Professional Documents
Culture Documents
10. Budget Planning: Preparing the Organization and Community to Budget 257
Organizational Planning to Meet Efficiency and Effectiveness Expectations 260
Political Planning 272
Polity Planning 278
Summary 286
Study Questions 287
Notes 288
PART III. EXPENDITURE FORMATS FOR DECISION AND CONTROL
Teaching Case: A New Mayor Mandates Performance-Based Budgeting 291
Part III Introduction: Expenditure Formats for Decision and Control 299
Part III Summary: The Comparative Strengths of Budgeting Formats and Their
Contributions to Democratic Governance 401
Teaching Case: Negotiations with City Unions Threaten to Disrupt the Budget Process 411
Glossary 529
Bibliography 555
Index 579
About the Authors 594
This page intentionally left blank
Preface and
Acknowledgments
This text on local public budgeting draws on our several decades of instructional experience,
scholarship, and professional practice focused on the improvement of local public service. We are
grateful that much of our experience has been acquired through our work in the Mark O. Hatfield
School of Government’s Center for Public Service (previously known as the Executive Leadership
Institute) at Portland State University. The Center for Public Service (CPS) serves as a two-way
transfer station that integrates the practical knowledge of public service professionals with the
academic research and knowledge generated by the university. CPS has provided a fertile ground
where practitioners and academics come together to coproduce better public service knowledge
and practices through joint engagement in applied research, leadership development, and techni-
cal assistance. This book is both a product of this coproduction process and a testimonial to the
important role that such a partnership plays in improving public service practices. We have sought
to capture the lessons we have learned from this experience and pass them on to our students who
wish to devote their lives to public service in local nonprofit and governmental organizations. In
the sections that follow, we summarize the role of this text in preparing students for careers in
local public service.
Focus of Text
This text is aimed especially at graduate students in master’s degree programs in public policy,
public administration, urban planning, nonprofit management, political science, health, social
work, and public affairs. Since these programs vary widely in the background of their students
and in the priority they give to courses in local government and budgeting, we have tried to be
mindful of this diversity in writing the text.
In some programs, public budgeting is the first introductory course in a public finance sequence;
in other programs, budgeting is a second course following an introductory course in accounting and
management control. In some programs, public budgeting is a mandatory core course; in others,
it is an elective. Students tend to enter public budgeting classes with a broad array of technical
skill levels and backgrounds. Within this diversity, however, there is a common denominator:
Most students have limited backgrounds in statistics and analytic methods, economics, and an
understanding of the public policy process, especially at the local level of government. To make
this text accessible to students and practitioners at all levels, we have kept the mathematics, com-
putations, and accounting to the basic level of first-year college algebra and analytic geometry.
And we have increased our emphasis on local government structures and processes of governance.
Other available public budgeting texts provide effective content and instruction at a higher analytic
level. Furthermore, we have assumed a minimum level of understanding of the local public policy
process and the varieties of models that seek to make sense out of local governing processes.
xi
xii Preface and Acknowledgments
A large portion of students enrolled in public budgeting courses work at the local government
level. This book makes a special effort to take into account the variety of experiences these students
have in all forms of county, city, and special districts. Another large portion of students who are
typically enrolled in public budgeting courses work for nonprofit organizations and foundations.
Again, the text makes a special effort to take into account the wide variety, size, and complexity of
nonprofit organization, ranging from the smallest micro nonprofits providing social services with
one part-time administrator and volunteers, to major hospitals, universities, and intermediaries with
budgets in the hundreds of millions of dollars. While there are important differences, nonprofit
administrators are faced with many of the same budget process requirements and challenges as
their peers in local government. Nonprofit budgeting includes planning and accounting for revenue
generation, expenditure development, account balancing, and the political aspects of budget adop-
tion through an executive director and board. For these reasons, we attempt throughout the text to
discuss the applicability of the material and budgeting principles to nonprofit organizations. But
this coverage falls short of what nonprofit managers need to know in order to be fully successful
in performing their fiduciary roles. We encourage faculty and students with a primary interest in
nonprofit finance to consult other, more advanced texts.
The variation in course requirements among graduate public administration programs also re-
flects inconsistent mandatory degree requirements. Many topics closely related to public budgeting
are covered in elective courses. A public budgeting course may provide students with their only
exposure to strategic planning, contracting and procurement, management control and accounting,
nonprofit finance, performance measurement, or public finance. We have provided foundational
summaries of these topics as they link to the public budgeting process.
Core Themes
Most public budgeting texts focus on the federal budgeting process despite the fact that local
governments are by far the most important unit of government in the lives of most citizens. Local
government units throughout the United States number about 87,500. This text is organized around
the following four local government themes, which are more fully developed in chapter 1:
• Local governments play a central role in building and sustaining the trust of American citizens
in democratic governance.
• Local government career administrators play a critical role in making the local budgeting
process work successfully.
• The common good at the local level is the product of collaboration between government,
nonprofit service providers, private market-sector organizations, and other community
partners.
• The reality of severe resource constraints faced by most local governments for the foresee-
able future increases the urgency of taking what we call a polity-centered approach to local
public budgeting.
Organization of Text
We have divided the text into four parts or sections, each of which opens with a demonstrative
teaching case. The purpose of each case is to illustrate the core themes of the section and to
provide students with an opportunity to test the practicality of what they have learned in the sec-
tion chapters. Part I establishes the context of local public budgeting within the larger historical
framework of American government. It defines the purposes of public budgeting and establishes
the importance of governance as the driving force behind government and community budgeting.
Preface and Acknowledgments xiii
The section then reviews the major actors in the government budgeting process and introduces
the budget process cycle.
A familiarity with revenue sources is critical to understanding the potential for spending and
program services delivery. Part II of the text reviews the sources of public revenues, explains the
role of property tax and retail sales tax in detail, reviews methods for forecasting revenues, and
provides an overview of nonprofit revenues and community governance of tax expenditures and tax
rebates. It then reviews budget funds and basic accounting concepts that play an important role in
defining the parameters and standards for measuring the success of local public budgeting systems.
Students need to understand these concepts to fully understand the public budget documents they
read. This part of the book closes with an important chapter on budget process planning.
Part III of the text focuses on department- and program-level budget preparation. We devote a
chapter to each of the following four traditional approaches to local government budgeting: line-
item budgeting; the planning, programming, budgeting system (PPBS); performance-oriented
budgeting; and zero-base budgeting (ZBB) and priority-based budgeting. The goal of these chap-
ters is to illustrate the following four types of accountability that are important for measuring the
success of local public budgeting:
The order of discussion for the format-focused chapters in Part III is based on the historical
evolution of various systems of accountability. However, the chapters are written as independent,
stand-alone essays, thus allowing instructors to sequence the discussions to accommodate the
goals and purposes of a given course.
Part IV of the text reviews the processes for the development of an integrated executive bud-
get and its adoption by the legislative body. The section begins with a chapter on the process for
budget approval, which is composed of budget assembly by the central budget office, review and
approval by the executive, and finally, review and adoption by the elected or appointed council or
board. Part IV also includes a chapter on capital budgeting. A primary outcome of the budgeting
process is its actual application over the fiscal year or biennium. With this in mind, the section
explains the procedures that are used as part of the budget execution process, including monthly
reporting and cash flow management adjustments. Finally, Part IV provides an overview of the
post-budget auditing process.
Our teaching experiences have confirmed the benefit of having a series of prepared technical
exercises and datasets to support the topics presented in the course text. To this end, we have pro-
vided the following series of laboratory exercises that can help students gain a basic understand-
ing of key concepts and budgeting techniques. The website at www.pdx.edu/cps/budget-book
provides exercises and data for:
• Revenue forecasting
• Budget fund accounting
• Line-item budgeting
• PPBS budgeting and performance budgeting
• Zero-base budgeting
• Making the department budget request
• Budget integration and balancing
• Capital budgeting
xiv Preface and Acknowledgments
We have included an extensive glossary at the end of the book for all terms that have technical
or special meaning to those in the professional budgeting community. All boldface terms in the
text can be found in the Glossary.
Acknowledgments
We would very much like to thank those students who reviewed the text and laboratory exercises
over the years. The Oregon State Fiscal Association provided the initial grant that supported the
development of our precursor text, Handbook on Public Budgeting. We also wish to acknowledge
the support, advice, and suggestions of Jon Yunker, Drew Barden, David Jarvis, Mary Gruss, Susan
Walker, Cathy Huber Nickerson, Cece Clitheroe, Mary Ripp, Sandra Reese, and Mark Sayler. In
particular, we would like to thank Rick Mogren, our production coordinator, who has performed
stellar work in bringing this finished product to the final production stage; our executive editor,
Harry Briggs; and the editorial staff at M.E. Sharpe, for their continued enthusiastic and high-
quality editorial support. Finally, we would like to thank Ron Tainmen, Director of the Hatfreld
School in Government, for financial support in the preparation of this manuscript.
