Local Government Reserve Funds: Policy Alternatives and Political Strategies

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.     

Monitoring Single-Source Revenue Funds throughout the Budgeting Process

Unexpected revenue shortfalls that occur during budget execution create serious problems for public agencies and programs. This is especially true for agencies and programs that rely upon a single source of revenue. This article implements a revenue monitoring process that combines ideas from statistical process control and exploratory data analysis into a spreadsheet environment. The methodology builds on principles used to monitor manufacturing processes. This simple application helps public managers detect revenue surpluses and deficits early enough in the budget execution process to take corrective action. The methodology also adapts to the data problems and avoids many of the pitfalls that arise when using "real world" budget data. An example of the benefits of this methodology is offered using an example of a state agency funded by a single revenue source.     

Biennial Budgeting in the Federal Government

This article examines the possible outcomes of changing from the current annual budget review to biennial budgeting. It looks at the experience of various states and its application to the federal level. It explores all of the supposed benefits , including less time spent on budgeting issues, more accurate budget projections, reduction of congressional workload and increased congressional oversight and, for the president's point of view, increased power of the executive branch. Concluding on a cautious note, the article offers some plausible applications of biennial budgeting to the national budget.     

The Line-Item Veto in Government Budgeting

Beginning in January 1997, the president will have the power to veto line-items in appropriations bills This article examines four paragraphs about the line-item veto from Jesse Burkhead's Government Budgeting . Eight themes from Burkhead's writing are identified and compared to practice by the states.     

Budgeting for Contracting in Local Government

While the amount of contracting out seems to be leveling off, the number of larger, long‐term contracts seems to be increasing. Such contracts are generally not well described in local budgets. Recent efforts in some cities to shift to more outcome‐oriented performance budgeting should push toward more clarity in reporting on major contracts in the budget. This article examines how a handful of major cities handle contracts in their budgets—in some cities contracts are omitted from the budget or all merged into one budget line—and makes some suggestions for improvements.     

Financial Control in Australian Government Budgeting

With the arrival of accrual accounting and "accrual output budgeting," there have been huge changes in the mechanism of central financial control in the budget-dependent Australian public sector. This article outlines and evaluates these changes. The new parliamentary appropriations arrangements are discussed, as is the increased role played by nonappropriated departmental "own-source" funding. The shift of emphasis from legislative to administrative financial controls is noted and analyzed. Consideration is given to the implications of this shift of emphasis, and of the increased complexity of the financial control framework, for fiscal transparency and democratic accountability.     

Program Budgeting and Accountability in Local Government

Much has been written about program budgeting and its relevance to improved efficiency and effectiveness. However, there is little discussion about the relationship between the use of program budgeting and accountability. While, organisations using program budgeting focus on the issues of performance, the accountability of management to an elected body, such as a local council has been given little attention. In this article three questions are posed: (1) Is the performance information available to enable councillors to form a judgment about management's performance?; (2) Is management involved in determining issues of policy, such as objectives, programs and performance measurement?; and (3) Are councillors confronted by a greater volume of budgetary documentation but with no increase in time to consider it? The results show that program budgeting does not always enhance accountability in local government.     

An Analysis of Introducing Program Budgeting in Local Government

Program budgeting has been in use for 30 years. It has had a checkered history, being considered alternately a great advancement or an unworkable system. Little has been written about the consequences for the organization that has adopted it. This study was undertaken concerning local government across the State of Victoria, Australia. A questionnaire was sent to all municipalities. There was a 60 percent response rate. Results show that information generated by planning programming budgeting (PPB) is used for decision making but in a limited way. The proposition that PPB will have an impact on the operations of councils is only partially supported.     

Trust Matters: Enhancing Government Legitimacy through Participatory Budgeting

Legitimacy is a problem of contemporary governance. Communities lack trust in elected officials—in their effectiveness, fairness, and representation of the public interest. Participatory budgeting (PB)—a set of democratic processes where residents determine how to spend a public budget—helps bridge that distance by letting the public make spending decisions. Since 2011, some of New York City’s (NYC) council members have been implementing PB with their capital budget—setting aside a million dollars in their districts each budget cycle for PB. Participatory budgeting has the potential to rebuild relationships between government and communities. Using data from over eighty interviews conducted by New York University (NYU) graduate students in 2013 and 2014 with PBNYC participants over two years, this article suggests that in council districts using PB, residents have greater feelings of access to and voice in local government, and better understanding of the complexities of spending public monies, often leading to a more positive view of government officials, and bolstering legitimacy of local government.     

