How We Fund Local Government:            Michigan’s Local Leaders             See Need for ReformPresentation by the Cente...
Presentation Outline   Introduction to the Michigan Public Policy Survey   Era of Local Government Retrenchment   A 2nd...
What is the MPPS?   A census survey – every county, city, township, and    village in MI   Respondents - chief elected a...
Why Conduct the MPPS?    Michigan ranks 7th in the number    of general purpose local    governments (1,856):         83...
What does the MPPS aim to do?   Improve understanding of local government to help improve    policymaking and quality of ...
MPPS is not a typical opinion poll   Census approach   72% response rates – extraordinary efforts to maximize   Transpa...
MPPS Spring 2012 Questionnaire
Presentation Outline   Introduction to the Michigan Public Policy Survey   Era of Local Government Retrenchment   A 2nd...
A Decade of Severe Fiscal Stress- Revenue sharing cuts, property tax declines, rising costs -
Local Government Reactions to Fiscal Crisis
Pressures on local fiscal health         showed continued easing in 2012% ofjurisdictionsless able tomeet theirfinancialne...
Easing felt in Michigan jurisdictions of all sizes % of jurisdictions less able to meet their financial needs this year
Local leaders mostly positive on 2 key indicators: -                - General Fund Balances -
Local leaders mostly positive on 2 key indicators: -                     - Cash Flow -
Widespread satisfaction with jurisdiction’s       current package of services
Widespread satisfaction with jurisdiction’s       current package of services
Officials believe other stakeholders are also satisfied with current package of services
Presentation Outline   Introduction to the Michigan Public Policy Survey   Era of Local Government Retrenchment   A 2nd...
Less than half believecurrent system of funding local government will be    adequate to maintain jurisdiction’s services
Less than half believecurrent system of funding local government will be    adequate to maintain jurisdiction’s services
However, service demands continue to increase% ofjurisdictionswithincreasedpublic safetyneedscompared toprevious year
However, service demands continue to increase% ofjurisdictionswithincreasedinfrastructureneedscompared toprevious year
Just a quarter believe funding will be adequate to          improve jurisdiction’s services
Just a quarter believe funding will be adequate to          improve jurisdiction’s services
Presentation Outline   Introduction to the Michigan Public Policy Survey   Era of Local Government Retrenchment   A 2nd...
Substantial local support for significant reformto current system of funding local government
Substantial local support for significant reformto current system of funding local government
Substantial local support for significant reformto current system of funding local government
Substantial local support for significant reformto current system of funding local government                             ...
Suggestions from local officials:             Property Tax“… I would revise the Headlee amendment so thatmillage rates cou...
Suggestions from local officials:                   Sales Tax"Giving local municipalities the ability to levy a local sale...
Suggestions from local officials:        Revenue Sharing (including EVIP)“EVIP needs a complete overhaul. The idea isnt ba...
Key Findings from MPPS    on System of Funding Local Governments   Despite years of retrenchment among Michigan’s local g...
Future MPPS survey content   Types of questionnaire items? Other survey topics?   Targeted analysis by subgroup or regio...
How We Fund Local Government:Michigan’s Local Leaders See Need for              Reform    WWW.CLOSUP.UMICH.EDU     closup-...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

How We Fund Local Government: Michigan's Local Leaders See Need for Reform

606 views

Published on

Presentation by the Center for Local, State and Urban Policy (CLOSUP) for the University of Michigan Wolverine Caucus Forum. Featured speakers: Dr. Debra Horner (Bio), Project Manager; Tom Ivacko (Bio), Program Manager (Invited); Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy (CLOSUP), UM Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
606
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
57
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • This ends the section on “we have landed today in a surprisingly OK place for most j’s … they’re right-sized to live within reduced means.”
  • But wait, they don’t just have to maintain today’s svcs into the future, they also have to deal with increasing service demands …
  • How We Fund Local Government: Michigan's Local Leaders See Need for Reform