Part I
General Concepts
of Local Public
Budgeting
This page intentionally left blank
Teaching Case
A Case of Drastically
Falling Nonprofit Revenues
Case Narrative
Sonia Albertson, executive director of the nonprofit Upper Cascade Women’s Support Project
(hereafter referred to as the Support Project) sighed as she reviewed the numbers and then looked
over at her finance officer, Brenda Johnson.1 As usual, Brenda had reduced the ever-changing flow
of contracts, grants, major donations, and fees for service into a reality of hard, clear numbers.
Several of the revenue sources that the Support Project had come to rely on were being discon-
tinued. Revenues for the coming year’s budget would be much lower than they had been in recent
years, and the organization would need to make major changes to adapt. Next year’s budget would
have to become the blueprint for defining and making these radical changes.
It was now mid-September, and Sonia needed to present a proposed budget to the Support
Project’s board of directors by November 15. This would allow sufficient time for debate by the
board and for the adoption of a new budget by January 1, which was the beginning date of the
new fiscal year. Fortunately, Brenda had organized a budget process for the organization. Budget
preparation instructions had been sent out to each major program in late July, and the staff analysts,
program directors, and division directors were currently completing the technical groundwork for
their budget requests. Brenda had provided them with the best possible forecasts of the different
revenue sources, but revenues were falling steadily from the forecast levels. The directors and staff
were scrambling to make adjustments and still meet their October 1 due date for budget request
submission. By this time, Brenda was working closely with the different programs to develop
cutback packages. This was a whole new experience for Sonia, Brenda, the program directors,
and the staff, but the Support Project simply could not go on in its current form.
Sonia and Brenda had hoped that the local community foundation would supply several
emergency grants to help offset the loss in state government and country grant revenues, but a
recent telephone call from the foundation’s director had convinced Sonia there was no chance of
receiving any new funds. In past years, government grants had funded about 65 percent of the
project’s programs and staff. Sonia and Brenda would need to use the proposed budget to sketch
out major reductions in programs, staff, and the elimination of two grants to partner organizations.
The Support Project would likely maintain its strategic direction and program goals but respond
to community and client needs in a much smaller way.
Sonia turned to Brenda and said, “I will schedule a large block of time at our October board
meeting to lay out the situation. This will allow us time to provide a briefing and informa-
tion session before the budget presentation at the November board meeting. It will give the
board members time to process the situation before decisions are required. In the meantime,
I’ll update the board chair, and we will need to brief each of the other board members ahead
of time.” “As soon as we have an organization level proposal,” she went on, “we will need to
hold a staff family meeting to discuss the situation and the likelihood of layoffs. At that point,
you will need to contact the Shelter and Respite House and the Youth Response Project and
explain the situation.” Both Sonia and Brenda knew that this would be a challenging month
with devastating news for everyone.
3
4 General Concepts of Local Public Budgeting
Sonia Albertson had been the chief executive officer (CEO) of the Upper Cascade Women’s
Support Project for the past nine years. Over those years, the organization had grown from a small
women’s crisis hotline and shelter service to a multiservice organization with more than 120
employees. The project had taken on new grants from the local community foundation and two
regional community intermediary nonprofits.2 These nonprofit-sector grants complemented several
major contracts from county and state social service agencies. The Support Project continued to
provide telephone crisis intervention and safe shelter services for battered and threatened women
and their families, but it also now provided a range of other social and support services to women
and their families. The Support Project shelter could provide emergency and short-term shelter
for 20 single women and three women with children. Through a state human services grant, the
Support Project had established a drug and alcohol group treatment program for both women and
men, and using a county grant it had established a small mental health services program. The
Support Project provided a counseling and referral service to help women identify and access
services. To assist women in their efforts to gain and retain employment, the Support Project
established a business clothes bank, employment preparation counseling, and child care services
for toddlers through kindergarten. The Support Project’s board had carefully reviewed each new
program for strategic conformance with the organization’s mission—to help women in need), and
for its financial ramifications. Sonia was proud of the organization’s growth and its steady and
increasing service to the community.
As the Support Project organization grew, attention to administrative services had lagged. After
utilizing the services of a succession of bookkeepers and outside financial service providers, Sonia
and the board realized that the organization had grown to the point that it needed a chief financial
officer (CFO). Brenda Johnson was hired to bring order to a chaos of budgets, grant requirements,
audits, and limited professional staff capacity. In filling the CFO position, the board sought a candi-
date who could develop complex financial systems and internal controls, lead budget development,
bring consistency and quality to procurement and contracting, and improve the organization’s
performance.3 Brenda applied for the position as a CPA with extensive nonprofit experience. She
had successfully grown into the other aspects of the position. Brenda reported directly to Sonia
as the chief executive and was an important member of the executive team. Additionally, through
her continued presence and quality work, Brenda had developed strong credibility with the board
members. Brenda maintained a direct relationship with the board, especially on financial matters.
She managed this relationship carefully, most often closely coordinating with Sonia but, on occa-
sion, advocating independent opinions to the board chair and board members.
Brenda and Sonia had worked especially hard to diversify the organization’s revenues between
private grants, state agency and local government contracts, smaller charitable donations, and
client user fees. This formula had worked well up until the recent major economic downturn.
The Support Project had consistently covered expenses and put away a small reserve for tough
times. But the severe economic recession of the last year had overwhelmed these carefully laid
plans and strategies.
Brenda had pushed Sonia to follow the development of the economic recession over the last
year and a half. A sputtering national economy and the downturn of the stock market had stalled
business hiring. Faced with employment uncertainty, consumers had put off purchasing new cars
and other large discretionary capital purchases. Another major outcome of the recession was
severely limited tax revenues to the state government: Reduced purchasing by consumers and
businesses resulted in reduced retail sales tax revenues. Automobile use taxes and transfer fees,
and lodging and entertainment sales taxes were also down considerably. Caution by businesses
had led to increased unemployment. Weak employment and reduced business activity led to a
strong reduction in state income tax revenues.
The reduced revenues had left the state government with revenue shortfalls of over $800 mil-
Teaching Case 5
lion. With state revenues so severely depressed, the legislature would be forced to reduce revenue
sharing and grants to counties and local governments. These intergovernmental revenues were the
primary source of funds for many of the Support Project’s programs.
Early in the previous December, following state constitution requirements, the governor had
presented a balanced budget filled with extensive cuts and program reductions. The balanced
budget responded to the $800 million revenue shortfall with major cuts to numerous programs.
The governor could have shifted the timing of expenditures, used one-time monies, emptied the
rainy day fund, and/or borrowed short-term funds to soften the blows, but she relied on her budget
office analysts to present a truthful picture without gimmicks. This approach forced the legislature
to make the policy and spending decisions that would respond to the reality of reduced revenues.
The structure of the state budget, however, greatly limited what the governor could modify. Over
70 percent of the state budget was protected by constitutional requirements to fund K–12 schools,
public safety, and the state police. Other required spending included matching funds to obtain fed-
eral grants and debt service payments on funds borrowed by the state. The difficulty of the state’s
revenue situation was demonstrated by calls to close both a youth corrections camp and the least
efficient unit of the adult state prison system. But because social services were not constitution-
ally protected, the deepest cuts fell on health and social service programs. About 10,000 clients
would be left ineligible for the state health plan, thus freeing up $150 million in savings. Secure
crisis residential centers for youth were eliminated in favor of lower cost residential service for
$9.4 million in savings. Nursing home reimbursement rates under the state’s Medicaid program
were reduced by 5 percent, yielding another $46.2 million savings in both state and federal dollars.
Funding for mental health services was reduced by $30.5 million. And the general assistance to
unemployable adults and alcohol and drug addiction treatment funds were cut by $160 million.
Though it was balanced, even the governor publicly lamented that the budget was unjust.
