Donate
Independent, objective, nonpartisan research

OP 1203MBOP

Authors

OP 1203MBOP

Tagged with:

Publication PDFs

Database

This is the content currently stored in the post and postmeta tables.

View live version

object(Timber\Post)#3742 (44) { ["ImageClass"]=> string(12) "Timber\Image" ["PostClass"]=> string(11) "Timber\Post" ["TermClass"]=> string(11) "Timber\Term" ["object_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["custom"]=> array(5) { ["_wp_attached_file"]=> string(15) "OP_1203MBOP.pdf" ["wpmf_size"]=> string(6) "468123" ["wpmf_filetype"]=> string(3) "pdf" ["wpmf_order"]=> string(1) "0" ["searchwp_content"]=> string(4897) "Occasional Papers Local Homeland Security and Fiscal Uncertainty: Surveys of City Officials in California Mark Baldassare Christopher Hoene Presented at the National League of Cities Congress of Cities and Exposition, Session on Local Homeland Security Costs, Nashville, Tennessee December 11, 2003 Public Policy Institute of California The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) is a private operating foundation established in 1994 with an endowment from William R. Hewlett. The Institute is dedicated to improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research. PPIC's research agenda focuses on three program areas: population, economy, and governance and public finance. Studies within these programs are examining the underlying forces shaping California’s future, cutting across a wide range of public policy concerns, including education, health care, immigration, income distribution, welfare, urban growth, and state and local finance. PPIC was created because three concerned citizens – William R. Hewlett, Roger W. Heyns, and Arjay Miller – recognized the need for linking objective research to the realities of California public policy. Their goal was to help the state’s leaders better understand the intricacies and implications of contemporary issues and make informed public policy decisions when confronted with challenges in the future. David W. Lyon is founding President and Chief Executive Officer of PPIC. Raymond L. Watson is Chairman of the Board of Directors. Copyright © 2003 by Public Policy Institute of California All rights reserved San Francisco, CA Short sections of text, not to exceed three paragraphs, may be quoted without written permission provided that full attribution is given to the source and the above copyright notice is included. PPIC does not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. Research publications reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff, officers, or Board of Directors of the Public Policy Institute of California. Contents Summary Introduction The Fiscal Context in California and U.S. Cities California Cities in 2002 and 2003 Larger and Smaller California Cities California’s Major Metropolitan Areas California’s Coastal and Inland Cities Appendix Survey Methodology Survey Questionnaire 1 3 5 7 11 15 19 23 25 -i- Summary This report presents the second in a series of comprehensive analyses of the ways in which California city officials and U.S. city officials are responding to homeland security issues. The findings are based on a statewide survey that was conducted in July and August 2003 by the League of California Cities. The League sent a direct mail survey to city officials in all of California's 478 cities. A total of 294 surveys were completed and returned, for a 62 percent response rate. This report compares responses in the 2003 survey to responses in a similar survey of California city officials conducted in July and August 2002 and to responses in a national survey of city officials conducted by the National League of Cities in 2003. The survey results offer a “snapshot in time,” when city officials are in the process of continuing to implement ways to cope with the new realities confronting local governments two years after the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, D.C. As federal and state policymakers contemplate the future of homeland security, the opinions expressed in these surveys should prove helpful in identifying local issues and perceived needs. Some of the findings and the conclusions we draw from the California and U.S. surveys are presented below. • The fiscal context in California and U.S. cities • Large majorities of California and U.S. city officials say that their local economic and fiscal conditions are weaker this year than previously and that they will continue to weaken in the coming year. • California cities report more negative economic and fiscal conditions than U.S. cities as a whole. • California cities in 2002 and 2003 • City officials are more pessimistic in 2003 than they were in 2002 about the likelihood of public support for local taxes and fees to pay for increased homeland security activities. • Many city officials continue to be concerned about homeland security, and larger percentages than in 2002 report that they have addressed various types of potential terrorist attacks in their planning efforts. There appears to be increased coordination across all levels of government since September 11th. Over the past year, coordination between cities and counties increased in particular, according to city officials. • California cities: large (>100,000 people) and small (" } ["___content":protected]=> string(108) "

