Menus Subscribe Search

Follow us


Facing a dire revenue shortfall, Providence, Rhode Island, has taken drastic measures to save money, providing only basic services to those in need. (PHOTO: SHUTTERSTOCK)

Facing a dire revenue shortfall, Providence, Rhode Island, has taken drastic measures to save money, providing only basic services to those in need. (PHOTO: SHUTTERSTOCK)

Analysis: We Should Rethink Who Funds Basic Services

• January 03, 2013 • 4:00 AM

Facing a dire revenue shortfall, Providence, Rhode Island, has taken drastic measures to save money, providing only basic services to those in need. (PHOTO: SHUTTERSTOCK)

Wealthy Barrington, Rhode Island, and needy Providence provide a case in point.

Barrington may be the only community in Rhode Island that not only did not cut back on library hours and services in 2011—it expanded them. What’s more, in 2012, it has continued to increase library funding.

The nearby city of Providence closed seven of its nine public libraries for a week this September because it needed to close a budget shortfall. Even before that closure, budget constraints had limited the hours at Providence libraries, making it difficult for people with full time jobs and their families to use this public service on most days.

This is just one example of how Providence and Barrington, located just nine miles apart, highlight the inequity of our locality-based budget system: The places most critically in need of the local services that facilitate economic growth and job attainment are the least likely to have the means to pay for them.

Rhode Island has 39 cities, each of which manages critical services (such as schools, public health, the promotion of tourism and business development, and law enforcement) needed for economic growth. As with most local governments in the U.S., the only taxation authority these cities have is a broadly defined property tax that covers houses, cars, boats, etc. (Such taxes make up 72 percent of Providence’s total revenue. Only 15 percent of the city’s revenue is funding from the state and the rest is made up of fees for services and the like). These sorts of “flat” taxes based on ownership are the norm for local governments across the country, with only a few exceptions.

A “flat tax” often seems like the most fair—everyone pays the same, based on how much they spend or own. However, in an era of unprecedented economic segregation, having a flat tax and fee system that is geographically limited to the local jurisdiction means that those cities and towns that are home to the poorest individuals (and, more importantly, have the lowest housing values) have the least ability to pay for vital services, let alone invest in the economic growth of the citizenry. Providence’s property tax rate is already three times that of cities in the rest of the state, and yet it still can’t generate the income needed to invest in essential services. Tying the funding for basic services to the locally available dollars is a perfect way to create inequality and stunt economic growth.

In Providence, where I live, the median household income is about $37,000. In Barrington, it is more than $90,000. Housing values mirror the money residents have at their disposal, and as a result Barrington can afford to invest heavily in all sorts of programs that benefit residents and the local (and national) economy.

Providence, on the other hand, is facing a dire revenue shortfall and has taken drastic measures to save money, providing only basic services to those in need. In one particularly rash move, the mayor fired every teacher in the city’s school system at the end of the 2010-11 school year so that he could hire back only as many as the city could afford (once they figured out how many that was). In the end, the city cut its education budget by about $28 million. The mayor closed six schools, eliminated scores of teaching and administrative positions, and substantially reduced the special-education budget. Because its property tax is already so high and its housing market is in continual decline, there are no good ways for Providence to increase its revenue. Providence has raised taxes several times over the last few years, but there is a limit to how much it can boost the property tax without hurting housing values even more. In time, the city may have to file for bankruptcy. And yet Barrington’s proposed budget for next year includes increasing expenditures on its schools by 2.7 percent (more than $1 million) without any tax hikes. Sure, these cities are also different in other ways, but those distinctions are irrelevant as long as their access to economic capital is so drastically different.

Most of us probably can think of two such contrasting cities within 20 miles of our own homes—one flush in cash with great services and another serving a poor population whose services seem to be forever under fire. The services cities need to provide—and how much is budgeted for each service—depend largely upon the population that lives there.

But wealthy or poor, people always seem to think that governments serving poor populations are somehow screwing up; few recognize that communities that are poor or have significant economic inequality (like Providence) are simply being screwed. When I talk to my neighbors and colleagues about the future of Providence, and how its growth is likely being crushed by the decisions of our political leadership, they often look puzzled. “Whatever it takes to balance the budget … the city has to manage its pocketbook,” they say—canned responses that could have been taken right from one of the mayor’s press releases. The thing is, they are right. Cities must balance their budgets or declare bankruptcy, as more and more of them are doing.

Because they have to fix their budgets using only the economic means available locally, the cities that need to spend the most on critical services to facilitate growth end up spending the least. Indeed, Paul Peterson, director of the Program on Education Policy and Governance at Harvard University, has found that communities with higher per-capita income spend more on welfare, health, education, unemployment benefits, and police, and fire—even though they need fewer of these services in the first place. What affects expenditures is not what a community needs to spend, but how much money it has available.

Economist Charles Tiebout is known for originating the concept of voting with one’s feet. Fifty years ago, he argued that officials at the local level know what services voters want and how much they’re willing to pay for them (i.e., taxes) by their willingness to live in a particular place. This concept is the cornerstone of competitive federalism: communities compete for residents, so they are driven to provide the best services for the least money.

His theory assumes a fictional utopia. The residents of Barrington were able to make these decisions and to buy expensive houses, the taxes on which guarantee good services. The people of Providence who would most benefit from high-quality schools, police officers on every corner, and access to great opportunities for job training lack the financial means to relocate to where those services are available.

Unfortunately, in tough economic times, states tend to pawn off more responsibilities to local governments, which exacerbates the opportunity gap between poor and rich communities and slow economic growth. It is large government entities—like states and the federal government that have the ability to distribute money in a way that makes up for local deficits. Maybe it’s time to rethink which level of government should pay for services that lead to economic growth.

