Merl Hackbart

State Debt Management Policy: A National Survey

The amount of outstanding, long-term, tax-exempt state debt has grown precipitously over the last decade, from

MPA vs. MPP: A Distinction Without a Difference?

87 billion in 1977 to

For the People: Popular Financial Reporting Practices of Local Governments

264 billion in 1987. But there have been few attempts to carry out broad studies of basic state debt management policies, using comparative state data. As a result, policy-makers lack guidance as they attempt to adjust policies and procedures to meet the rapidly evolving requirements associated with public borrowing. This paper reports on a national survey of state debt manage ment policies - policies devoted to the planning, preparation, sale, and repayment of debt for which states consider themselves responsible.

State Debt Limits: How Many Are Enough?

Despite several scholarly inquiries, the question of whether there are critical differences between Masters of Public Administration (MPA) and Masters of Public Policy (MPP) programs continues in the minds of prospective students, potential employers, and university officials. Building on previous inquiries into this issue, we compare the core course content of selected MPA and MPP programs, and expand the study by investigating whether there is a correlation between the academic backgrounds of program faculty and the emphases in core curricula. We also surveyed departments or schools that have both MPA and MPP programs in order to determine the reasons for offering both programs and related issues — it was assumed that schools and departments offering both programs would have vetted program goals and content issues. Our study suggests that MPA and MPP program curricula differ. However, such differences seem more likely to be associated with faculty discipline differences than with a focus on providing graduates the core competencies required for job and career options/opportunities in these fields.

An Empirical Examination of the Statutory Characteristics and Effects of Highway and Transportation Commissions on DOT Capital Management Capacity

Popular financial reports are reports distributed to citizens and other interested parties who lack a background in formal government financial reporting but who desire an overview of the governments financial status and activities. This paper examines the current state of local government popular financial reporting in the U.S. The results of a survey of large cities and counties indicate that 75 percent of these local governments have issued popular financial reports and that the types of reports and methods of distribution vary. Many of the reasons for providing popular reports relate to providing information and improving transparency and accountability by providing more user friendly financial reports. This paper concludes with a discussion on popular financial reporting in the context of government transparency and accountability, and offers a research agenda for continued study of the topic.

MANAGING PUBLIC RESOURCES: BUDGET EXECUTION

There is a growing concern among state policy makers that unrestrained debt may exceed politically acceptable or financially sustainable levels of debt. Many states have established limits to restrict debt, but many of these limits are circumvented through issuing more complex and specialized bonds. In this article, we focus on the use of debt limits as an instrument to manage a states debt in context of two key questions: (1) under what circumstances should a state consider multiple debt limits and (2) if multiple limits are established, what factors should be considered in setting such multiple limits. In addressing these issues, we consider the theoretical and conceptual issues associated with setting debt limits, we highlight current state debt limit policies, and discuss factors that appear to be influencing decisions to establish and set multiple limits.

State Infrastructure Banks and Borrowing Costs for Transportation Projects

A majority of the states have created, by statute, some type of external body (such as a board or commissions) to oversee their departments of transportation (DOTs). The focus of this research is on two types of commissions: highway-only commissions and multimodal transportation commissions. We review the authorizing statutes that establish these boards and commissions to identify their statutorily defined membership characteristics and roles. We then empirically estimate the possible contribution of commissionsstatutory characteristics to a measure of DOT capital and infrastructure management capacity taken from the Government Performance Project. The findings suggest that commissions are designed to promote the general interest in the efficient allocation of transportation resources. They also suggest that large commissions may improve management capacity by fostering more open discussion. There were no significant differences between highway-only and multimodal transportation commissions.

Transportation Commissions as Accountability Structures: A Review of their Statutory Roles and Other Attributes

Much of the budgeting literature has focused on the questions of “how” budgets are prepared and “how” budget decisions are made. Minimal attention has been directed to “how” budgets are executed. This paper focuses on this issue with special emphasis on state government budget execution processes. The paper provides an overview of the similarities and differences of state and federal budget execution follows by an assessment of how state balanced budget requirements place special responsibilities on state budget offices to monitor “within” budget execution year expenditures and revenues. Actions which may be taken to insure that state budgets are balanced are discussed. These actions are enumerated and analyzed in terms of legislative and executive branch authority and responsibility shifts.

State approaches to debt capacity assessment: a further evaluation

State infrastructure banks (SIBs) are state-run revolving loan funds that offer financial assistance for transportation projects mainly through low-interest loans. This study examines the role of SIBs in transportation finance by investigating the extent to which SIBs provide lower cost borrowing than would be available through the municipal bond market. The authors use a two-step research approach: developing a predictive model to estimate the interest rate for the non-SIB financing alternative of municipal bond financing and then calculating the differential interest rate between SIB loans and municipal bonds. The authors also explore the impact of SIB goals, project type, state aid, and state—local equity on the size of the interest rate savings. The authors find that SIB loan interest rates are lower than those of comparable municipal bonds; the size of this interest rate savings is influenced by the SIB goals and state—local equity concerns.

Enhancing Kentucky's Transportation Funding Capacity: A Review of Six Innovative Financing Options

As of 2004, 36 of the 50 states had created, by statute, some type of external body (such as boards or commissions) to work with their departments of transportation (DOTs). The authors review the authorizing statutes that establish these boards and commissions to identify their statutorily defined responsibilities and attributes. From the literature on governance structures and accountability, three propositions are derived about their likely structure and roles. The authors propose that commissions are designed to (a) ensure broader stakeholder representation, (b) possess oversight roles and responsibilities relevant to resource allocation, and (c) encourage more open discussion and public involvement. The content analysis of the statutes and interviews with DOT officials and commission members provide support for the propositions.