Sonia and Brenda had followed the governor’s budget—and the subsequent legislative action
on it—quite closely. In January, the state legislature had convened for a general session, a pri-
mary task of which was to prepare a new biennial budget. Committee hearings in the state house
and state senate laid out the issues. The quarterly state revenue forecast told of further revenue
shortfalls. But analysts from the state’s service caseload forecasting team predicted strongly in-
creasing needs for social services, job training, and postsecondary education services because of
the poor economy. Sonia had gone to the state capital and testified before the House Health and
Social Services Appropriations Subcommittee on the growing need for services. Other nonprofit
executives and county commissioners had testified before state senate committees. Social service
advocates and lobbyists had worked the halls and delivered constituent communications as best
they could. While the lawmakers had blunted the worst cuts in the governor’s budget, the fiscal
realities resulted in about a $325 million reduction spread across emergency housing, low-income
health, mental health, drug and alcohol recovery, developmental disabilities, juvenile services,
and job training programs.
Just after the legislature convened in January, the Upper Cascadia County Commission also
began its work on a budget for the coming fiscal year. As executive director of the Support Project,
Sonia kept in close contact with the county director of community and social services. At every
chance, Sonia stressed the continuing need for crisis services, shelter services, and treatment
services for mental health, drug abuse, and alcohol addiction. The county director was quick to
recognize the growing service demand and caseload but was also quick to caution that if funding
from the state fell drastically, so would the county programs and service contracts.
By late April, the county executive released his proposed budget: Community and social
services would take a 10 percent reduction. County-delivered programs would be reduced by
7 percent. Major existing service contracts for housing, veterans, mental health, children’s and
family services, and developmental disabilities would continue, but without an inflation escala-
6 General Concepts of Local Public Budgeting
tion in payments. This matched the minimal inflation rate across the regional economy. But most
important, several drug and alcohol treatment, mental health, and homeless services contracts
would be wound down and not renewed. The number of new service contracts in community and
social services was reduced to near zero.
Sonia and Brenda worked through the county executive’s proposed budget in detail and winced
at many of the cuts. These cuts would be devastating to their organization and to their clients.
Sonia contacted the county director of community and social services to explain the situation and
its implications. The county citizen budget advisory committee met in early May to review the
executive’s proposed budget. Sonia requested, and was granted, a slot to testify before the com-
mittee to explain the implications of the combined cuts. The county commission then held three
public hearings on the proposed budget. Again, Sonia requested a slot, and she was granted five
minutes at the second public hearing. In her presentation, Sonia explained the implications of the
reductions on women in the community and on the nonprofit partners that carried out county and
state programs. The commissioners listened, but one politely reminded Sonia of the major cuts
in state funding to the county, and of flat and declining property and sales tax revenues. Another
commissioner was more blunt and asked Sonia how she would apportion a $2.5 million cut to
social services to minimize the impact on clients.
By early June, the commissioners understood the full impact of state funding reductions and
adjusted the worst of the reductions through amendments to the county executive’s proposed bud-
get, but in the end reduced services for alcohol and drug treatment, homelessness, mental health
issues, the elderly, and children by 15 percent. The county commission adopted a balanced annual
budget in mid-June—in time for the new fiscal year, which would begin on July 1.
The reductions in government funding were difficult enough, but Sonia and Brenda’s com-
munications with the local community foundation presented another challenge. The economic
downturn had rocked the stock market and created uncertainty in the foundation’s other endowment
investments. Personal charitable giving had also dropped off because of the economic insecurity.
The community foundation completed its budget cycle in late August, which allowed it to follow
and react to decisions by the state and county governments in their budgets. In early August, the
foundation’s chair had convened a meeting with its nonprofit grantees, contractors, and partners.
Sonia and Brenda attended that meeting and related the difficulties the Support Project was facing
because of reductions in government funding. The community foundation chair and chief executive
officer could only empathize and report that the foundation, too, would be cutting its grants and
contracts to service providers. The foundation would examine all components of its programs and
strategically adjust its grants to prioritize and support services, and where possible, compensate
for the reductions in government funding. The Support Project would benefit from some of these
adjustments, but the larger message was that the foundation was going to significantly reduce
grants to its service delivery partners. These developments knocked another leg out from under
the Support Project’s revenue sources.
The impacts of the drastic government and foundation cuts would hit the Support Project in
the next fiscal year. The new budget had to reflect major structural changes in the organization’s
programs. Preliminary scenarios indicated that about 40 percent of the programs would need to
close, and staff layoffs would follow a proportional reduction. The two grants with partner orga-
nizations would need to be terminated if the Support Project’s budget were to remain balanced.
The dire revenue situation caused Sonia and Brenda to go back and reconsider their organiza-
tion’s mission and purpose. The Support Project had been established to empower and support
women in the community as they gained personal stability and self-sufficiency. This mission still
seemed highly relevant and appropriate, but the current program goals of comprehensive services
and annual objectives of well-developed service delivery—though once appropriate—were now
lofty and overstated. Resizing and restating the goals and objectives would be a critical task in
Teaching Case 7
developing a new budget. Sonia and Brenda agreed that the board and the staff would need to
be involved in such an effort, even though the budget schedule left very limited time for such an
effort.
Brenda stated that she could quickly convene the department and program directors and the
budget analysts to conduct a downsizing exercise. The group would take on the details of reduc-
ing all programs and then develop a series of alternative budget scenarios with 30, 20, and 15
percent reductions. Brenda quickly outlined a meeting agenda. Sonia would convene the group
and explain the overall revenue and strategic situation. Brenda would then give a more detailed
look at the reduced funding levels for each of the major programs. Next, she would break the
leadership team into small groups and give each one a program area for analysis. A paper ex-
ercise would follow with the required reductions to reach a balanced budget. At the end of the
day, the group would reflect on their exercise results and develop recommendations to Sonia
and to the board of directors.
Sonia paused a moment over whether to follow Brenda’s suggestion. Should the staff take the
lead in defining major program reductions and reorganizations? The department directors and
staff analysts were well into the alternative development process as part of the budget prepara-
tion task. The budget process would allow the board a full chance to review the situation and to
evaluate any proposed reductions and reorganizations, but should she focus first on the board and
let them give initial guidance on alternatives? She was sure that she could “sell” staff-developed
alternatives and a recommended course of action, but would it be better to let the board provide
strategic guidance and program priorities on how best to transform the organization and its pro-
grams? Allowing the board to take the lead would allow the board members to make contact with
the Support Project’s service delivery partners and subcontractors, key donors, advocacy groups,
community leaders, clients, and even staff. Sonia turned to Brenda and asked, “Would you please
hold off on convening a staff work group until I consult with our board chair and we can figure
out our next steps forward?”
Case Analysis
The Upper Cascade Women’s Support Project case opens up the subject of public budgeting on
numerous levels. At least three major levels stand out in the scenario: (1) the networked delivery
of services and issues of community governance and responsibility; (2) the structuring effects
of the public budgeting process; and (3) the contrasting values and success criteria of political
actors and professionals.
First, the Support Project has defined itself as a comprehensive, one-stop service delivery
agency, but providing such a program depends on numerous sources of revenue and the support
of several major benefactors. These supports include state social service and health agencies,
county government departments and social service programs, community foundations, and com-
munity intermediary nonprofits. Each of these contributors is an independent organization, even if
they have partial reliance on each other for funding or policy direction. For example, state social
service agencies may contract with county governments for service provision. The county may
deliver programs with in-house staff or may partner and contract with nonprofit organizations
like the Support Project. The Support Project is, however, an independent provider—it receives
funding from multiple sources and answers to its own board of directors. It follows county or
state government direction only to the degree required in its contracts, and out of common policy
intention and goodwill. The Support Project, in turn, contracts with two subgrantees or subcon-
tractors to deliver part of its services. These subcontractors are again independent organizations.
The service providers in this community are interlinked in a complex network of resource and
service organizations. The network arrangement may be beneficial for performance effectiveness
8 General Concepts of Local Public Budgeting
and resilience, for building a competitive vendor community, and for nurturing civic capacity and
civil society. But the diffusion of authority and responsibility over the network can be problematic.
Who governs the network and sets its strategic direction to benefit the community and its needs?
And, as we have seen in this case, who takes final responsibility to ensure that sufficient resources
are budgeted and channeled to meet client needs? Once services are provided, who reviews the
efficiency and effectiveness of the service program? Governance of the network raises additional
issues. Should governance of the network generate from community energy and local relationships,
or should network leadership and decision making draw from a larger funding organization that
can enforce performance and resource allocation? In this case, should the Support Project as the
primary service delivery group closest to the ground have primary responsibility, or should the
community foundation, or a major community intermediary, or the county have responsibility as
a primary donor? More defined and effective network governance might provide a more focused
answer to these issues.
