Although using some of the same organizational and financial factors examined by prior researchers to build and test models that explain factors influencing change in the general fund unreserved balance for smaller, rural, and less affluent counties in Mississippi, the rationale of this study is to build additional support that applying the recommended 5-15 percent savings benchmark across all jurisdictions is not a sufficient guide. Overall, Mississippi counties maintain unreserved fund balances ranging from a negative balance to over one hundred percent of their current expenditures. Counties also increase reserves during times of relative resource abundance and decrease them during relative resource scarcity. Moreover, they tend to address short-term needs and resident demands when revenues are plentiful. During relative resource scarcity, however, they are more cost-conscious and focus on maintaining rather than expanding current expenditures. This research shows that counties using the Beat system, a political form of government, are more likely to behave more frugally than counties using a Unit system, an administrative form of government.

This study examines county government participation in the state-sponsored investment pool, the North Carolina Capital Management Trust (NCCMT), during the recession years. Using panel data of all 100 counties in North Carolina with additional survey data from finance officers concerning annual practices between fiscal years 2008-2011, findings suggest that county sales taxes were the most influential revenue stream on NCCMT cash portfolio participation while the accumulation of alternative revenue sources decreased participation. The findings also determined that the NCCMT was the safest investment option for idle local government funds during the recession.

Studies find minimal evidence that general‐purpose local governments draw down slack resources set aside during prosperous times to contend with economic downturns; although they maintain, in some cases, unrestricted fund balances well in excess of professionally recommended levels. Replicating divergence from the trend methodology in the state of Illinois that provides greater discretion to create and use savings, the analysis finds counties budget slack resources counter‐cyclically (in downturn but not in upturn years) when controlling for political/institutional, revenue, economic, and demographic factors. This article discusses plausible alternative explanations for non‐findings to explore in future studies.

This research examines the relative influences of different forms of government on local governments' financial management. Specifically, it seeks to determine whether or not the impact of financial and environmental factors on the unreserved fund balance differs between an administrative form of government, such as the Unit system, and a political form of government, such as the Beat system of county governments in Mississippi. The purpose of this study is to explain further why governments maintain far more savings than are the recommended benchmarks. The findings suggest that savings behave differently under different financial environments. During times of resource abundance, Beat systems increase savings as per capita income, property tax, and other revenues increase. Beat systems decrease savings as the population, debt per capita, and intergovernmental revenues increase. Unit systems, however, increase savings as property tax, intergovernmental and other revenues increase, but decrease savings as per capita income, population, and debt per capita increase. During times of resource scarcity, majority-non-white counties spent savings at a much slower rate than did the majority-white counties.