-class quality of life issue" can you explain why three other communities in Fulton County - at least one in South Fulton, near the airport (not exactly your upper-middle-class neighborhood) - are considering a similar move? In addition, at least two other communities outside of Fulton are considering this.

[James]

Geoff,

This is still a quality of life issue. Unfortunately, most folks are willing to submit themselves to be governed and taxed at this level for certain public goods. Chief among them parks, police, fire, zoning, and development issues. Basically, Fulton has growth in population so much that folks feel they need someone, responsive government, a little closer to home to complain about these issues. Since over the years the county feels it has bigger fish to fry.

Besides there is plenty of unincorporated county space left in counties other than Fulton if you don't want a city layer, like Bartow or Hall.

People do submit themselve to golfcart city (Peachtree City) for a reason.

Even less affluent, but incorporated Fulton have city based services(as discussed before), they pay for in taxes, that their unincorporated neighbors do not benfit from.