Second, the case demonstrates that public budgeting follows a well-defined process. We explain
the generic budget cycle and the major budget process steps in detail in chapter 5, and the budget
actors who use the process in chapter 4. The case, however, offers glimpses of the state govern-
ment, county government, and nonprofit organization budget procedures. The case demonstrates
that while these governmental and nonprofit organizations may be in very different political and
economic contexts, the budget development procedures have many features in common. A budget
cycle will typically begin with a planning phase initiated by the executive, followed by a budget
request preparation phase by agency, department, or program staff. The organization executive, a
governor, county executive, mayor, special district executive, or nonprofit executive then presents
a proposed consolidated organization budget to a legislative group for evaluation, public review,
likely modification, and final adoption. Legislative groups include state legislatures, city councils,
county commissions, special district boards, or nonprofit boards. Once the budget is adopted, the
organization will implement it and spend its resources over a single fiscal year or fiscal biennium
of two years. When the fiscal year or biennium ends, an audit phase reviews the agency’s financial
and organizational performance. But the case demonstrates a complexity specific to public budget-
ing: The timing of cycles used by different governments and nonprofits does not always mesh.
For example, the county government was trying to build a budget at the same time that the state
legislature was undecided on funding for state grants to counties for social services. This made
it hard for county and other local governments to plan and budget effectively. The community
foundation recognized this timing mismatch and scheduled its budget process to follow the adop-
tion of the government budgets. The foundation’s retrospective approach allowed it to prioritize
its funding allocations to partially compensate for government funding shortfalls.
Third, the case gives some indication of the many actors involved in the public budgeting process.
Each actor has a different perspective on the process, along with different criteria for demonstrating
successful participation. Professionals in the process—as modeled by Brenda Johnson, the Support
Project’s department and program directors, and the staff analysts—judge their success by profes-
sional standards and by legal compliance with state regulations and rules. For finance professionals
and analysts, the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA 2000) distinguished budget
presentation criteria; professional accounting and auditing standards (see chaps. 9 and 18) provide
such criteria. For program professionals, designing, funding, and conducting responsive, effective
programs to meet client needs and professional expectations stand as the success criteria. In con-
trast, executives and elected officials face a less sufficiently defined and more politically tangled
set of success criteria. Budgeting must be of special help to these actors as they respond to political
pressures, communicate with activists outside the organization, and connect with the community
and its many groups. The budget process provides an important communication path for execu-
tives, legislatures, councils, commissions, and boards building confidence in government and its
Teaching Case 9
ability to deliver services. These two conflicting perspectives, the professional and the political,
raise tensions throughout the budget process. As the closing moment in our case demonstrates,
professional standards and efficiency may often need to give way to the political needs of building
support for action and governance agreement.
Notes
1. Though hypothetical, this instructional case is drawn and integrated from real-world events and condi-
tions. As examples of major nonprofit service provider cutbacks, see VanderHart (2010); state government
reductions (State of Washington 2008, 18–20, 2009); and county government reduction (Hannah-Jones 2011).
For an example of a social service delivery nonprofit with state and government grants, see the Cascadia
Behavioral Healthcare website at www.cascadiabhc.org/ (accessed January 19, 2014).
2. Intermediary nonprofit organizations (chap. 3, 8; glossary) raise money from a broad number of
sources and then partner and contract with service provider organizations to deliver programs and services.
An intermediary typically does not engage in service provision, but might provide community leadership
planning and coordination services. Widely known community and regional intermediary organizations include
regional and local United Way chapters, as well as religious affiliated service providers that draw donations
from member churches, parishes, and synagogues (e.g., Catholic Charities Community Services; Lutheran
Community Services). Rather than identify specific organizations, we use the generic term of intermediary
nonprofit throughout the book. Community foundations play a similar role, but through a slightly different
mechanism. A foundation is a type of intermediary nonprofit. Foundations may use collected revenues for
making direct grants to service providers and groups, but foundations often collect money from donors to
feed an investment endowment. Income generated from the investments provides revenue for grants to service
providers and community groups.
3. The responsibilities of this position are similar to those handled by the finance director of a small- or
medium-sized city or special district. A clerk of a small town would have similar duties, but on a smaller
scale.
This page intentionally left blank
1 Local Public Budgeting
and the Challenges
of Decentralized
Governance
Three Scenarios
Following several unsuccessful attempts to pass local property tax levies to finance public services,
four separate governing jurisdictions took action: They initiated a strategic planning process and
enlisted help from their local university to assist in creating a tax levy plan and citizen outreach
strategy for funding local services. The four governing units (a unified school district, a county, a
city, and an independent parks and recreation district) realized that citizens were confused about
how local services were funded and believed that too many governments were making too many
requests for increased taxes. The goals of the strategic planning process were (1) to generate a
better understanding of the priorities citizens placed on the separately funded public services; (2)
to educate citizens on the mutual needs and funding sources of the various entities; and (3) to
create a plan for property tax revenue requests by the four independent entities.
In the face of growing urbanization, government leaders in this large urban area were struggling
to meet increased service demands without dramatically increasing property taxes or compromis-
ing the existing property tax base upon which the various jurisdictions relied for funding. The
major governing entities in the region agreed to create a joint task force to develop governance
options. Ultimately, the task force recommended the creation of a new regional government and
the transfer of regionwide functions to the new entity (e.g., regional land-use and growth plan-
ning, management of the zoo and the Exposition Center, solid waste disposal, and parks and open
space), with the taxing authority to fund these functions. Citizens and government leaders alike
supported the recommendations of the task force.
On average, 40 percent of the funding for services provided at the local level comes as transfers
from the state and federal government (Tax Policy Center 2008). Since the economic downturn
of 2007–2009, 46 states plus the District of Columbia have initiated major budget cuts. These
cuts resulted in the reduction of health care (31 states), services to the elderly and disabled (29
states and the District of Columbia), K–12 education (34 states and the District of Columbia),
and higher education (43 states) (Johnson, Oliff, and Williams 2011). These cuts are occurring at
a time when local debt has risen by more than 76 percent between 2000 and 2008 (U.S. Census
Bureau 2003, 2012b).
11
12 General Concepts of Local Public Budgeting
Unable to fund the growing social service needs of its citizens, county administrative leaders
facilitated a community envisioning process with citizens and stakeholders. The exercise served
to identify shared aspirations and map existing resources in the nonprofit, business, religious, and
governmental communities that might be better coordinated and leveraged to meet these unmet
social service needs. The county created a new 501(c)(3), called the Vision Action Network, to
serve as the holding company for addressing these needs, and it committed to using this new
network as the governing entity for dispersing county-funded social service activities.
Struggling to find ways of replacing seriously undermaintained old buildings, a local school
district entered into a partnership agreement with the Boys and Girls Club, the city, the develop-
ment commission, and the private sector to develop a new mixed-income residential community
large enough to require a new school. The new school includes a community and recreation center,
which is partly owned and operated by the Boys and Girls Club and the city parks department. The
school has full use of the athletic facilities for all of its school functions but only pays for a share
of the total costs. Because the new development includes neighborhood businesses located within
the new community and is built within a low-income area of the city, the development qualifies
for low-interest federal loans. The old school building and land have been donated to the city in
exchange for the land in the new community development.
We begin this book with these three scenarios to illustrate why local public budgeting deserves
special attention. Budgeting is not simply a technical exercise about how best to expend the
revenues collected from citizens through fees, charges, taxes, and other sources. It is ultimately
about determining what the community values and generating the support necessary to fund these
values. The support is reflected not only in dollars but in patterns of relationships that have been
developed through time and have acquired institutional status. The local school, library, Boys
and Girls Club, chamber of commerce, rotary club, friends group, community center, or a long-
enduring citizen group may symbolize this institutional role. While the national and state budgeting
processes are greatly influenced by well-financed lobbyists speaking on behalf of well-organized
interest groups, this is not the case in most of the 88,657 local government jurisdictions in the
United States (see Exhibit 1.1). Instead, the budgeting process is shaped by deeply embedded
local institutional entities that have a vested interest in how government officials use the process
to promote the common good of the community. This makes the budgeting process political, but
it is a different kind of politics than the interest group model used to explain what happens at the
state and federal levels of government.
Most books on public budgeting focus on the federal and, to a lesser extent, state budgeting
processes. Moreover, most of these books view budgeting more narrowly as an interest-based
lobbying activity that determines how various revenue sources will be allocated to support what
government does. This model is less applicable to the state and especially local levels of government
(Carroll and Johnson 2010). The reasons are an artifact of a legal and political structure that gives
local citizens large amounts of control over the discretionary authority of elected officials to collect
various kinds of revenue and to expend those revenues to support what government does.