Shanna Pearson
Shanna Pearson-Merkowitz is an assistant professor at the University of Rhode Island. Her academic work is published in some of the top political science journals including the Journal of Politics, the American Journal of Political Science, and State Politics and Policy Quarterly. Prior to entering academia, she worked in state and local government and electoral campaigns.

More From Shanna Pearson

A weekly roundup of the best of Pacific Standard and PSmag.com, delivered straight to your inbox.

Recent Posts

November 25 • 4:00 PM

Is the Federal Reserve Bank of New York Doing Enough to Monitor Wall Street?

Bank President William Dudley says supervision is stronger than ever, but Democratic senators are unconvinced: “You need to fix it, Mr. Dudley, or we need to get someone who will.”


November 25 • 3:30 PM

Cultural Activities Help Seniors Retain Health Literacy

New research finds a link between the ability to process health-related information and regular attendance at movies, plays, and concerts.


November 25 • 12:00 PM

Why Did Doctors Stop Giving Women Orgasms?

You can thank the rise of the vibrator for that, according to technology historian Rachel Maines.


November 25 • 10:08 AM

Geography, Race, and LOLs

The online lexicon spreads through racial and ethnic groups as much as it does through geography and other traditional linguistic measures.


November 25 • 10:00 AM

If It’s Yellow, Seriously, Let It Mellow

If you actually care about water and the future of the species, you’ll think twice about flushing.


November 25 • 8:00 AM

Sometimes You Should Just Say No to Surgery

The introduction of national thyroid cancer screening in South Korea led to a 15-fold increase in diagnoses and a corresponding explosion of operations—but no difference in mortality rates. This is a prime example of over-diagnosis that’s contributing to bloated health care costs.



November 25 • 6:00 AM

The Long War Between Highbrow and Lowbrow

Despise The Avengers? Loathe the snobs who despise The Avengers? You’re not the first.


November 25 • 4:00 AM

Are Women More Open to Sex Than They Admit?

New research questions the conventional wisdom that men overestimate women’s level of sexual interest in them.


November 25 • 2:00 AM

The Geography of Innovation, or, Why Almost All Japanese People Hate Root Beer

Innovation is not a product of population density, but of something else entirely.


November 24 • 4:00 PM

Federal Reserve Announces Sweeping Review of Its Big Bank Oversight

The Federal Reserve Board wants to look at whether the views of examiners are being heard by higher-ups.



November 24 • 2:00 PM

That Catcalling Video Is a Reminder of Why Research Methods Are So Important

If your methods aren’t sound then neither are your findings.


November 24 • 12:00 PM

Yes, Republicans Can Still Win the White House

If the economy in 2016 is where it was in 2012 or better, Democrats will likely retain the White House. If not, well….


November 24 • 11:36 AM

Feeling—Not Being—Wealthy Cuts Support for Economic Redistribution

A new study suggests it’s relative wealth that leads people to oppose taxing the rich and giving to the poor.


November 24 • 10:00 AM

Why Are Patients Drawn to Certain Doctors?

We look for an emotional fit between our physicians and ourselves—and right now, that’s the best we can do.


November 24 • 8:00 AM

Why Do We Elect Corrupt Politicians?

Voters, it seems, are willing to forgive—over and over again—dishonest yet beloved politicians if they think the job is still getting done.



November 24 • 6:00 AM

They Steal Babies, Don’t They?

Ethiopia, the Hague, and the rise and fall of international adoption. An exclusive investigation of internal U.S. State Department documents describing how humanitarian adoptions metastasized into a mini-industry shot through with fraud, becoming a source of income for unscrupulous orphanages, government officials, and shady operators—and was then reined back in through diplomacy, regulation, and a brand-new federal law.


November 24 • 4:00 AM

Nudging Drivers, and Pedestrians, Into Better Behavior

Daniel Pink’s new series, Crowd Control, premieres tonight on the National Geographic Channel.


November 21 • 4:00 PM

Why Are America’s Poorest Toddlers Being Over-Prescribed ADHD Drugs?

Against all medical guidelines, children who are two and three years old are getting diagnosed with ADHD and treated with Adderall and other stimulants. It may be shocking, but it’s perfectly legal.



November 21 • 2:00 PM

The Best Moms Let Mess Happen

That’s the message of a Bounty commercial that reminds this sociologist of Sharon Hays’ work on “the ideology of intensive motherhood.”


November 21 • 12:00 PM

Eating Disorders Are Not Just for Women

Men, like women, are affected by our cultural preoccupation with thinness. And refusing to recognize that only makes things worse.


November 21 • 10:00 AM

Queens of the South

Inside Asheville, North Carolina’s 7th annual Miss Gay Latina pageant.


Follow us


Geography, Race, and LOLs

The online lexicon spreads through racial and ethnic groups as much as it does through geography and other traditional linguistic measures.

Feeling—Not Being—Wealthy Cuts Support for Economic Redistribution

A new study suggests it's relative wealth that leads people to oppose taxing the rich and giving to the poor.

Sufferers of Social Anxiety Disorder, Your Friends Like You

The first study of friends' perceptions suggest they know something's off with their pals but like them just the same.

Standing Up for My Group by Kicking Yours

Members of a minority ethnic group are less likely to express support for gay equality if they believe their own group suffers from discrimination.

How Old Brains Learn New Tricks

A new study shows that the neural plasticity needed for learning doesn't vanish as we age—it just moves.

The Big One

One in two United States senators and two in five House members who left office between 1998 and 2004 became lobbyists. November/December 2014

Copyright © 2014 by Pacific Standard and The Miller-McCune Center for Research, Media, and Public Policy. All Rights Reserved.