Bartle 2003
Bartle 2003
Bartle 2003
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:393177 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics
(COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
ABSTRACT. Local governments in the U.S. rely less on the property tax than
they have historically. This long-term trend has been accompanied by important
shifts in the composition of local revenues. While the property tax still serves as
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)
one primary source of local government revenue, increasingly other sources are
used to pay for local government. This paper first examines that trend, the forces
behind it, and its regional impact. We then explore trends in three central states -
- Iowa, Nebraska, and Arkansas -- that have experienced substantial revenue
shifts in recent years. A concluding section discusses the options for the future.
in a recent review of property tax trends stated, “It’s easy to pick on the
property tax.... Yet as a local government revenue source, it has
meritorious and unparalleled features, high revenue yield, and stability in
particular.” Other taxes are more difficult to levy and administer at the
local level, and some jurisdictions have limited sales and income tax
bases (G. Fisher, 1996). Because of these features, the general property
tax has long been considered as the “best available independent source of
local revenue, and made it possible for citizens to spend their own money
as they collectively saw fit” (Mields, 1993, p. 16).
Many premature obituaries of the property tax have been written,
often emphasizing the alleged inelasticity of the property tax. This is a
fair criticism, as a review of several studies indicates that income and
sales taxes are significantly more elastic relative to their tax base than is
the property tax (Mikesell, 1999, p. 298). Other obituaries have stressed
the limits imposed on property tax rates as a result of the general public’s
revolt against the tax. However, through the 1980s and into the 1990s,
property tax levies typically increased, while the tax rate grew less
slowly or even declined. A resurgent economy plus better assessment
techniques have boosted assessed valuation in many localities, and have
produced a revenue bonanza in many cities (Dearborn, 1993). Criticisms
about its regressivity have been muted as more states have enacted
various exemptions to the property tax (Bartle, 2000). Similarly, the
popular outcry against the property tax has had to be balanced against the
public’s opinion that it is a relatively fair and beneficial tax (Speer,
1997). At the beginning of the twenty-first century, property taxes
continue to be a significant source of funds for municipalities, counties,
school districts, towns, villages, and special districts. While it is used less
624 BARTLE, EBDON & KRANE
intensively than it was thirty years ago, most likely the property tax will
survive well into the 21st century, and beyond.
TABLE 1
Property Tax Share As a Percentage of Total Local Government
Taxes, 1957-1997
Year Total Cities Counties School Townships Special
Local Districts Districts
1957 86.69 72.70 93.70 98.60 98.60 100.00
1967 86.63 69.96 92.13 98.36 92.76 100.00
1972 83.68 64.30 85.86 98.06 93.45 94.85
1977 80.51 60.00 81.20 97.46 91.67 91.20
1982 76.04 52.60 77.28 96.81 93.70 78.91
1987 73.71 49.09 73.47 97.45 92.30 72.38
1992 75.62 52.60 74.30 97.05 92.97 67.58
1997 73.33 48.70 69.44 96.85 92.39 76.49
Sources: ACIR, (1990, 1998); U.S. Bureau of Census (2000a).
BEYOND THE PROPERTY TAX: LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVENUE DIVERSIFICATION 625
1992 there was a rebound, followed by another drop in 1997. Cities now
derive less than half of their tax revenues from the property tax. For
counties and special districts, the rapid decline in property tax utilization
is particularly noteworthy. School districts and townships still depend
heavily on the property tax.
The decline of property taxes as a proportion of total local taxes also
held for most states, as indicated in Table 2. From 1970 to 1999, only
five states increased the reliance of their local governments on the
property tax, while the other 45 decreased their reliance. The Southwest,
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)
Rocky Mountain, and Plains states had the largest decreases. There is
substantial regional variation in the use of local taxes. New England
states rely most heavily on the property tax to fund local government;
New Hampshire local governments draw 98.8% of their tax revenue
from the property tax. Southeastern and Southwestern states are the
lowest, and Alabama is the lowest in the nation in property tax reliance at
37.5%.
