As you can see the local munis get the lions share of their revenue from three sources; direct payments from the State (30%), local property taxes (26%) and other revenues (22%). A total of nearly 80% of the muni revenue stream is now suspect.
If you are living in a hard up municipal area (who isn’t?) you know that the fees you pay for everything has increased in the last year or so. Building permits, licensing fees, transportation fees, library cards, speeding and parking tickets, you name it have all doubled. There is a limit to this. I think it has already passed. Nickel and diming residents and having the cops turned into a revenue source is just not going to fly much longer. We are at the point where if some town wants to raise the price for garbage collection they are going to run into a wall. Don’t look for this source of revenue to bail out the munis in 2011.
Property tax revenue is also a risk. At the end of the day there is a relationship between the value of a property and the taxes that the property pays. With housing in the dumps now for two years (and with no prospect for any improvement) the tax base is falling apart. Where I live price are down about 40% from the 06 levels. One after another neighbors are petitioning the local authorities for relief based on lower values. RE agents who represent sellers tell their customers to go forward with the process before the house is listed. If the listing price is less than the value on the books, tax relief is granted. This process will accelerate. This is what the CBO had to say on the prospects of property taxes actually falling:
The decline in house prices implies that (tax) collections will probably fall in the coming years as local governments gradually update property tax assessments to reflect lower market values. On average, collections of property tax revenues lag behind changes in house prices by three years. Even small declines in collections could cause fiscal stress when the cost of providing public services is growing.
The largest contributor to Muni budgets is the states themselves. We know that the states are broke and have to cut costs, so this source of revenue has to be reduced.
Here is a (surprising to me) chart of both state and municipal revenue for the past few years. Of no surprise is the sharp drop off of revenue at the state level. But the municipal revenue has continued to increase. Given the foregoing discussion on the sources of muni revenue it would seem certain that their income is going to decline in 2011.
A few factoids on local munis tells the importance they play in our economic picture.
-90% of all cities have cut backs in spending scheduled for 2011.
-Approximately 14 million people are employed by local munis (not state workers). That is 11% of the entire work force. Do the math. A 15% drop in employment translates to 2.2mm jobs. That would come to 175,000 per month. By itself this would add 1.7% to the unemployment rate. We would be pushing 12% UE as a result.
-Muni spending is 9% of total GDP. A 10% cutback translates into a drag on top line GDP by 1%. The estimates for growth range from 2-3%. If local governments are forced into cuts (they will) a better estimate for GDP is 1-2%.
-When looking for places to cut, munis always go to capital projects first. Roads, sewer, water hospitals, schools are not going to get built. What does this do for the private sector construction industry?
What are the options for a cash strapped muni? Unlike state borrowers, munis can go bankrupt. (more than half have laws on the books permitting a chapter filing - including key ones). The CBO report provided an excellent set of reasons for munis to default:
Benefits of Bankruptcy
-One key advantage of bankruptcy is the “automatic stay,” which is issued by a court and prevents creditors from taking action against the municipality and its officials without approval from the court.
-Another important advantage of bankruptcy is that courts can implement a restructuring plan without the consent of every creditor.
-The bankruptcy process may also allow a municipal government to reduce its labor costs by facilitating the con- sent of employee unions to changes in labor contracts.
-While a stay is in place, bondholders cannot force municipal officials to raise taxes in order to make debt-service payments.
Over the past 30 years of the 18,400 muni borrowers only 54 have defaulted on their debt. An admirable track record. One that is unlikely to be continued over the next few years. Not a pretty picture for a muni investor. To top it off BABs (the last pillar of support for munis) is gone. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if some big Muni became the Greece of America in the near future.
Disclosure: Very “underweight” in long term munis.



Great stuff, Bruce! I think the point you made about local government being 10% of jobs is particularly striking and speaks to why this recovery has been slow and jobless--one of the main drivers of job growth for the last thirty years has been MIA. People still have this paradigm of employment in our economy as being driven by private spending when the real drivers of employment growth have been health care (Medicare and Medicaid) and government.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that the government category includes secondary and primary school teachers--with declining (or at least stable) enrollments this component of the series should be a wash for some time.
