2016
DOI: 10.1111/pbaf.12122
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Special Districts and Local Government Debt: An Analysis of “Old Northwest Territory” States

Abstract: Special districts potentially offer a way for local governments to issue more debt than allowed by debt limits. This research examines the relationship between the number of special districts in a county and local government debt levels. Using data from states formed from the Northwest Territory and controlling for other local governments, demographic, and fiscal factors, we find that the number of special districts in a county is positively related to local government debt in four of the five states examined … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
30
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
1
30
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is not generally how the recent literature views the relationship between debt limits and special districts. Faulk and Killian (2017) examine the linkage between special districts and debt and conceptualize their analysis through a circumvention argument similar to Sbragia (1996). They find evidence that an increase in the number of special districts is associated with more aggregate local government debt in five states.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is not generally how the recent literature views the relationship between debt limits and special districts. Faulk and Killian (2017) examine the linkage between special districts and debt and conceptualize their analysis through a circumvention argument similar to Sbragia (1996). They find evidence that an increase in the number of special districts is associated with more aggregate local government debt in five states.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The current literature on local government debt mainly focuses on its various influencing factors: globalization (Kim et al [34]); monetary (Andolfatto and Martin [35]); the number of special districts in a county (Faulk and Killian [36]); corruption (Liu et al [37]); fiscal policy (Cassou et al [38]); intergovernmental transfers (Lu and Zhong [39]); local governments' behavior (Li and Liang [40]); taxes (Kopczewska et al [41]); etc.…”
Section: Local Government Debt and Environmental Pollutionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These guarantees do not show up as debt in our data at the city level. Faulk and Killian (2017) show empirically that having more special districts (and the Harrisburg Authority is classified as one of these) is positively correlated with increased local government debt in four of the five states they consider, which suggests this type of behavior is not unique. Note: Changes are log differences relative to 1986 except for Chicago, which is relative to 1987; circles denote periods of acute fiscal stress such as defaults, bankruptcies, or emergency manager takeovers (the last only for Flint); triangles denote acute fiscal stress periods that occur after 2011; "other cities" is not the universe of cities but covers 64% to 74% of the U.S. population over the time range; fiscal variables are in 2010 dollars per person; the interquartile range is given by the shaded area.…”
Section: A Case Study Of Default and Financial Distressmentioning
confidence: 86%