by Andy Rochman

After titanic efforts, it was urged that the JSC approve recommendations that reflect
• What you studied
• What you were given adequate time to digest and thoroughly discuss
• The scope of the JSC purposes and construction
• Conclusions supported by solid facts and not conjecture and extrapolation
• Positions consistent with the findings detailed in the individual reports
• Justification that weighs the positives against the negatives
• Action to be taken

Joint Study Committee Recommendations

At the completion of the study, the JSC has concluded the merger of the two cities is not recommended at this time. However, the JSC has found that there are numerous [only two are enumerated below] opportunities for advantageous partnerships. Further, in light of the Finance Subcommittee’s findings, the JSC recommends that an independent, external financial consultant be jointly employed by the two cities to validate the financial conclusions of the subcommittees. [This is not at all what the Finance Subcommittee recommended. Their report recommended engaging a consultant if the cities were to consider merger, which is not your recommendation. (See end of this email.) Further, when did the JSC discuss let alone entertain the notion of retaining outside expertise?]

The JSC also recommends an ongoing dialogue between the Mayors and City Managers of the two cities to consider and recommend to the two elected bodies potential areas of partnering or sharing of services. It is recommended that they meet on a monthly basis to review and discuss these possibilities. It is recommended the City Managers report orally and in writing to the Clayton Board of Aldermen and to the Richmond Heights City Council at least every six (6) months regarding the progress of any and all potential partnering and/or further studies. Further, it is recommended that the members of the Joint Study Committee [In accordance with resolutions the Cities signed, the JSC ends after you issue your final report; the Cities did not grant the JSC authority to do anything other than study nor empower the JSC to oversee or make anything happen.] be individually notified of all “progress report” meetings and be furnished copies of the written reports. Such meetings will also be posted and open to the general public.

The combining of the Parks and Recreation activities of the two cities together with the cities of Brentwood and Maplewood, and sharing with the CRSWC, could produce substantial revenues. The Parks and Recreation Subcommittee found that a merger of the departments could produce $350,000 to $1,170,000 in additional net revenues after five years. [This does not completely reflect the P&R Subcommittee’s findings; according to the P&R Subcommittee final report, it also could produce losses estimated at $700,000.] There is evidence that all the communities would be favorably inclined to consider the formation of a park district or formal partnering [This appears to be conjecture: The P&R Subcommittee report spoke of no such evidence. Where are Brentwood’s and Maplewood’s signed letters of intent?]. To that end, the JSC recommends that the establishment of a combined park entity be explored thoroughly.

The two cities should further explore costs savings and efficiencies of shared information technology facilities and services. Sharing of services and facilities could have significant cost savings [This was not the IT Subcommittee’s findings. In fact, the IT Subcommittee final report made no recommendations whatsoever.] and lessen redundancies for the two cities. The JSC recommends that the two cities further study possible data center consolidation and shared support services. There may be great opportunity for the cities to serve as back-up facilities for each other, eliminating the costs of third-party off-site facilities.

It is recommended that the two cities jointly plan land use along their boundaries on Clayton Road. [Apart from merging itself, Clayton Road land sharing has never even been mentioned in two years of study and is being introduced in the last-hour 4th draft of your final report.]

Lastly, it is imperative that the Joint Study Committee reiterate that any possible merger of the two cities has no legal impact whatsoever on the four school districts within these two cities. [This is not a recommendation. What action is the JSC requesting the Cities to take?]

WHAT FINANCE SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDED (Page 1 of Report)

“Further, the Finance Subcommittee recommends that if the cities choose to extend their respective commitments to the study of possible merger of the two Municipalities, the governing bodies of the respective city’s individually, and if desired jointly, engage an independent, external consultant to expand on the Joint Study Committee’s efforts to assess the service delivery enhancement potential and the cost.