Boo hoo to the muni workers. Anyone who has ever been to a city/town hall knows they have 4 or 5 "workers" doing the work of one.
ReplyDeleteThey get shorter hours, more vacation time, and much better benefits than anyone in the private sector. Public "servants" are much better off than the public they are supposed to serve - even before you factor in their lack of productivity.
The whining has already started with spending cuts. As always, they threaten to fire teachers, firemen, police... if taxpayers don't empty our wallets and purses and hand over all our jewelry. Thieves.
We are long overdue to right size government. Administrative overhead is outrageous. In most large municipalities, administrative overhead is 50% of the "education" budget (its almost 60% in NYC ... the cost of teachers and classrooms is squeezed into the other 40%).
Government is in the same position now as GM, GE and IBM were in the 1970s. High cost, low productivity, and "customers" who are dying to find an alternative.
GE and IBM both rightsized. GM tried to placate the crappy unions, and has needed two major bailouts (so far!)
Claiming that this will increase unemployment is purely a matter of semantics. While we can all think of a few exceptions that prove the rule - these people don't work. Essentially, municipal employment is just an overpriced form of welfare.
Put these lazy muni "workers" on actual welfare, which is where an honest accounting would have shown them for decades
The default is the right way forward. It is a common business strategy extract the value of a business and turn it into debt that becomes the debt-holders problem while the extractees walk away richer. This is the essence of a deregulated marketplace. Why can't municipalities do the same thing?
ReplyDeleteAnother front on the war against public good is making great progress. These actions follow-up with large aggregate demand declines, increased poverty, increased social unrest and decreased social mobility.
How do you like your free markets ideology now?
How arrogant to assume that municipal unions represent the "public good"
ReplyDeleteWe need police and teachers and firemen. But they always get the cuts. If I never fill out another pointless form to justify a pointless muni union admin job -- it will be too soon. The public good is best served by eliminating over priced "make work" jobs and putting these lazy dolts on welfare where they belong
Everywhere that we have big government unions -- New York, Chicago, California -- we have incredibly high poverty, lots of street crime (in addition to the white collar crimes that infest municipal life) and no private sector jobs
If that is your definition of the "public good", then lets hope it ends soon
The public good is best served by eliminating over priced "make work" jobs and putting these lazy dolts on welfare where they belong
ReplyDeleteThe problem with your argument is it's main use is to fund your pet projects and defund the rest. It also sets up a nice whipping boy for enriching the top 10% at the bottom 90%'s expense.
Everywhere that we have big government unions -- New York, Chicago, California -- we have incredibly high poverty,
We also have a large number of extremely wealthy people too. Those 'poor' mostly work you know. Comparatively high tax rates too.
lots of street crime (in addition to the white collar crimes that infest municipal life)
Pet project of yours? Let's raise taxes and hire more law enforcement then. Oh noes! Government will be getting bigger!!! So, which is it?
and no private sector jobs
Hmm, California **on it's own** has a world-ranked economy. New York is a global financial hub. Lots of economic activity. There are jobs. Except not the ones you want to see. Another pet project of yours?
A few municipalities have already filed; one is Vallejo CA, where the public employees are putting up one helluva fight to keep their benefits. Its been a long, drawn out mess. Will bondholders or employee pension and benefits lose more ?
ReplyDelete"If bankruptcy allows Vallejo to overturn otherwise ironclad labor contracts and shed or restructure pay and retirement costs, will other struggling cities and counties be tempted to do the same?
Taking no chances, public employee unions are backing a bill, AB 155 by Assemblyman Tony Mendoza, D-Norwalk, that would require local governments to go before a labor-friendly commission in Sacramento before filing bankruptcy"
http://calpensions.com/2010/06/12/vallejo-bankruptcy-tied-up-in-binding-arbitration/