We have organized this book around four core themes that, taken together, explain why
government budgeting at the local level deserves to be given special attention. First, there are
88,657 local governments (see the aforementioned Exhibit 1.1) in the United States. These lo-
cal governments are responsible for providing services that matter most to the average citizen,
including those related to schools, land-use planning, public safety, water, sewer, transportation,
and mental health. The complexity of this arrangement creates the need for cooperation across
organizational and jurisdictional boundaries and provides a multitude of opportunities for the
Exhibit 1.1
%
Year Change4
Type of Government 19521 1962 1967 1972 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997 2007 (1952–2007)
Total, All Types 116,807 91,237 81,299 78,269 79,913 81,831 83,237 85,006 87,504 89,272 –23
U.S. Government 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
Native American Tribes2 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 564
State Governments 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 0
Local Governments 116,756 91,186 81,248 78,218 79,862 81,780 83,186 84,955 87,453 88,657 –24
Counties 3,052 3,043 3,049 3,044 3,042 3,041 3,042 3,043 3,043 3,033 –0.60
Municipal 16,807 18,000 18,048 18,517 18,862 19,076 19,200 19,279 19,372 19,492 16
Townships and Towns 17,202 17,142 17,105 16,991 16,822 16,734 16,691 16,656 16,629 16,519 –4
School Districts3 67,355 34,678 21,782 15,781 15,174 14,851 14,721 14,422 13,726 14,561 –78
Special Districts 12,340 18,323 21,264 23,885 25,962 28,078 29,532 31,555 34,683 35,052 84
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2002, Census of Governments, Vol. 1, No. 1, Government Organization, Series GC02(1)-1, Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office, 2002; and U.S. Census Bureau 2007a.
1
1952 adjusted to include units in Alaska and Hawaii, which adopted statehood in 1959.
2
The U.S. Census Bureau does not track the number of Indian tribes. As of May 2013, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) listed 566 tribal entities as eligible for
funding and services from the BIA by virtue of their status as Indian tribes. The basic legal framework for tribal sovereignty was established by Chief Justice John
Marshall in a trilogy of cases adjudicated in the 1830s and affirmed by more recent courts. See Johnson v. McIntosh, 21 U.S. (8 Wheat.) 543, 5 L. Ed. 681 (1823);
Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 30 U.S. (5 Pet.) 1, 8 L. Ed. 25 (1831); Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) 515, 8 L. Ed. 483 (1832) and United States v. Wheeler,
435 U.S. 313, 98 S. Ct. 1079, 55 L. Ed. 2d 303 (1978). For a list of federally recognized tribes, see U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, http://
bia.gov/cs/groups/public/documents/text/idc1-023762.pdf (accessed February 4, 2014).
3
Includes dependent school districts, which are under the control of the state, county, or other governing body.
4
Calculation of percent change does not include Native American tribes.
13
14 General Concepts of Local Public Budgeting
exercise of creative leadership on the part of career public administrators as they carry out their
local budgeting responsibilities.
A second reason for giving special attention to local public budgeting is that for the foresee-
able future, local jurisdictions will be facing a financial crisis that requires the invention of new
approaches to local service delivery and civic engagement strategies to enlist the support and
confidence of the local community. Because local governments are the legal creatures of the state
within which they exist, they operate within a more constrained environment than do their federal
and state counterparts. Despite this constrained environment, we argue that local administrators
have opportunities to exercise creative leadership that are not as readily available to those with
budget responsibility at the state and federal levels of government.
Policy decisions for most local governments are made by part-time and unpaid elected officials
who depend on their career administrators for innovative problem solving. This is a third reason
we believe local public budgeting deserves separate consideration.
Finally, local governments in the future will be increasingly responsible for what we call polity
budgeting—that is, a concern for how the community’s assets across the nonprofit, for-profit, and
government sectors can be identified and mobilized to make the highest and best contribution to
the community’s common good. This goes beyond the traditional jurisdiction-centered concern
for using the budget process to preserve the delivery of high-quality government services, even
in the face of diminishing resources. In the future, we believe local governments will increasingly
use their soft power of influence rather than relying on their smaller sphere of constrained hard
power and formal legal authority in the local public budgeting process.
In the sections that follow, we will elaborate more fully on each of the four core themes of the
book, summarized here:
In the United States, local governments play a decisive but legally subordinate role in build-
ing and maintaining the legitimacy of democratic government. The Tenth Amendment to the
U.S. Constitution makes explicit that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to
the people.” The states, in turn, have delegated their powers down to a wide variety of local
governing bodies that provide the services about which the majority of citizens care most. This
legal arrangement reflects the historical reality that many local governments existed prior to
statehood, but it also embodies a conundrum: On the one hand, local governments play a sig-
nificant, practical role in making democratic governance work; on the other, they are legally
subordinate to their parent state authority. This conundrum will be explored more fully in the
sections that follow.
In his travels across the United States in the mid-1830s, the French historian Alexis de Tocqueville
was struck by the high levels of decentralization of governmental authority and the advantages
this provided in building the trust of America’s citizens in their public officials:
Challenges of Decentralized Governance 15
What I admire most in America are not the administrative effects of decentralization, but the
political effects. . . . Often the European sees in the public official only force; the American
sees in him right. . . . As administrative authority is placed at the side of those whom it
administers, and in some way represents them, it excites neither jealousy nor hatred. . . .
Administrative power . . . does not find itself abandoned to itself as in Europe. One does
not believe that the duties of particular persons have ceased because the representative of
the public comes to act. (Tocqueville 1835–1840/2000, 90)
If Tocqueville were to travel across the United States today, he would likely be even more im-
pressed by the extraordinary expansion of the process of decentralization that has occurred over
the past two centuries. As of the 2007 Census there were, 88,657 separate local governmental
entities in the United States, each levying taxes or charging fees to deliver services to the citizens
it serves. Exhibit 1.1 provides a summary overview of the kinds and growth of these governing
bodies over the past 50 years. During this time, special districts have increased by more than 143
percent, growing from 12,340 in 1952 to 35,052 in 2007 (U.S. Census Bureau 2002, 2007a). In
contrast, school districts have undergone a dramatic consolidation and contraction.
While all local governments in the United States are the legal creatures of the state within which
they exist, the long-standing American tradition of bottom-up governance has resulted in the cre-
ation of a rich array of models that set local governments off from their counterparts around the
world. First, there is a very large degree of discretionary authority at the local levels of the system,
resulting in a wide variety of governing structures and processes. Neither the central government
nor a controlling political party dictates how the majority of money raised from local citizens shall
be spent by local government officials. This is not the case in many single party systems or in
countries like France, whose local governing bodies are the administrative agencies of the central
government. While local officials are elected in countries like France, Japan, South Korea, and
Italy, their discretionary authority is severely limited in comparison to local government officials
in the United States. For example, in Japan and South Korea, local government officials have very
limited taxing authority. This is also the case for European democratic states like France and Italy,
where local governing bodies have limited powers to collect taxes for services like public safety,
transportation, waste collection, and street lighting. In these centralized governments, most of
the revenue flows downward through the central ministries to local offices. This contrasts with
the United States, where local governments exercise significant discretionary authority over the
collection and expenditure of taxes (Tax Policy Center 2008).
Most Americans are surprised to learn that so many local budgeting entities hold the author-
ity to levy taxes, charge fees, and borrow money to pay for the services they provide. A typical
citizen may be a taxpayer of up to a dozen local jurisdictions: city, county, borough, township,
state, school district, fire district, water district, soil conservation district, library district, hospital
district, parks and recreation district, just to mention a few of the more common possibilities. One
of the authors of this book resides in a county with 33 separate governing jurisdictions and pays
taxes to six separate entities. This complexity of the local government landscape creates unique
budgeting and revenue issues both for citizens and for elected officials, which we will discuss in
more detail in the section that follows.
Each state defines by statute the types and kinds of local jurisdictions that can exist within its
borders. This enabling authority is codified in state statutes, for which a dizzying array of models
exist.2 For example, the state of Pennsylvania organizes its local government code authority by
16 General Concepts of Local Public Budgeting
county, subdividing each county into cities, class 1 townships, class 2 townships, and boroughs.
By contrast, the state of South Carolina organizes its code authority by counties (Title 4), mu-
nicipal corporations (Title 5), and Local Government Provisions Applicable to Special Purpose
Districts and Other Political Subdivisions (Title 6). The state of Washington represents the extreme
in specification of local government authority. It provides separate code authority for cities and
towns (Title 35, which provides for the creation of class 1 cities, class 2 cities, and towns), home
rule jurisdictions (Title 35A), counties (Title 36), library districts (Title 27), fire protection districts
(Title 52), port districts (Title 53), public utility districts (Title 54), sanitary districts (Title 55),
and water-sewer districts (Title 57).
