A Perspective on Small City Development: Local Assessments of Grant Management Capacity

Abstract

Survey research undertaken under the auspicies of HUD. and ana1.vzed in this paper. demonstrates that municipal ojjicials,/rom smaller cities do not perceive their situation in /he intergovernmental grant proc'ess to be suiressjirl. The smaller the city, the more like1.v are ojjicials to feel that the grants proi'ess is outside their capacity and control. Attributes associated with city size appear to be the major lactors explaining variations in the municipal ojjicial's perceptions oftheir capaciiies to successfully vie in thefederal grants netnwk. Grants management capacity is described not us a unidimensional concept, but as one whi1.h varies by the location ofcapacity, by the level ofcapacity, and b.v the stability of that capacity over time (longitudinally. and more narrowI.v, during the grant acquisition process). It is reported that nothing in the recent past indkates that the system is about to change and, w,hile regu1ator.s reform may prove beneficial, it "ill noi by itself provide the economic. political and managerial resources necessary to alter the intergovernmental transfer oJ.funds along more equitable lines. The Federal Assistance MalaiseCurrently there is no clear or consistent national grants policy designed to address the variety of needs in smaller cities. Local complaints about the operation and impact of the federal grants-in-aid system include an awe induced by the array of programs, disgruntlement caused by the burdensome administrative requirements of program management, and an increasing fear over financial and programmatic dependence on the federal government. For example, two scholars have commented: "The sheer number of programs can ... overwhelm state and local officials to the point that they are often unaware of grant money for which they may be eligible. This is especially true of smaller jurisdictions that lack specialized staffs to deal with grants."' At a time when the needs of small municipalities range from a basic struggle to maintain the quantity and quality of services in declining communities, to the needs of those communities facing conditions of startling growth, Congress is faced with a national kaleidoscope of urban-rural trends, problems and demands. On the other hand, individual municipal governments face what seems an inflexible collage of grant purposes, requirements, coordination structures and public officials, with interests other than general municipal fiscal assistance. In summarizing the current condition of fiscal federalism, one official of the Congressional Budget Office, Robert Reischauer, observed "(t)he diversity in the provision of services is matched by the diversity of responsibilities for supplying financial support. The existence of large amounts of intergovernmental grants means that often the jurisdiction responsible for providing a particular service is not the one responsible for its fiscal support."2 Perhaps the most striking observation that can be made about the current array of federal aid programs for municipal governments is that there i...

The Influence of Jurisdiction Size and Sale Type on Municipal Bond Interest Rates: An Empirical Analysis

“…They are generally neither the trained finance experts nor the debt-management professionals employed by larger and more sophisticated governments. Reed and Green (1980), for instance, find that small communities (under 10,000 in population) are more likely to report a lack of staff capacity to apply for federal grants, and that they would postpone developing such capacity to deal with their short-term problems.…”