Mayor‐Council Form of Government and Policy Responses in Times of Economic Travail

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between forms of government in U.S. cities and budgetary cuts that were soon implemented after the 2008 financial crisis. This analysis focuses on mayor-council and council-manager cities to determine the effects that institutional arrangements had on municipal governments' ability to implement austerity measures in a timely fashion. Using data from the International City/County Management Association, this study finds that mayorcouncil cities implemented fewer austerity measures and were less likely to implement many of the cutback strategies, when compared to municipalities with the council-manager form government.

The impact of government form on resource allocation in local government, evidence from municipal court closures

“…In council‐manager governments elected council members appoint a professional administrator to serve as the administrative head of the municipality, responsible for the day‐to‐day running of government. It is thought that making the town manager accountable to the council rather than directly to the voters shields the town managers from political considerations, giving them greater latitude to make unpopular decisions (Aguado, 2018) and allowing for their decisions to be guided by technical expertise and professional norms (Hayes & Chang, 1990; Morgan & Kickham, 1999). These features of council‐manager governments have led researchers and practitioners to the conclusion that these governments will be more cost‐effective in the provision of public goods and services relative to mayor‐council governments (Carr, 2015; MacDonald, 2008).…”