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

December 19 • 4:00 PM

How a Drug Policy Reform Organization Thinks of the Children

This valuable, newly updated resource for parents is based in the real world.


December 19 • 2:00 PM

Where Did the Ouija Board Come From?

It wasn’t just a toy.


December 19 • 12:00 PM

Social Scientists Can Do More to Eradicate Racial Oppression

Using our knowledge of social systems, all social scientists—black or white, race scholar or not—have an opportunity to challenge white privilege.


December 19 • 10:17 AM

How Scientists Contribute to Bad Science Reporting

By not taking university press officers and research press releases seriously, scientists are often complicit in the media falsehoods they so often deride.


December 19 • 10:00 AM

Pentecostalism in West Africa: A Boon or Barrier to Disease?

How has Ghana stayed Ebola-free despite being at high risk for infection? A look at their American-style Pentecostalism, a religion that threatens to do more harm than good.


December 19 • 8:00 AM

Don’t Text and Drive—Especially If You’re Old

A new study shows that texting while driving becomes even more dangerous with age.


December 19 • 6:12 AM

All That ‘Call of Duty’ With Your Friends Has Not Made You a More Violent Person

But all that solo Call of Duty has.


December 19 • 4:00 AM

Food for Thought: WIC Works

New research finds participation in the federal WIC program, which subsidizes healthy foods for young children, is linked with stronger cognitive development and higher test scores.


December 18 • 4:00 PM

How I Navigated Life as a Newly Sober Mom

Saying “no” to my kids was harder than saying “no” to alcohol. But for their sake and mine, I had to learn to put myself first sometimes.


December 18 • 2:00 PM

Women in Apocalyptic Fiction Shaving Their Armpits

Because our interest in realism apparently only goes so far.


December 18 • 12:00 PM

The Paradox of Choice, 10 Years Later

Paul Hiebert talks to psychologist Barry Schwartz about how modern trends—social media, FOMO, customer review sites—fit in with arguments he made a decade ago in his highly influential book, The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less.


December 18 • 10:00 AM

What It’s Like to Spend a Few Hours in the Church of Scientology

Wrestling with thetans, attempting to unlock a memory bank, and a personality test seemingly aimed at people with depression. This is Scientology’s “dissemination drill” for potential new members.


December 18 • 8:00 AM

Gendering #BlackLivesMatter: A Feminist Perspective

Black men are stereotyped as violent, while black women are rendered invisible. Here’s why the gendering of black lives matters.


December 18 • 7:06 AM

Apparently You Can Bring Your Religion to Work

New research says offices that encourage talk of religion actually make for happier workplaces.


December 18 • 6:00 AM

The Very Weak and Complicated Links Between Mental Illness and Gun Violence

Vanderbilt University’s Jonathan Metzl and Kenneth MacLeish address our anxieties and correct our assumptions.


December 18 • 4:00 AM

Should Movies Be Rated RD for Reckless Driving?

A new study finds a link between watching films featuring reckless driving and engaging in similar behavior years later.


December 17 • 4:00 PM

How to Run a Drug Dealing Network in Prison

People tend not to hear about the prison drug dealing operations that succeed. Substance.com asks a veteran of the game to explain his system.


December 17 • 2:00 PM

Gender Segregation of Toys Is on the Rise

Charting the use of “toys for boys” and “toys for girls” in American English.


December 17 • 12:41 PM

Why the College Football Playoff Is Terrible But Better Than Before

The sample size is still embarrassingly small, but at least there’s less room for the availability cascade.


December 17 • 11:06 AM

Canadian Kids Have a Serious Smoking Problem

Bootleg cigarette sales could be leading Canadian teens to more serious drugs, a recent study finds.


December 17 • 10:37 AM

A Public Lynching in Sproul Plaza

When photographs of lynching victims showed up on a hallowed site of democracy in action, a provocation was issued—but to whom, by whom, and why?


December 17 • 8:00 AM

What Was the Job?

This was the year the job broke, the year we accepted a re-interpretation of its fundamental bargain and bought in to the push to get us to all work for ourselves rather than each other.


December 17 • 6:00 AM

White Kids Will Be Kids

Even the “good” kids—bound for college, upwardly mobile—sometimes break the law. The difference? They don’t have much to fear. A professor of race and social movements reflects on her teenage years and faces some uncomfortable realities.



December 16 • 4:00 PM

How Fear of Occupy Wall Street Undermined the Red Cross’ Sandy Relief Effort

Red Cross responders say there was a ban on working with the widely praised Occupy Sandy relief group because it was seen as politically unpalatable.


Follow us


Don’t Text and Drive—Especially If You’re Old

A new study shows that texting while driving becomes even more dangerous with age.

Apparently You Can Bring Your Religion to Work

New research says offices that encourage talk of religion actually make for happier workplaces.

Canadian Kids Have a Serious Smoking Problem

Bootleg cigarette sales could be leading Canadian teens to more serious drugs, a recent study finds.

The Hidden Psychology of the Home Ref

That old myth of home field bias isn’t a myth at all; it’s a statistical fact.

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.