TABLE 2
Property Tax as a Share of Local Taxes, 1970 and 1999
State 1970 1999 Change
New England 99.0% 97.7% -1.3%
Connecticut 99.3 98.3 -1.0
Maine 99.3 97.6 -1.7
Massachusetts 99.1 96.9 -2.2
New Hampshire 99.1 98.8 -0.3
Rhode Island 98.8 98.6 -0.2
Vermont 98.2 95.8 -2.4
Mid-Atlantic 79.1 71.8 -7.3
Delaware 89.4 79.0 -10.4
Maryland 71.6 55.2 -16.4
New Jersey 89.9 97.9 8.0
New York 74.6 57.0 -17.6
Pennsylvania 69.9 69.7 -0.2
Great Lakes 92.5 84.3 -8.2
Illinois 87.6 82.9 -4.7
Indiana 99.6 88.6 -11.0
Michigan 91.1 89.8 -1.3
Ohio 85.4 66.0 -19.4
626 BARTLE, EBDON & KRANE
TABLE 2 (Continued)
State 1970 1999 Change
Wisconsin 98.7 94.0 -4.7
Plains 94.5 81.2 -13.4
Iowa 99.0 90.3 -8.7
Kansas 97.2 76.5 -20.7
Minnesota 97.5 94.5 -3.0
Missouri 81.8 60.2 -21.6
Nebraska 94.1 79.6 -14.5
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)
TABLE 2 (Continued)
State 1970 1999 Change
Hawaii 75.5 79.6 4.1
Nevada 79.8 63.3 -16.5
Oregon 96.7 80.1 -16.6
Washington 86.5 62.4 -24.1
US Average 84.9 72.3 -12.6
Sources: ACIR (1998) and U.S. Bureau of Census (2001)
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)
TABLE 3
Local Revenue Per Capita, 1986-1999
Revenue Sources FY 1999
Amount % of
General Percentage
FY 1986 Revenue Change
General Revenue $1,579.01 $3,076.86 94.9
Intergovernmental Revenue 610.83 1,201.28 39.0 96.7
Federal 84.76 116.20 3.8 37.1
State 526.07 1,085.08 35.3 106.3
Taxes 601.46 1,158.21 37.6 92.6
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)
& Ryan, 1982, p. 144). The history of the various attempts to limit state
or local spending is well-known. An important effect of this movement
on the intergovernmental tax structure is captured concisely by Hy and
Waugh (1995, p. 151) in their statement “[t]he strong opposition to
property tax increases has forced many states and local governments to
look for alternative revenue sources.”
School enrollments continued to grow while the economy stagnated,
but state and local governments managed to keep the income share per
K-12 student relatively steady (O’Sullivan, 2001, p. 188). Once school
BEYOND THE PROPERTY TAX: LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVENUE DIVERSIFICATION 629
1998). McCue (1993) noted that state aid to localities did not keep pace
with the obligations that state governments had transferred to local
governments. This state aid shortfall coming on the heels of the decline
in federal aid prompted local governments to seek new authority to
obtain revenues by means other than the property tax. While the property
tax continues to be the bedrock source of local revenues, the
diversification of local revenue sources has become a significant trend
which is changing the way many localities obtain their fiscal resources.
The next section examines the different sources of local government
revenue.
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)
1995). Thus the growth in local income tax revenue is attributable more
to increases in the number of governments levying the tax and the growth
in income, rather than rate increases. In contrast, the trend in local sales
tax collections is exactly the opposite of that for local income tax; while
local sales tax rates have increased in many cases, the number of
governments levying the sales tax has decreased.
counties, and that states actually provided more aid to those counties that
shifted from taxes to fees (Johnston, Pagano & Russo, 2000).
In some cases, user fees offset expenditures to a significant degree.
Local parking revenues exceeded parking expenditures, and in other
areas (water and air transportation and sewerage) charges are close to
covering local expenditures in the aggregate. In other areas (hospitals,
solid waste, and parks and recreation) expenditures are substantially
higher than revenues, but charges are increasing. Special districts,
especially those providing utility services, collect a larger percentage of
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)
by 87.7% over this period. Property tax fell from 41.8% of total general
revenues in 1987 to 34.4%. The general sales tax represented only 3.8%
of the total in 1999, but this source increased by 156.2% in this period.