    1. 1. How We Fund Local Government: Michigan’s Local Leaders See Need for ReformPresentation by the Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy (CLOSUP) for the University of Michigan Wolverine Caucus Forum February 13, 2013
    2. 2. Presentation Outline Introduction to the Michigan Public Policy Survey Era of Local Government Retrenchment A 2nd Retrenchment Looming? What Local Leaders Say Should Be Done
    3. 3. What is the MPPS? A census survey – every county, city, township, and village in MI Respondents - chief elected and chief appointed officials Two surveys per year: spring and fall Administered online and via hardcopy Content developed in partnership with MML, MTA, MAC, and topic experts
    4. 4. Why Conduct the MPPS? Michigan ranks 7th in the number of general purpose local governments (1,856):  83 counties  256 villages  277 cities  1,240 townships. These governments:  spend about $26 billion per year  employ about 150,000 people  hold approximately $45 billion in debt (and billions more in unfunded retiree obligations). -U.S. Census of Governments, 2007
    5. 5. What does the MPPS aim to do? Improve understanding of local government to help improve policymaking and quality of life Inform local leaders about peers across the state: their challenges and responses Inform state policymakers and other stakeholders about local level challenges and responses with data not available from any other source. Build a longitudinal data archive to allow tracking of fundamental changes (such as the economic transition, aging population, etc.) Foster academic research and teaching on local government issues.
    6. 6. MPPS is not a typical opinion poll Census approach 72% response rates – extraordinary efforts to maximize Transparency  Questionnaires on line  Pre-run data tables on line  Sharing data with other researchers Expert advisors on questionnaire content Borrow from other proven sources such as NLC and ICMA Double blind coding of open-end responses Technical memos for quality control analysis
    7. 7. MPPS Spring 2012 Questionnaire
    8. 8. Presentation Outline Introduction to the Michigan Public Policy Survey Era of Local Government Retrenchment A 2nd Retrenchment Looming? What Local Leaders Say Should Be Done
    9. 9. A Decade of Severe Fiscal Stress- Revenue sharing cuts, property tax declines, rising costs -
    10. 10. Local Government Reactions to Fiscal Crisis
    11. 11. Pressures on local fiscal health showed continued easing in 2012% ofjurisdictionsless able tomeet theirfinancialneeds thisyear
    12. 12. Easing felt in Michigan jurisdictions of all sizes % of jurisdictions less able to meet their financial needs this year
    13. 13. Local leaders mostly positive on 2 key indicators: - - General Fund Balances -
    14. 14. Local leaders mostly positive on 2 key indicators: - - Cash Flow -
    15. 15. Widespread satisfaction with jurisdiction’s current package of services
    16. 16. Widespread satisfaction with jurisdiction’s current package of services
    17. 17. Officials believe other stakeholders are also satisfied with current package of services
    18. 18. Presentation Outline Introduction to the Michigan Public Policy Survey Era of Local Government Retrenchment A 2nd Retrenchment Looming? What Local Leaders Say Should Be Done
    19. 19. Less than half believecurrent system of funding local government will be adequate to maintain jurisdiction’s services
    20. 20. Less than half believecurrent system of funding local government will be adequate to maintain jurisdiction’s services
    21. 21. However, service demands continue to increase% ofjurisdictionswithincreasedpublic safetyneedscompared toprevious year
    22. 22. However, service demands continue to increase% ofjurisdictionswithincreasedinfrastructureneedscompared toprevious year
    23. 23. Just a quarter believe funding will be adequate to improve jurisdiction’s services
    24. 24. Just a quarter believe funding will be adequate to improve jurisdiction’s services
    25. 25. Presentation Outline Introduction to the Michigan Public Policy Survey Era of Local Government Retrenchment A 2nd Retrenchment Looming? What Local Leaders Say Should Be Done
    26. 26. Substantial local support for significant reformto current system of funding local government
    27. 27. Substantial local support for significant reformto current system of funding local government
    28. 28. Substantial local support for significant reformto current system of funding local government
    29. 29. Substantial local support for significant reformto current system of funding local government 6% 12% 9% 8% 15% 15% 12% 37% 29%
    30. 30. Suggestions from local officials: Property Tax“… I would revise the Headlee amendment so thatmillage rates could both be rolled back and rolledup without a vote of the people.”
    31. 31. Suggestions from local officials: Sales Tax"Giving local municipalities the ability to levy a local salestax would significantly change our financial landscape andour dependence on property taxes ...”
    32. 32. Suggestions from local officials: Revenue Sharing (including EVIP)“EVIP needs a complete overhaul. The idea isnt bad but aone-size doesnt fit all. Most of the required initiatives arealready being done because they were the right thing to do.Now things are being required like theyre new ideas.”
    33. 33. Key Findings from MPPS on System of Funding Local Governments Despite years of retrenchment among Michigan’s local governments, most local leaders are satisfied with their current package of services today. However, fewer than half (43%) believe our current system of funding local government will allow them to maintain their current package of services in the future, and only 26% think the current funding system will allow improvements to current services or provision of new services in their jurisdictions. Of the 58% who say reform is needed: 89% cite the gas tax; 83% point to the sales tax; 82% cite the Headlee Amendment; 81% say Proposal A needs reform; and 80% say revenue sharing needs reform.
    34. 34. Future MPPS survey content Types of questionnaire items? Other survey topics? Targeted analysis by subgroup or region? How should MPPS data and reports be distributed to reach the widest audience?Contact us at: closup-mpps@umich.edu
    35. 35. How We Fund Local Government:Michigan’s Local Leaders See Need for Reform WWW.CLOSUP.UMICH.EDU closup-mpps@umich.edu

    ×