Along the eastern seaboard of the United States, many local governments predated those of the
states. These small governmental bodies provided the milieu for cultivating significant degrees
of local autonomy—as well as direct and indirect democratic governance—decades in advance
of the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. A U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental
Relations report (1993, hereafter referred to as ACIR report) observed that during the colonial
and revolutionary periods, “the custom and practice of local self-government was strong and
pervasive,” and local institutions exhibited varied forms and functions (1993, 28–29). Most
commonly known are the New England town governments, which operated under colonial town
laws and practiced direct democratic governance. However, local governments in other colonies
also exercised considerable “local privilege,” manifested in many instances through independent
democratic decision processes, and in some cases were even empowered to send delegates with
instructions to their colonial legislatures (1993, 27–30).
With the ratification of the U.S. Constitution came some drastic changes to the power structure
at the local level. This dominant, national legal doctrine set forth the supreme laws of the land and,
in general, treated local governments as mere creatures of the states—as products of the reserve
powers ceded to the states under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. Technically, local
governments in the United States are not even “guaranteed a republican form,” as the Constitution
requires of the state governments in Article IV. The states, it is held, provide for the establishment
of local governments, and they delegate authority to local governing bodies that otherwise hold
no independent authority.
The tidy legal doctrine just described is now commonly referred to as Dillon’s Rule, after
John Forest Dillon, a jurist from Iowa who had served on both state and federal courts and who
articulated the doctrine in an 1868 Iowa case (Clinton v. Cedar Rapids and the Missouri River
Railroad, 24 Iowa 455 [1868]). Dillon derived his analysis in part from Chief Justice John Mar-
shall’s (served 1801–1835) jurisprudence as expressed in cases such as Fletcher v. Peck (10 U.S.
87 [1810]) and Dartmouth College v. Woodward (17 U.S. 518 [1819]), and from Federalist legal
commentaries such as James Kent’s 1827 treatise on American law. In the Fletcher and Dartmouth
College cases, Marshall—holding to strong Federalist views—outlined a theory of contract and
property rights that favored centralized governmental interventions and policy to spur economic
development over local self-determination. He deemed local governments a strong source of
parochial interests that would likely do more to retard economic development than encourage
it. For this reason, it was important that state governments possess strict authority over local
governing entities as creatures of their own making. However, Marshall’s jurisprudence did not
preclude limited protection by state and federal courts of local initiatives that did spur economic
development or that established important mediating institutions for socializing and educating
local citizenry. Marshall thus left at least an opening for local governments to play their own role
in these affairs (see Barron 1999, 506).
Judge Dillon narrowed this thinking in the 1860s and1870s. Basing his jurisprudence in part on
the popular laissez-faire and classical liberal doctrines of the late nineteenth century, he asserted
that governments were constitutionally obliged to play strictly neutral roles over private civic and
Challenges of Decentralized Governance 17
economic development. He proffered a bright-line distinction between public and private spheres
of life, and state governments were obliged to strictly control local governments toward that end
(Barron 1999, 507–509). If state legislatures failed in this effort, then “enlightened state judges
would enforce the private boundary that public politics would likely breach” (509).
Though Dillon’s Rule is still considered authoritative, it is not the only legal doctrine recog-
nized in statutes and case law. Thomas Cooley, a highly regarded state supreme court jurist from
Michigan, immediately attacked the Dillon doctrine, arguing in his then-influential Treatise on
Constitutional Limitations (1868, see also his concurring opinion in a Michigan case, People v.
Hurlbut, 24 Mich 44 [1871]):
It is axiomatic that the management of purely local affairs belongs to the people concerned,
not only because of being their own affairs, but because they will best understand and be most
competent to manage them. The continued and permanent existence of local government is
therefore assumed in all the state constitutions, and is a matter of constitutional right, even
when not in terms expressly provided for. It would not be competent to dispense with it by
statute. (emphasis added, Cooley 1868, 378)
As indicated, Cooley did not rest his defense of local autonomy on specific constitutional or
statutory language, but rather “on a more general assertion of basic, unwritten constitutional norms”
that derived from a more “organic approach to constitutionalism”—an approach associated with
the Jacksonian common law perspective popular in that era (Barron 1999, 512, 518–519; see also
Carrington 1997; Kahn 1992; Jones 1987; Paludan 1975; Siegel 1984; and Williams 1986). This
amounts to a kind of inherent constitutional power, though a very limited one. Cooley “sought
at once to embrace and to tame popular rule” by envisioning a “local constitutionalism in which
public municipal corporations—such as towns and cities—would be responsible for imparting
important values to the public in much the same manner that Marshall had previously imagined
private civic corporations such as Dartmouth College would” (Barron 1999, 511–512). Cooley
viewed the Constitution “not [as] a privatizing charter that protected individuals from government,”
but as “a publicizing document that protected the community from self-interested public officials,
corrupted by powerful private interests” (Barron 1999, 512). Living as he did in the Gilded Age
(the late nineteenth century) of massive corporate monopolies and urban political machines, this
twist on constitutional purpose was neither surprising nor uncommon, especially among reformers
(ironically, a group with whom Cooley was not then associated; see Barron 1999, 509–520).
Cooley wanted to shelter local governments from powerful private interests that were often
protected by state politicians as they perverted the public interests of communities for private gain.
He witnessed this dynamic firsthand through cases involving railroad monopolies—a problem he
took on more directly upon being appointed head of the Interstate Commerce Commission a few
years later (see Rohr 1986, chap. 7). With Jacksonian fervor, Cooley championed the “autonomy
and liberty of persons to order their own affairs, subject to general laws which do not create favored
or disfavored classes of citizens” (quoted in Barron 1999, 514).
Cooley believed that local governments played a vital role in preserving Jacksonian conceptions
of democratic equality; such theories allowed for the socialization of local people into public life
via civic and entrepreneurial associations, and enabled them to participate in local self-governance.
Cooley’s organic view of constitutions as facilitating the evolution of governing principles in
the same way the common law does—through accreted habits, customs, lived experiences, and
“common thoughts of men”—acknowledged the “from-the-ground-up” aspects of local gover-
nance and community life that the dominant, more positivistic jurisprudence ignored. From this
perspective, he conceived a “structural defense of the practice of local self-government” (Barron
1999, 516–518):
18 General Concepts of Local Public Budgeting
Local political institutions provided the fora through which people could engage in the
practice of constitutionalism for themselves. The practice of local self-government would
directly inculcate constitutional values in the public sphere by affording the local citizenry
an opportunity to practice democracy with constitutional limitations. Through the practice
of public politics at the local level, citizens would be forced in a direct and immediate way
to determine for themselves which decisions would serve the “public” interests of their own
communities and which would not. That experience would provide citizens with a greater
understanding of what it meant to govern themselves in accord with constitutional limita-
tions that would be possible under a regime of either centralized state legislative control or
judicial supremacy. (518)
Cooley’s structural defense of local constitutionalism failed to become a more prominent legal
doctrine for local governments in the United States. Dillon’s Rule imposes an arid legal standard
on local entities—a standard that fails to account for their rich and varied nature and leaves them
quite vulnerable to the vagaries of state legislative meddling. In effect, it forces them to govern
their own affairs with one hand tied behind their backs. The ACIR report strongly recommended
that a more balanced and consistent relationship between state and local governments was needed,
and the report specifically cited Cooley’s doctrine as an important legal element in “refocusing
the debate over how to balance state control and local autonomy” (1993, 7). The dominance of
the Dillon Rule, however, has not been absolute. The organic or “from-the-ground-up” aspects of
local self-determination and governance could not help but manifest themselves in law as well as
in political life, and thus have been recognized in a more tenuous form through the adoption of
home rule charters and related legislation.
Some scholars locate American precedents for home rule in the colonial and revolutionary
eras (ACIR report 1993, 32–34), but Cooley’s doctrine clearly gave the home rule movement
more impetus. “Although Cooley’s views were unequivocally adopted only in Indiana, Nebraska,
Iowa, Kentucky, and Texas, they articulated a resurgence of values that would soon be embodied
in institutional reforms designed to widen the scope of local choice” (1993, 34). These included
the insertion of ripper clauses and more general state constitutional provisions against “special
legislation,” which was commonly used to interfere with local powers and prerogatives relating
to social and economic development in their jurisdictions. Ripper clauses specifically forbade
state legislatures from delegating powers of interference in municipal functions to special com-
missions, private corporations or associations, or any other entities that would work on behalf of
private interests over local public interests. “By 1880, 28 of 38 states had incorporated similar
restrictions in their constitutions” (ACIR report 1993, 35).