State aid increased by 180%, and made up more than one-quarter of all
local general revenues in 1999.
Local property tax statewide increased by 414% between 1968 and
1996; in real dollars, however, the increase was 24%. Over this period,
schools were the major users of the property tax, comprising 62% of total
property tax across the state. Cities used 16% of the total property tax in
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)
1968, but comprised only 12% of its use by 1996. The county share of
property tax increased from 14% to 15% over this period, while special
district use increased from 8% to 11%. During this time, the tax base was
changed to reduce the valuation of agricultural property. Currently,
agricultural property must be assessed at 80% of full value, while other
property must be between 92-100% of full value (Committee on
Revenue, 1996).
In 1989, state aid to school districts in Nebraska was only 24.8% of
total revenues, while property tax comprised 67.2% of school revenues.
This ranked the state 47th in its support of schools. Concerns about equity
across districts, as well as public complaints about property tax levels,
led the state to increase aid to schools in 1990 (Cordes, 1998). To further
TABLE 4
Nebraska’s Local General Revenues, 1987-1999 (In %)
Iowa
Iowa’s population is 2.5 million. The state has 99 counties and 950
cities (Coates, Whitmer & Bredeweg, 2001), as well as 375 school
districts (Iowa Association of School Boards, 2000). Local property
taxes are highly restricted in Iowa, following 1976 state legislation that
limits growth in annual taxable values. Currently, the “rollback” amount
allows governments to tax less than 60% of the market value. In
addition, the tax rate is limited for cities to $8.10 per $1,000 for the
general fund; two-thirds of all cities are at this maximum rate. A trust
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)
and agency fund may be used for specific employee benefits, with taxes
levied as needed; an emergency fund may also be established with an
additional $0.27 tax rate authority. County tax levies are restricted to
$3.50 per $1,000 for the general levy and $3.95 for the rural services
levy (Coates, Whitmer & Bredeweg, 2001).
Diversification of local revenues in Iowa can be seen in Table 5.
State aid comprises 35.9% of total local general revenues, with property
taxes 31.2%. The proportion of property taxes decreased over this period,
and property tax revenues grew more slowly than overall general
revenues. In 2000, the property tax equaled $2.65 billion, of which
45.3% went to school districts, 22.2% to counties, and 26.3% to cities,
with the remainder to other districts (Iowa Department of Revenue and
Finance, 2000).
General sales tax was a small component of total general revenues in
1999, but use of this source has increased dramatically recently. Counties
were given the authority to levy a local option sales tax in 1985, which is
distributed to municipalities within the county. In 1994, this option was
exercised in 27 counties (Pagano, 1999). By 2001, 75 counties were
using this tax, with distributions made to 687 incorporated municipalities
(Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance, 2002). Total local option
sales taxes totaled $142.9 million in 2000 (Iowa Department of Revenue
and Finance, 2000).
School districts were also given local-option sales tax authority in
1998. The sales tax can be used for school repairs and construction, as
well as debt repayment, but must be approved by a majority of voters. It
is levied on a county-wide basis, with the revenues shared between all
school districts in the county. By 2002, schools in 23 counties were using
BEYOND THE PROPERTY TAX: LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVENUE DIVERSIFICATION 637
TABLE 5
Iowa’s Local General Revenues, 1987-1999 (In %)
Revenue Source Percent of Total Percent of Total Percent Change
Revenue, 1987 Revenue, 1999
Federal Aid 4.1 2.7 20.2
State Aid 33.6 35.9 94.4
Property Tax 36.8 31.2 54.5
General Sales Tax 0 1.6 7,713.0
Indiv. Income Tax 0 0.5 60,793.8
Other Taxes 0.8 1.3 216.1
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)
this tax source (Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance, 2002). One
reason some school districts favor this approach over bonding for
infrastructure needs is that the sales tax requires only a majority vote,
while bonds require a 60% super-majority. Of the school bond ballot
measures that failed in the past 20 years, one-half received a majority
vote but not the required 60% in favor of the bond (Clayton, 2000). This
source raised $49.5 million in 2000 (Iowa Department of Revenue and
Finance, 2000).
