The obstacles in consolidation of municipal structure in the Czech Republic: voluntary mergers in 2002 and 2003

THE OBSTACLES IN CONSOLIDATION OF MUNICIPAL STRUCTURE IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC: VOLUNTARY MERGERS IN 2002 AND 2003Karolína Musilová, Jan HeřmánekOtočec 2015

2

•Are there any aspects which connect the cases in 2002 and 2003? •Is there any impact of previous intermunicipal cooperation in the process of amalgamation?•Are those mergers impact of the shared tax allocation reform in 2001?

Why should we focus on mergers in 2002 and 2003?

3

• Factors examinated during he research – characteristic of the municipality, triggers, process of amalgamation and actors.

• Empirical research based on legislative documents, documents of the units (resolutions, records, agreements), statistical data, local medias and interviews with actors.

• Main problems – the acces to the documents of non-existing units, age of former councilors

Methods and sources of informations

4

• The municipal structure of the Czech Republic is highly fragmented, about 78% of units has less than 1000 inhabitants.

• The autonomy is still highly valued despite the potential lack of financial resources in the smallest municipalities.

• Regardless the ineffectiveness, there is no political party which openly admit possible consolidation.

• 2001 – the incomes of the smallest units decreased due to the shared tax allocation reform, however the aim to trigger amalgamation was not declared.

• Successful voluntary amalgamation is then considered as one of the ways how to inspire small units to merger.

Context

5

Amalgamated municipalities - overview Year Municipal

ityNew unit Number

of inhabitants

Previous experience with amalgamation

Plurality of the local political system

Intermunicipal cooperation

2002

Kaliště

Švihov

54  non-plural  

Jíno 32 non-

plural  

Stropčice 20 non-

plural  

Prosatín Kuřimská Nová Ves 13

non-plural  -

Hostokryje Senomaty 104

 1994 plural  -

2003

Malesice

Plzeň

448 - 1998

semiplural

 ()

Lhota 419 -

 1994 semiplural, 1998 plural

 -

Zahořany Králův Dvůr 223

 1998 plural  -

Domoradice

Vysoké Mýto 164

non-plural  -

6

• Growing number of administrative tasks – Lack of staff, complexity of the tasks

• Territorial aspect of the public administration reform– Unconvinient municipalities with extended powers assigned to

selected units – avoiding traditional partners, bad transport connection to the assigned municipality, distance

• Unsufficient transport connection• Condition of roads• Construction (or reconstruction of utilities)• Unsufficient financial sources

– Cases, when only general lack of sources was mentioned. • Demographic trap, lack of interest

– Inability to draw up a candidate list, ageing of the population

Main reasons for mergers (mentioned by the actors)

7

Problems of municipalities

8

• The iniciator of the merger:

The process of amalgamation and main actors

Jíno, Kaliště, Stropčice

Prosatín Hostokryje Zahořany Domoradice Lhota Malesice

The iniciator of the merger

disappearing unit

disappearing unit

persisting unit

persisting unit

disappearing unit

persisting unit + inspiration from different case

persisting unit + inspiraton from different case

9

• The role of citizens

The process of amalgamation and main actors

 Jíno,

Kaliště, Stropčice

 Prosatín Hostokryje Zahořany Domoradice Lhota Malesice

Citizen´s involvement - - Public

survey - - Public survey

Public survey

10

• The mergers of units were driven by several different factors based on size and resources of the municipalities.

• The reasons for mergers were mostly economical, however any of selected cases was not caused by sudden drop of resources. The only structural impetus was the reform of public administration and the way, how small units were assigned to municipalities with extended powers.

• The amalgamation was agreed at the moment, when the existence of the unit was endangered – i.e. the amalgamation was not considered as a way how to solve long-term problems with financial resources or lack of candidates to local council.

• The intermunicipal cooperation did not play any role in selected cases.

Conclusions

11

• There is no causality between shared tax allocation reform and subsequent mergers. Moreover, the reform of revenues as a cause of the amalgamation was not mentioned at all.

• The units with non-plural political system iniciated the merger, on the onther hand, units with functional political system accepted the proposal from persistent municipalities.

Conclusions II

12

• Karolína Musilová, Jan Heřmánek

• [email protected]

Authors