The Politics of Local Government Stabilization Funds

The adoption, maintenance, and prudent use of budgetary stabilization funds are fundamental financial management precepts, yet the variables that influence the size of these funds are poorly understood. This article contributes to the stabilization fund literature by examining the extent to which variation in stabilization fund balances across municipalities and over time can be explained by a community's political culture and financial management capacity. The balanced panel research design includes archival data for 239 Massachusetts municipalities for each of 18 fiscal years. Stabilization fund balances are lower in communities with either an anti‐tax or a pro‐spending political culture. Stabilization fund balances are higher in communities that have the financial management capacity to accumulate budget surpluses that can be made available for appropriation to stabilization funds. Communities with the open town meeting form of government also have higher stabilization fund balances.     

To PPB or Not PPB – Budgeting in Victorian Local Government

Budgeting is an important element in a public sector organisation's accounting control system. There are a number of budgetary methods that could be used, each with an explicitly different focus. This article investigates possible reasons for Victorian local government selecting line item budgeting, planning programming budgeting (PPB) or a combination of the two. While program budgeting arguably failed in the USA, research shows it was adopted by local government. Australian researchers report similar findings, yet the introduction of program budgeting into local government has not been explored. Four reasons are postulated: (1) PPB will be adopted because of the complexity of the organisation; (2) PPB will be adopted because it is perceived as an aid to planning; (3) line item budgeting will continue to be used because users are familiar with this type of budgeting; and (4) management's support for the adoption of PPB will be a significant factor in its introduction. A questionnaire was distributed to all the local governments in Victoria and 60 percent were returned. The findings reported in this article confirm the reasons postulated.     

Capital Budgeting and Management Practices: Smoothing Out Rough Spots in Government Outlays

Public capital budgeting and management literature recommends long‐term capital and fiscal planning practices to prevent large fluctuations in outlays caused by fiscal stresses. This study extends the literature by examining the effects of long‐term capital planning and management practices such as the use of a capital budget, separate impact analyses, and the use of bond financing and dedicated revenue sources on capital spending volatility. The empirical results confirm that several of these practices smooth out state government capital outlays that vary because of socio‐economic and financial factors.     

Participatory Budgeting in Australian Local Government: An Initial Assessment and Critical Issues

Participatory budgeting (PB), a process whereby governments seek direct input from citizens into financial decisions, is gaining a foothold in the community engagement practices of Australian local governments. Following questions of definition, we survey the theoretical terrain, locating PB within several components of local democracy. We then provide details of six PB processes in New South Wales, Victoria, and Western Australia. We identify several questions for the future of PB in Australian local governments, including the role of deliberative practices as part of the broader work of councils, the issue of the adaptability of councils and leaders, the impacts upon state and local governments, and the role of third parties. The article concludes by reflecting on how PB sits with democratic practices at the local level if it continues to be implemented.     

Implementing the GPRA: Examining the Prospects for Performance Budgeting in the Federal Government

The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) is the latest in a series of attempts to introduce performance-based management and budgeting techniques at the federal level in the United States. In the past, these attempts largely failed due to administrative complexities, lack of investment in managerial, accounting, and information systems, and the absence of institutional incentives to promote gains in economic efficiency. Whereas we find the objectives of the GPRA laudable, we question whether this current incarnation of performance budgeting can succeed in transforming the traditional focus of federal budgeting from annual appropriations and obligations to multiyear outputs and outcomes.     

Budgeting for Our Times: Target Base Budgeting

Target base budgeting sets limits on how much a department may request in its budget. Departments must submit two budget requests—one within the target base and another for additional funds. Some supplemental requests may be funded from a reserve pool. Target base budgeting has been used in parts of the federal government over the last forty years. Its use continues to slowly expand. This article examines the experiences in three cities: Rochester, Tampa, and Phoenix.