OP 1203MBOP

" ["_permalink":protected]=> string(132) "https://www.ppic.org/publication/local-homeland-security-and-fiscal-uncertainty-surveys-of-city-officials-in-california/op_1203mbop/" ["_next":protected]=> array(0) { } ["_prev":protected]=> array(0) { } ["_css_class":protected]=> NULL ["id"]=> int(8375) ["ID"]=> int(8375) ["post_author"]=> string(1) "1" ["post_content"]=> string(0) "" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 02:37:06" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(3567) ["post_status"]=> string(7) "inherit" ["post_title"]=> string(11) "OP 1203MBOP" ["post_type"]=> string(10) "attachment" ["slug"]=> string(11) "op_1203mbop" ["__type":protected]=> NULL ["_wp_attached_file"]=> string(15) "OP_1203MBOP.pdf" ["wpmf_size"]=> string(6) "468123" ["wpmf_filetype"]=> string(3) "pdf" ["wpmf_order"]=> string(1) "0" ["searchwp_content"]=> string(4897) "Occasional Papers Local Homeland Security and Fiscal Uncertainty: Surveys of City Officials in California Mark Baldassare Christopher Hoene Presented at the National League of Cities Congress of Cities and Exposition, Session on Local Homeland Security Costs, Nashville, Tennessee December 11, 2003 Public Policy Institute of California The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) is a private operating foundation established in 1994 with an endowment from William R. Hewlett. The Institute is dedicated to improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research. PPIC's research agenda focuses on three program areas: population, economy, and governance and public finance. Studies within these programs are examining the underlying forces shaping California’s future, cutting across a wide range of public policy concerns, including education, health care, immigration, income distribution, welfare, urban growth, and state and local finance. PPIC was created because three concerned citizens – William R. Hewlett, Roger W. Heyns, and Arjay Miller – recognized the need for linking objective research to the realities of California public policy. Their goal was to help the state’s leaders better understand the intricacies and implications of contemporary issues and make informed public policy decisions when confronted with challenges in the future. David W. Lyon is founding President and Chief Executive Officer of PPIC. Raymond L. Watson is Chairman of the Board of Directors. Copyright © 2003 by Public Policy Institute of California All rights reserved San Francisco, CA Short sections of text, not to exceed three paragraphs, may be quoted without written permission provided that full attribution is given to the source and the above copyright notice is included. PPIC does not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. Research publications reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff, officers, or Board of Directors of the Public Policy Institute of California. Contents Summary Introduction The Fiscal Context in California and U.S. Cities California Cities in 2002 and 2003 Larger and Smaller California Cities California’s Major Metropolitan Areas California’s Coastal and Inland Cities Appendix Survey Methodology Survey Questionnaire 1 3 5 7 11 15 19 23 25 -i- Summary This report presents the second in a series of comprehensive analyses of the ways in which California city officials and U.S. city officials are responding to homeland security issues. The findings are based on a statewide survey that was conducted in July and August 2003 by the League of California Cities. The League sent a direct mail survey to city officials in all of California's 478 cities. A total of 294 surveys were completed and returned, for a 62 percent response rate. This report compares responses in the 2003 survey to responses in a similar survey of California city officials conducted in July and August 2002 and to responses in a national survey of city officials conducted by the National League of Cities in 2003. The survey results offer a “snapshot in time,” when city officials are in the process of continuing to implement ways to cope with the new realities confronting local governments two years after the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, D.C. As federal and state policymakers contemplate the future of homeland security, the opinions expressed in these surveys should prove helpful in identifying local issues and perceived needs. Some of the findings and the conclusions we draw from the California and U.S. surveys are presented below. • The fiscal context in California and U.S. cities • Large majorities of California and U.S. city officials say that their local economic and fiscal conditions are weaker this year than previously and that they will continue to weaken in the coming year. • California cities report more negative economic and fiscal conditions than U.S. cities as a whole. • California cities in 2002 and 2003 • City officials are more pessimistic in 2003 than they were in 2002 about the likelihood of public support for local taxes and fees to pay for increased homeland security activities. • Many city officials continue to be concerned about homeland security, and larger percentages than in 2002 report that they have addressed various types of potential terrorist attacks in their planning efforts. There appears to be increased coordination across all levels of government since September 11th. Over the past year, coordination between cities and counties increased in particular, according to city officials. • California cities: large (>100,000 people) and small (" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 09:37:06" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(6) "closed" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(11) "op_1203mbop" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 02:37:07" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 09:37:07" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["guid"]=> string(53) "http://148.62.4.17/wp-content/uploads/OP_1203MBOP.pdf" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_mime_type"]=> string(15) "application/pdf" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" ["status"]=> string(7) "inherit" ["attachment_authors"]=> bool(false) }