Search

Byline: Kevin Oklobzija Rochester City Council narrowly passed the annual budget submitted by Mayor Malik Evans, approving $675 million in spending for fiscal year 2023-24 that begins July 1. The [...]

During economic downturns, municipal decisionmakers often must make difficult budget decisions to reduce costs. However, their residents' household budgets also become strained, as evidenced by the global financial crisis. During [...]

Byline: Kevin Oklobzija Monroe County Executive Adam Bello signed his $1.34 billion spending plan for 2023 on Tuesday night, moments after the budget was unanimously approved by the Monroe County [...]

How can you leverage the budget to advance equity in your community? While proper planning and passion for this essential work is important, ample funding is needed to turn equity [...]

Challenges facing local governments today literally requires a new way to see. It's as if our vision has been blurred by the extraordinary stress of managing in this complex economic [...]

When using zero-base budgeting (ZBB), a local government builds a budget from the ground up, starting from zero. Although the apex of ZBB's popularity in the late 1970s is long [...]

Illustrations from Hillsborough County, Florida, highlight advantages and pitfalls of various modes of public participation in developing and adopting the budget. Participation by interested parties in the budget process has [...]

Six action elements guiding the city's multiyear budget process provide the tools for integrating its community-based planning with its long-range financial plans to create an economically balanced, sustainable community. The [...]

Local governments frequently face land banking decisions concerning real properties that they may acquire now in open market transactions or later via their power of eminent domain. After construction of a practical local government land banking example, a theoretically correct cash flow and cost-benefit analysis is presented. Then a buy-now or buy-later decision model is developed explaining when to exercise the free American Call Option provided to governments through their power of eminent domain.

This paper analyzes the standard infrastructure policies of seven Texas city manager cities and seven Indiana strong mayor cities to (1) determine whether different levels of formality are associated with the policies; (2) assess differences in financial participation required of private developers and city governments; and (3) determine whether the resulting capital expenditure patterns of the cities vary. I use qualitative analysis, analysis of variance, and regression analysis to address these objectives. The analyses suggest that infrastructure policies of the strong mayor cities and city manager cities reflect two different approaches to the provision of public capital facilities. City manager policies are more formalized and have greater specifications for oversizing and cost sharing between the city and developers. Strong mayor policies are informal, flexible, and based on 'case-by-case' consideration of developers' proposals. The different policy environments also seem to affect capital spending for roads, sewers, and water in the cities. The Texas city manager cities spend more per capita on capital facilities than the Indiana strong mayor cities. Differences in capital spending exist even after controlling for fundamental economic, fiscal, and demographic differences among the cities. City manager cities spend significantly more than the strong mayor cities on water, sewer, and road infrastructure per capita., Introduction Most urban infrastructure is supplied through public policies established by city governments. These policies define cost participation by cities and developers and provide design standards for water distribution and [...]

Confronted with a litigation price tag of billions of dollars annually, local government budget officials are searching for both preventive and reactive mechanisms to get these costs under control. The [...]

Local government officials are operating in a policy void when it comes to the establishment and use of reserve funds. In part, this is due to confusion about the distinction between reserve and contingency funds. The limited research that has been conducted shows that relatively large sums of money are maintained in reserve by many local governments. Some governments refer to these sums as reserve funds and their intended use is clearly indicated in one or more local documents, such as a budget or audit/financial report. Others simply maintain an unreserved fund balance. This article identifies rationales for using reserve funds, discusses the alternative ways reserves are accumulated, and outlines key issues a local government financial plan should address when reserve funds are utilized.

Its dependence on government has Tallahassee in a precarious position. A lot of hope is riding on the magnetic lab. TALLAHASSEE MSA EMPLOYMENT December 1990 vs. 1991 Gain\Loss %Chg. Health [...]

'Budget volunteers contribute more than 2,000 hours per fiscal year to the budget process while gaining valuable new skills to enhance their careers and helping upgrade budgetary procedures in their [...]

The efficiency of Glendale, AR's budget office can be credited to its strategy of borrowing personnel from other city offices during budget preparation. Its Budget Liaison Program was bestowed one of the two Awards for Excellence in Government Finance for 1995 from the Government Finance Officers Assn.

Byline: Keith Crain The drop dead date is Thursday. By that date, everyone has to agree on what's going to happen in the city of Detroit. There have been a [...]

Differing approaches and responses to the local-authority spending squeeze THEY are the best of cuts; they are the worst of cuts. Depending on where you go and whom you believe, [...]

Although the Bay Area appears on track toward economic recovery, it faces at least one major roadblock: the unwieldly state budget. This year, as last, the budget is shaping up [...]