School districts can also levy a local income tax in Iowa. While only
three districts used this option in 1976, 59 districts in 1990 levied the tax
and 379 by 1994 (Pagano, 1999). The income tax revenue for schools
amounted to $38 million in 1999 (Iowa Department of Revenue and
Finance, 2000). School districts in Iowa have also begun to establish
nonprofit foundations to raise donations from within the local
community. Approximately 150 school districts, or 40%, have a school
foundation. This number has increased from 60 in 1997 (Iowa
Association of School Boards, 2000).
The City of Des Moines still relies heavily on the property tax
relative to other taxes. Property tax represented 22% of the total 2001
budget, compared to 1.3% for other taxes. However, intergovernmental
aid comprises 27% of the total budget. Charges for service also represent
638 BARTLE, EBDON & KRANE
a greater share of the budget than property taxes, at 27% of the total
(City of Des Moines, 2001).
Arkansas
Arkansas has a population of 2.5 million, with 75 counties, 490
cities, 324 school districts, and about 584 special districts. Property taxes
have been under fire recently in Arkansas. In 1998, a constitutional
amendment was proposed that would have eliminated property taxes in
the state. It did not pass due to legal issues (Reid & Miller, 2001), but
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)
TABLE 6
Arkansas’ Local General Revenues, 1987-1999 (In %)
Revenue Source Percent of Total Percent of Total Percent
Revenue, 1987 Revenue, 1999 Change
Federal Aid 4.8 2.7 26.1
State Aid 39.6 41.1 132.1
Property Tax 20.8 19.0 104.3
General Sales Tax 2.7 8.3 589.6
Other Taxes 5.8 2.1 66.8
Current Charges 17.5 18.5 136.4
Other Non-Tax 11.8 8.3 57.3
Total General Revenue 100.0 100.0 123.7
tax up to three cents, with two cents for operating expenditures and one
cent for capital purposes. Cities may levy up to four cents with voter
approval, two cents may be used for operating purposes, one cent for
park improvements, and one cent for capital. (Reid & Miller, 2001). In
1986, only 59 municipalities and 19 counties used the local option sales
tax. By 1994, these numbers had increased to 192 cities and 69 counties
(Pagano, 1999). As of 2000, 228 cities received sales tax revenue directly
(Arkansas Municipal League, 2000). County sales tax revenues are also
distributed to municipalities within the county, primarily based on
population (Schoen, 2000).
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)
Cities and counties also have the authority to levy an income tax in
Arkansas. However, none currently use this option (Reid & Miller,
2001). This is attributed to the political difficulty of imposing a new tax
on income (Hayes, 2000). Other taxes have increased slowly, and now
comprise only 2.1% of total revenues. The primary reason for this
change was that the state rescinded the power for local governments to
tax motor fuels during this period.
An example of the decreased reliance on the property tax can be
clearly seen in the City of Little Rock. Of the $152.8 million 2000
budget, property tax is 7.2% of total revenues, while sales tax is the
largest source at 32.3%. Enterprise fund revenues comprise 26.6% of the
total, with utility franchise fees at 12.8% (City of Little Rock, 2000).
Cross-State Trends
The property tax as a percentage of total state and local taxes has
declined slowly but steadily over the past thirty years in these three
states. To what alternative revenue sources did officials in these three
states turn? The figures displayed in Tables 4, 5, and 6, suggest that the
answer varies from state to state. The biggest increase for Arkansas is the
general sales tax; for Iowa, the individual income tax; and for Nebraska,
“other taxes”. The common trends across these three states are an
increase in state aid to localities and the diversification of local
government revenue sources. State aid increased from 1986 to 1999 by
180% in Nebraska, by 94% in Iowa, and by 132% in Arkansas. This
boost in state aid reflects the national response of state governments to
the “defunding” of local governments that accompanied the effort to
devolve many domestic programs to the states.