Going beyond self-imposed legislative restraints, states also began thinking in terms of “em-
powering local citizens with the ability to articulate their preferences over institutional forms and
functional powers within their communities” (ACIR report 1993, 41). Missouri first experimented
with what later came to be called home rule provisions, a term originally associated with local or
regional self-determination movements in Ireland and England, and then eventually around the
world. The Missouri Constitutional Convention of 1875 conferred charter-making power on the city
of St. Louis, though it was hedged about with many conditions and restrictions. Charter-making
power was considered to be strictly a sovereign power of state legislatures, so this broke new
legal ground. Discussion in the state convention centered on two concerns—curbing the extensive
“corruption and favoritism by the state legislature in the management of the affairs of the city,”
and recognizing “the principle of local self-government” (ACIR report 1993, 41).
These arguments notwithstanding, the Missouri legislature retained essential prerogatives and
asserted its authority over St. Louis in clear language that subsequent state court decisions would
strictly enforce. This set a pattern among states—one that remains largely in place to this day—of
Challenges of Decentralized Governance 19
legislatures conferring various types of autonomy on specific local governments (or in general to
all cities/towns of certain classifications), but retaining powers of express and implied preemption
that state courts would often interpret strictly. States such as Illinois, New Jersey, and California
have mandated liberal construction by state judges of municipal powers under law in the attempt
to reverse the impact of Dillon’s Rule, but the judges have not always acted accordingly.
Beyond the conferral of chartering power, however limited it was in the Missouri Constitu-
tion, another key provision granted “the power to act without prior authorization by the state
legislature”—as long as those actions were authorized in the local charter, “did not conflict with
a statute, and did not run afoul of a constitutional prohibition” (quoted in ACIR report 1993, 42).
This caught on in many states as cities grew in number and size to the point that state legislatures
could no longer maintain the degree of control they once exerted. Cities needed to exercise their
own initiative on many local matters without constantly seeking legislative authorization. This
developmental imperative led to the formulation of a “devolved powers” model of home rule,
which provides for “a general grant of powers subject to enumerated restrictions” (ACIR report
1993, 44).
Frank Johnson Goodnow (1895/2008) had articulated an early version of this model, and, sig-
nificantly, used English and Prussian models of organization, departing “from ‘the cross-checks
and intersecting lines of divided responsibility’ of the federal idea in favor of ‘a simple pyramid’
of efficient, rationalized functional administration” (quoted in ACIR report 1993, 44). This model’s
influence became widespread and contributed to the development of the council-manager model
of local government during the Progressive reform era. It was used by University of Pennsylvania
Law School dean Jefferson Fordham in 1953 as the basis for the American Municipal Association’s
model home rule provision, and has since been referred to as the Fordham Rule.
Finally, a Supreme Court case arose from a dispute over a diverse structure of courts provided
for in the Missouri Constitution of 1875. In Missouri v. Lewis (101 U.S. 22 [1879]), the court
unanimously asserted each state’s “full power to make for municipal purposes political subdivi-
sions of its territory and regulate their local government, including the constitution of courts, and
the extent of their jurisdictions” (30). In sweeping language, the court affirmed states’ rights to
adopt diverse legal systems, processes, forms, and institutions for carrying out municipal functions
within its jurisdiction, even to the point of grafting foreign legal systems and practices into a part
of the state (the example of Mexico was used in this case; see Missouri v. Lewis 1879, 32).
Ironically, the Missouri Constitution’s home rule provision for St. Louis required a form of
government based on the federal constitutional model, with a “chief executive and two houses
of legislation, one of which shall be elected by general ticket” (quoted in ACIR report 1993, 41).
Few cities would follow this lead as Populist and Progressive reforms ensued. Indeed, as they
developed over the twentieth and now twenty-first centuries, cities have cultivated even more di-
verse forms of operation, largely out of a need for more extensive interlocal cooperation in order
to leverage resources as federal and state governments pare back their support. As the 1993 ACIR
report indicated, local governments must now address “such matters as dissolution and annexation,
consolidation and separation, joint participation in common enterprises, interlocal cooperation
and [new forms of] intergovernmental relations,” while “clarify[ing] rules concerning the forma-
tion, operation, and dissolution of special districts” (46). The report notes with emphasis the shift
that has occurred over many decades “from a preoccupation with conflict to a recognition of the
pervasive collaboration through contractual arrangements that [can be obtained] in modern state
and local government” (46).
In general, states are embracing diversity in forms of local government institutions; however,
as local governments try to adapt to changing conditions, states’ treatment of local autonomy and
self-determination remains mixed at best. Over the twentieth century, the spheres of local autonomy
have alternately expanded and contracted, though it is safe to say that since the nineteenth century,
20 General Concepts of Local Public Budgeting
they have expanded more than they have contracted. They possess a limited variety of taxing and
other revenue powers, eminent domain powers, and contracting powers typically associated with
sovereignty, while never enjoying sovereign status. State legislatures still meddle and courts still
invoke Dillon’s Rule from time to time, with the result that local governments continue to exist
in an uneasy relation with their state masters. They continue to govern with one hand tied behind
their backs.
In the sections that follow, we will summarize the major types and kinds of local government
jurisdictions and forms of government, pointing out the wide variability from state to state with
respect to the legal authority extended to the same types of governmental units. It is important
for those who have budgeting responsibility to know what kind of authority and budget duties
they have under their state statutes. The general summary of the types of local governments and
their forms of governance in the following two subsections is not a substitute for knowing this
more specific information.
There are six basic types of local government in the United States: counties and parishes; cities
and towns; townships; boroughs; school districts; and special districts. Each will be discussed in
greater detail in the sections that follow.
All states except for Rhode Island and Connecticut have county units of government. Louisiana
and Alaska subdivide the state into parishes and boroughs, respectively, instead of counties. While
states rely heavily on counties to provide services, they vary widely in the power and functions
delegated to them. In New England, counties serve as judicial court districts and provide sheriffs’
services. In the mid-Atlantic and midwestern states, counties provide a broader range of services,
including courts, public utilities, libraries, hospitals, public health services, parks, roads, law en-
forcement, and jails. Counties in western and southern states have even broader authority, including
the provision of public housing, child/family/elder services, airports/recreation/convention centers,
zoos, health clinics, museums, welfare/mental and public health services, animal control, veterans’
assistance services, probation/parole supervision, historic preservation, food safety regulation,
and environmental health services.
Counties vary widely in the number and kind of elected offices used for county leadership.
Most counties provide for a county registrar, recorder, or clerk (the exact title varies). The clerk
collects vital statistics, holds elections (sometimes in coordination with a separate elections office
or commission), and prepares or processes certificates of births, deaths, marriages, and dissolu-
tions (divorce decrees). The county recorder normally maintains the official record of all real
estate transactions. Other key county officials may include the district attorney, coroner/medical
examiner, treasurer, assessor, auditor, and controller.
In New England, regional councils have been formed to fill the void left by the abolition
of county governments. The regional councils’ authority is far more limited than that of a
county government. For example, regional councils have no taxing authority or authority to
issue permits; the aforementioned powers are delegated to the town governments. However,
the regional councils do have authority over infrastructure and land-use planning, distribution
of state and federal funds for infrastructure projects, emergency preparedness, and limited law
enforcement duties.
Counties vary widely not only in their authority and the number and kinds of officials who
are elected to office but also in their governance structures (Berman 1993; Coppa 2000; Jeffrey,
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
DANCE ON STILTS AT THE GIRLS’ UNYAGO, NIUCHI
I see increasing reason to believe that the view formed some time
back as to the origin of the Makonde bush is the correct one. I have
no doubt that it is not a natural product, but the result of human
occupation. Those parts of the high country where man—as a very
slight amount of practice enables the eye to perceive at once—has not
yet penetrated with axe and hoe, are still occupied by a splendid
timber forest quite able to sustain a comparison with our mixed
forests in Germany. But wherever man has once built his hut or tilled
his field, this horrible bush springs up. Every phase of this process
may be seen in the course of a couple of hours’ walk along the main
road. From the bush to right or left, one hears the sound of the axe—
not from one spot only, but from several directions at once. A few
steps further on, we can see what is taking place. The brush has been
cut down and piled up in heaps to the height of a yard or more,
between which the trunks of the large trees stand up like the last
pillars of a magnificent ruined building. These, too, present a
melancholy spectacle: the destructive Makonde have ringed them—
cut a broad strip of bark all round to ensure their dying off—and also
piled up pyramids of brush round them. Father and son, mother and
son-in-law, are chopping away perseveringly in the background—too
busy, almost, to look round at the white stranger, who usually excites
so much interest. If you pass by the same place a week later, the piles
of brushwood have disappeared and a thick layer of ashes has taken
the place of the green forest. The large trees stretch their
smouldering trunks and branches in dumb accusation to heaven—if
they have not already fallen and been more or less reduced to ashes,
perhaps only showing as a white stripe on the dark ground.
