Emergency financial management is a relatively recent and unique form of municipal governance that is designed to address local fiscal crises by concentrating the decision making power in the hands of a temporarily appointed chief executive. In this paper, we examine practices of emergency financial management in three Michigan cities in the Detroit metropolitan area to understand the role of emergency financial managers in helping the cities to address chronic fiscal distress. Through the analysis of data from comprehensive annual financial reports, we show that emergency financial management tends to produce budgetary-level improvements in fiscal condition. We also discuss policies that can assist emergency financial managers in bringing longer-term fiscal health to struggling cities.
Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (ACIR). (1973). City financial emergencies: The intergovernmental dimension. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
BerneR. & SchrammR. (1986). The financial analysis of governments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
4.
BrownK. W. (1993). The 10-point test of financial condition: Toward an easy-to-use assessment tool for smaller cities. Government Finance Review, 9, 21–26.
5.
CallahanR. F., & PisanoM. (2012). Bankruptcy: The divergent cases of the City and the County of San Bernardino. Public Finance and Management, 14, 84–105.
6.
CampbellR. J., & TurnbullG. K. (2003). On government structure and spending: The effects of management form and separation of powers. Urban Studies, 40(1), 23–34.
7.
ChapmanJ. I. (2008). State and local fiscal sustainability: The challenges. Public Administration Review, 68, S115–131.
8.
ChapmanJ. I. & GorinaE. (2012). Effects of the form of government and property tax limits on local finance in the context of revenue and expenditure simultaneity.” Public Budgeting and Finance, 32(4), 19–45.
9.
Citizen's Research Council of Michigan (CRCM). (2015). Outline of the Michigan Tax System. Retrieved from http://crcmich.org/tax-outline/#.
10.
CoateS. & KnightB. (2011). Government form and public spending: Theory and evidence from US municipalities.” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy3(3), 82–112.
11.
CoeC. K. (2008). Preventing local government fiscal crises: Emerging best practices. Public Administration Review, 68, 759–767.
12.
CrosbyA. & RobbinsD. (2013). Mission impossible: Monitoring municipal fiscal sustainability and stress in Michigan. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 25(3), 522–555.
13.
DaddowR. (1993). Ecorse: The fall and rise of a Michigan city. Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Retrieved from http://www.mackinac.org/252 (accessed July 11, 2014).
14.
DenoK. T., & MehayS. L. (1987). Municipal management structure and fiscal performance: Do city managers make a difference?” Southern Economic Journal, 53(3), 627–42.
15.
Ecorse Financial Review Team. (2009, April 22). Preliminary Review of the City of Ecorse. Retrieved from www.michigan.gov/treasury.
16.
GauthierS. J. (2009). GFOA updates best practice on fund balance. Government Finance Review25(6), 68–69.
17.
Government Accountability Office (GAO). (2007). State and Local Government Retiree Benefits: Current Status of Benefit Structures, Protections, and Fiscal Outlook for Funding Future Costs. Report to the Committee on Finance, U.S. Senate. Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/assets/270/267150.pdf.
18.
GrossE. (2011). Michigan: A state of home rule, local autonomy, and emergency managers. Michigan Policy Network. Retrieved from www.michiganpolicy.com.
19.
GrovesS. M., & ValenteM. G. (1994). Evaluating financial condition: A handbook for local government. (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: International City/County Management Association.
20.
HayesK., & ChangS. (1990). The relative efficiency of city manager and mayor-council forms of government.” Southern Economic Journal, 57(1), 167–177.
21.
Hamtramck Financial Review Team. (2013, May 13). Report of the Hamtramck Financial Review Team. Retrieved from www.michigan.gov/treasury.
22.
HendrickR. (2004). Assessing and measuring the fiscal health of local governments: Focus on Chicago suburban municipalities. Urban Affairs Review, 40, 78–114.
23.
HendrickR. (2011). Managing the Fiscal Metropolis: The Financial Policies, Practices, and Health of Suburban Municipalities. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
24.
Highland Park Financial Review Team. (2014, January 24). Report of the Highland Park Financial Review Team. Retrieved from www.michigan.gov/treasury.
25.
JimenezB.S. (2014). Smart cuts? Strategic planning, performance management, and budget cutting in U.S. cities during the Great Recession. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 26 (3), 494–526.
26.
JusticeJ. B., & ScorsoneE. A. (2012). Measuring and predicting local government fiscal stress: Theory and practice. In LevineH., JusticeJ. B., & ScorsoneE. A. (Eds.) Handbook of local government fiscal health (43–74). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett.
27.
KlohaP., WeissertC. S., & KleineR. (2005). Developing and testing a composite model to predict local fiscal distress. Public Administration Review, 65, 313–323.
28.
LaFaiveM. (2002). When privatization comes to town: What's new in Hamtramck? Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Retrieved from http://www.mackinac.org/3964.
29.
LevineH. C., RubinI. S., & WolohojianG. (1981). The politics of retrenchment: How local governments manage fiscal stress. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
30.
LevineH., JusticeJ. B., & ScorsoneE. A. (eds.). (2012). Handbook of local government fiscal health. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett.
31.
LineberryR. L., & FowlerE. P. (1967). Reformism and public policies in American cities. American Political Science Review, 61(3), 701–716.
Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act of 2011 (“Public Act 4”). Michigan Compiled Law §§141.1501 to 141.1531 (repealed). Retrieved from http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-Act-436-of-2012.
MaherC. S. & DellerS. C. (2007). Municipal responses to fiscal stress. International Journal of Public Administration, 30, 1549–1572.
38.
MallachA. & BrachmanL. (2013). Regenerating America's legacy cities. Policy Focus Report. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. Cambridge: MA.
39.
MeadD. M. (2006). A manageable system of economic condition analysis for governments. In FrankH. A. (Ed.) Public Financial Management (383–419). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.
MorganD.R., & PammerW.J.Jr. (1988). Coping with fiscal stress: Predicting the use of financial management practices among US cities.” Urban Affairs Quarterly (Currently Urban Affairs Review), 24(1), 69–86.
42.
MorganD. R., & PelisseroJ. P. (1980). Urban policy: Does political structure matter?American Political Science Review, 74(4), 999–1006.
43.
NollenbergerK. (2003). Evaluating financial condition: A handbook for local government. Washington, D.C.: International City/County Management Association.
44.
NunnS. (1996). Urban Infrastructure Policies and Capital Spending in City Manager and Strong Mayor Cities. American Review of Public Administration, 26(1), 93–111.
45.
ParkerJ. A. (2013, April 30). Farewell Message from Joyce A. Parker, Emergency Financial Manager. Retrieved from www.ecorsemi.gov.
PlerhoplesC., & ScorsoneE. (2011). Proposed alterations to the local government fiscal stress indicator system for the State of Michigan. Staff Paper, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics. Retrieved from http://purl.umn.edu/116167.
ReedL. W. (2002). Privatization and Hamtramck. Ideas on Liberty. Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Retrieved from www.macinac.org/4012.
50.
ScheiberA. (2013). After emergency manager, Ecorse on track and in the hands of local officials. Michigan Capitol Confidential. Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Retrieved from www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/18648.
51.
SchimmelL. H.Jr. (2005). Hamtramck update: Will city thrive without emergency financial manager? Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Retrieved from www.mackinac.org/7397.
52.
SkidmoreM., & ScorsoneE. (2011). Causes and consequences of fiscal stress in Michigan cities. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 41, 360–371.