640 BARTLE, EBDON & KRANE
1996 (Hoene, 2001). The sales tax is not meant for all local
governments, but some will find it attractive. To the extent that it
continues to be less unpopular than the property tax, its role will also
grow at the local level.
Expansion of user charges is an attractive option. Charges are
attractive for four reasons: they raise additional revenue, they create a
link between the revenue and expenditure parts of the budget that can
improve fiscal decision-making, they provide public managers an
indicator of the desirability of expanding or contracting service supply,
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)
and they can enhance efficiency by rationing services to those who value
them enough to pay their cost. This approach does raise some issues of
access to public services and therefore equity, and the administrative
costs may be high. Recreation probably should rely more heavily on fees,
especially during peak times and seasons. Also, more cities are charging
for trash removal, which encourages recycling and reduces disposal
costs. Other possibilities for expansion of fees include storm water run-
off, bridges, airports, and development charges. Local utility services are
recouping a smaller and smaller percentage of their costs, which suggests
an opportunity to increase revenue. It makes much more sense for these
to be self-funded than to draw property tax revenues to cover expenses.
One exception is with local public transit, which can justify its use of the
property tax because it reduces traffic congestion.
For good or for bad, local governments are diversifying their sources
of revenues. The property tax is unpopular and perceived by some to be
unfair. State aid is one key source of local government funds; but if local
jurisdictions are to avoid becoming, quite literally, wards of the state,
then they need the authority to raise a significant portion of revenue to
pay for local activities. Local sales and income taxes are the most
powerful engines to accomplish this. User charges have increased
substantially and have the capacity to be increased even more.
Miscellaneous revenues and other taxes will likely fill small, but
potentially important roles in funding local activities. While these
revenue sources all have drawbacks, greater local discretion to use them
is a positive development that we believe should continue. This recent
movement to diversify local government revenue sources is an important
and surprising new trend that bears watching as it continues to unfold.
BEYOND THE PROPERTY TAX: LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVENUE DIVERSIFICATION 643
NOTES
1. Rodgers and Temple (1996, p. 256) write, “Charleston, South
Carolina adopted an income tax in the early nineteenth century but
abandoned it. New York City adopted a local income tax in 1934 but
repealed the ordinance in 1935 before any collections were made.”
REFERENCES
Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. (1986).
Significant features of fiscal federalism (1985-86 ed.). Washington,
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)
DC: Author.
Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. (1987).
Significant features of fiscal federalism. (Vol. 1) (1988 ed.).
Washington, DC: Author.
Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. (1995).
Significant features of fiscal federalism (Vol. 1), Budget processes
and tax systems. Washington, DC: Author.
American Council on Intergovernmental Relations. (1998). Significant
features of fiscal federalism (Vol. 2), Revenues & expenditures.
Washington, DC: Author.
Arkansas Municipal League. (2000, August). Sales tax for August, City
and Town. [On-line]. Available: www.arml.org/publications/
city_town/august/00/08-07.html. (Accessed September, 2000).
Aronson, J.R., & Hilley, J.L. (1986). Financing state and local
governments (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Bartle, J.R. (2000). Changes and reforms in tax and public revenue
systems. In Liou, K.T. (Ed.), Handbook of public management
practice and research, New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.
Berman, D.R. (1998). State-local relations: Authority, finance, and
regional cooperation. In The municipal yearbook 1998 p. 68.
Washington, DC: International City/County Management
Association.
City of Des Moines, Iowa. (2001). City of Des Moines operating and
capital improvement budgets. [On-line]. Available: www.ci.des-
moines.ia.us/departments/FIN/Budgets. (Accessed October 2001).
644 BARTLE, EBDON & KRANE
City of Little Rock, Arkansas. (2000). City budget, all funds revenue
projections. [On-line]. Available: www.littlerock.org/government/
calendars/budget/default. (Accessed September, 2000).