This work of destruction is carried out by the Makonde alike on the
virgin forest and on the bush which has sprung up on sites already
cultivated and deserted. In the second case they are saved the trouble
of burning the large trees, these being entirely absent in the
secondary bush.
After burning this piece of forest ground and loosening it with the
hoe, the native sows his corn and plants his vegetables. All over the
country, he goes in for bed-culture, which requires, and, in fact,
receives, the most careful attention. Weeds are nowhere tolerated in
the south of German East Africa. The crops may fail on the plains,
where droughts are frequent, but never on the plateau with its
abundant rains and heavy dews. Its fortunate inhabitants even have
the satisfaction of seeing the proud Wayao and Wamakua working
for them as labourers, driven by hunger to serve where they were
accustomed to rule.
But the light, sandy soil is soon exhausted, and would yield no
harvest the second year if cultivated twice running. This fact has
been familiar to the native for ages; consequently he provides in
time, and, while his crop is growing, prepares the next plot with axe
and firebrand. Next year he plants this with his various crops and
lets the first piece lie fallow. For a short time it remains waste and
desolate; then nature steps in to repair the destruction wrought by
man; a thousand new growths spring out of the exhausted soil, and
even the old stumps put forth fresh shoots. Next year the new growth
is up to one’s knees, and in a few years more it is that terrible,
impenetrable bush, which maintains its position till the black
occupier of the land has made the round of all the available sites and
come back to his starting point.
The Makonde are, body and soul, so to speak, one with this bush.
According to my Yao informants, indeed, their name means nothing
else but “bush people.” Their own tradition says that they have been
settled up here for a very long time, but to my surprise they laid great
stress on an original immigration. Their old homes were in the
south-east, near Mikindani and the mouth of the Rovuma, whence
their peaceful forefathers were driven by the continual raids of the
Sakalavas from Madagascar and the warlike Shirazis[47] of the coast,
to take refuge on the almost inaccessible plateau. I have studied
African ethnology for twenty years, but the fact that changes of
population in this apparently quiet and peaceable corner of the earth
could have been occasioned by outside enterprises taking place on
the high seas, was completely new to me. It is, no doubt, however,
correct.
The charming tribal legend of the Makonde—besides informing us
of other interesting matters—explains why they have to live in the
thickest of the bush and a long way from the edge of the plateau,
instead of making their permanent homes beside the purling brooks
and springs of the low country.
“The place where the tribe originated is Mahuta, on the southern
side of the plateau towards the Rovuma, where of old time there was
nothing but thick bush. Out of this bush came a man who never
washed himself or shaved his head, and who ate and drank but little.
He went out and made a human figure from the wood of a tree
growing in the open country, which he took home to his abode in the
bush and there set it upright. In the night this image came to life and
was a woman. The man and woman went down together to the
Rovuma to wash themselves. Here the woman gave birth to a still-
born child. They left that place and passed over the high land into the
valley of the Mbemkuru, where the woman had another child, which
was also born dead. Then they returned to the high bush country of
Mahuta, where the third child was born, which lived and grew up. In
course of time, the couple had many more children, and called
themselves Wamatanda. These were the ancestral stock of the
Makonde, also called Wamakonde,[48] i.e., aborigines. Their
forefather, the man from the bush, gave his children the command to
bury their dead upright, in memory of the mother of their race who
was cut out of wood and awoke to life when standing upright. He also
warned them against settling in the valleys and near large streams,
for sickness and death dwelt there. They were to make it a rule to
have their huts at least an hour’s walk from the nearest watering-
place; then their children would thrive and escape illness.”
The explanation of the name Makonde given by my informants is
somewhat different from that contained in the above legend, which I
extract from a little book (small, but packed with information), by
Pater Adams, entitled Lindi und sein Hinterland. Otherwise, my
results agree exactly with the statements of the legend. Washing?
Hapana—there is no such thing. Why should they do so? As it is, the
supply of water scarcely suffices for cooking and drinking; other
people do not wash, so why should the Makonde distinguish himself
by such needless eccentricity? As for shaving the head, the short,
woolly crop scarcely needs it,[49] so the second ancestral precept is
likewise easy enough to follow. Beyond this, however, there is
nothing ridiculous in the ancestor’s advice. I have obtained from
various local artists a fairly large number of figures carved in wood,
ranging from fifteen to twenty-three inches in height, and
representing women belonging to the great group of the Mavia,
Makonde, and Matambwe tribes. The carving is remarkably well
done and renders the female type with great accuracy, especially the
keloid ornamentation, to be described later on. As to the object and
meaning of their works the sculptors either could or (more probably)
would tell me nothing, and I was forced to content myself with the
scanty information vouchsafed by one man, who said that the figures
were merely intended to represent the nembo—the artificial
deformations of pelele, ear-discs, and keloids. The legend recorded
by Pater Adams places these figures in a new light. They must surely
be more than mere dolls; and we may even venture to assume that
they are—though the majority of present-day Makonde are probably
unaware of the fact—representations of the tribal ancestress.
The references in the legend to the descent from Mahuta to the
Rovuma, and to a journey across the highlands into the Mbekuru
valley, undoubtedly indicate the previous history of the tribe, the
travels of the ancestral pair typifying the migrations of their
descendants. The descent to the neighbouring Rovuma valley, with
its extraordinary fertility and great abundance of game, is intelligible
at a glance—but the crossing of the Lukuledi depression, the ascent
to the Rondo Plateau and the descent to the Mbemkuru, also lie
within the bounds of probability, for all these districts have exactly
the same character as the extreme south. Now, however, comes a
point of especial interest for our bacteriological age. The primitive
Makonde did not enjoy their lives in the marshy river-valleys.
Disease raged among them, and many died. It was only after they
had returned to their original home near Mahuta, that the health
conditions of these people improved. We are very apt to think of the
African as a stupid person whose ignorance of nature is only equalled
by his fear of it, and who looks on all mishaps as caused by evil
spirits and malignant natural powers. It is much more correct to
assume in this case that the people very early learnt to distinguish
districts infested with malaria from those where it is absent.
This knowledge is crystallized in the
ancestral warning against settling in the
valleys and near the great waters, the
dwelling-places of disease and death. At the
same time, for security against the hostile
Mavia south of the Rovuma, it was enacted
that every settlement must be not less than a
certain distance from the southern edge of the
plateau. Such in fact is their mode of life at the
present day. It is not such a bad one, and
certainly they are both safer and more
comfortable than the Makua, the recent
intruders from the south, who have made USUAL METHOD OF
good their footing on the western edge of the CLOSING HUT-DOOR
plateau, extending over a fairly wide belt of
country. Neither Makua nor Makonde show in their dwellings
anything of the size and comeliness of the Yao houses in the plain,
especially at Masasi, Chingulungulu and Zuza’s. Jumbe Chauro, a
Makonde hamlet not far from Newala, on the road to Mahuta, is the
most important settlement of the tribe I have yet seen, and has fairly
spacious huts. But how slovenly is their construction compared with
the palatial residences of the elephant-hunters living in the plain.
The roofs are still more untidy than in the general run of huts during
the dry season, the walls show here and there the scanty beginnings
or the lamentable remains of the mud plastering, and the interior is a
veritable dog-kennel; dirt, dust and disorder everywhere. A few huts
only show any attempt at division into rooms, and this consists
merely of very roughly-made bamboo partitions. In one point alone
have I noticed any indication of progress—in the method of fastening
the door. Houses all over the south are secured in a simple but
ingenious manner. The door consists of a set of stout pieces of wood
or bamboo, tied with bark-string to two cross-pieces, and moving in
two grooves round one of the door-posts, so as to open inwards. If
the owner wishes to leave home, he takes two logs as thick as a man’s
upper arm and about a yard long. One of these is placed obliquely
against the middle of the door from the inside, so as to form an angle
of from 60° to 75° with the ground. He then places the second piece
horizontally across the first, pressing it downward with all his might.
It is kept in place by two strong posts planted in the ground a few
inches inside the door. This fastening is absolutely safe, but of course
cannot be applied to both doors at once, otherwise how could the
owner leave or enter his house? I have not yet succeeded in finding
out how the back door is fastened.