City of Lincoln, Nebraska. (2000), City budget. Lincoln, NE; Author.
City of Omaha, Nebraska. (2000). City budget. Omaha, NE: Author.
Clayton, C. (2000, January 27). Sales-tax votes set for spring. Omaha
World-Herald.
Coates, P., Whitmer, J., & Bredeweg, T. (2001). Iowa. In Krane, D.,
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)
Rigos, P.N., & Hill, Jr., M.B. (Eds.), Home rule in America: A fifty
state handbook (pp. 148-155). Washington, DC: Congressional
Quarterly, Inc.
Committeee on Revenue. (1996). A comprehensive guide to the
Nebraska state and local tax system. Lincoln, NE: Nebraska State
Legislature.
Cordes, H. J. (1998, July 15). Funding for schools sits on ‘fault line’ of
tax-lid debate. Omaha World-Herald.
Dearborn, P.M. (1993). Local property taxes: Emerging trends.
Intergovernmental Perspective, 19 (3), 10-12.
District of Columbia. (1999). Tax rates and tax burdens in the District of
Columbia - A nationwide comparison. Washington, DC: Author.
Downes, T.A., & Shah, M. (1994). The effect of school finance reforms
on the level and growth of per pupil expenditures. Paper presented at
the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management
conference, cited in Lewis, D. A., & Maruna, S. (1999). The politics
of education. In Gray, V., Hanson, R.L., & Jacob, H. (Eds.), Politics
in the American states: A comparative analysis (7th ed.).
Washington, DC: CQ Press.
Downing, P.B., & Bierhanzl, E.J. (1996). User charges and special
districts. In Aronson, J.R., & Schwartz, E. (Eds.), Management
policies in local government finance (4th ed.) (pp. 259-285).
Washington, DC: International City/County Management
Association.
Ebdon, C., & Bartle, J. (2000). Compelled competition: Tax limitation
effects on Nebraska’s special districts. Unpublished Paper.
BEYOND THE PROPERTY TAX: LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVENUE DIVERSIFICATION 645
Reid, M.F. & Miller, W. (2001). Arkansas. In Krane, D., Rigos, P.N., &
Hill, Jr., M.B. (Eds.), Home rule in America: A fifty state handbook
(pp. 49-57). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, Inc.
Rodgers, J.D. & Temple, J.A. (1996). Sales Taxes, Income Taxes, and
Other Nonproperty Tax Revenue. In Aronson, J.R., & Schwartz, E.
(Eds.), Management policies in local government finance (4th ed.)
(pp. 229-257). Washington, DC: International City/County
Management Association.
Schoen, D. (2000, September 27). Arkansas Municipal League, Phone
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)
Interview.
Sokolow, A.D. (1998). The changing property tax and state-local
relations. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 28 (1), 165-187.
Speer, T.L. (1997, April). Taxing times. American Demographics, 19:
41-44.
State of Nebraska (2001). Nebraska city sales tax rates. Department of
Economic Development. [On-line]. Available: www.info.neded.org/
stax.htm. (Accessed October 2001).
Steuerle, C. E. (1992). The tax decade: How taxes came to dominate the
public agenda. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.
United States Bureau of the Census. (1988). Government finances in
1986-87 (Series GF-87-5). Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office.
United States Bureau of the Census (1995). Finance data for cities
having 300,000 population or more: 1991-92. [On-line]. Available:
www.census.gov/govs/city/92cisum.txt.
United States Bureau of the Census (1997). United States state and local
government finances by level of government: 1995-96. [On-line].
Available: www.census.gov/govs/estimate/96stlus.txt.
United States Bureau of the Census (2000a). 1997 census of governments
compendium of government finances. Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office.
United States Bureau of the Census (2000b). Statistical abstract 2000.
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
648 BARTLE, EBDON & KRANE
United States Bureau of the Census (2001). State and local government
finances, 1998-99. [On-line]. Available: www.census.gov/govs/
www/estimate99.html. Accessed October 2001.
Downloaded by RMIT University Library At 16:56 18 December 2017 (PT)