Attempting Non-Incremental Budget Change in Oregon: An Exercise in Policy Sharing

American Review of Public Administration

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 229-249

  Simonsen, Bill ^a   Johnston, Nancy ^b   Barnett, Russell ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OREGON   (United States)

^b Business Advantage   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 1542426832     PISSN: 02750740     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Barber, B. (1984). Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
2. Brudney, J. L., & England, R. E. (1982). Urban policy making and subjective service evaluations: Are they compatible? Public Administration Review (March/April), pp. 127-135.
3. Citrin, J. (1979). Do people want something for nothing: Public opinion on taxes and spending. National Tax Journal, (2) (supplement, June), 113-130.
4. Courant, P., Gramlich, E. M., & Rubinfeld, D. L. (1980). Why voters support tax limitation amendments: The Michigan case. National Tax Journal, 33(1), 1-20.
5. Crosby, N., Kelly, J. M., & Schaefer, P. (1986). Citizen panels: A new approach to citizen participation. Public Administration Review, 46(2), 170-178.
6. deLeon, P. (1992). The democratization of the policy sciences. Public Administration Review, 52(2), 125-129.
7. Fitzgerald, M. R., & Durant, R. F. (1980). Citizen evaluations and urban management: Service delivery in an era of protest, Public Administration Review, 40(6), 585-594.
8. Governor's Office. (1992). A conversation with Oregon. Salem, OR: State of Oregon.
9. Harmon, M. M., & Mayer, R. T. (1986). Organizational theory for public administration (pp. 9-15). Boston, MA: Little Brown.
10. Hayes, M. T. (1992). Incrementalism and public policy. New York: Longman.
11. Hill, G. K. (1992a, July 1). Tax package, front and center. Oregonian, p. A1.
12. Hill, G. K. (1992b, July 5). Rebuff to Roberts' tax plan leaves raw wounds. Oregonian, p. C1.
13. Kathlene, L., & Martin, J. A. (1991). Enhancing citizen participation: Panel designs, perspectives, and policy formation. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 10(1), 46-63.
14. Ladd, H. F., & Wilson, J. B. (1982). Why voters support tax limitations: Evidence from Massachusetts Proposition 2-1/2. National Tax Journal, 35 (2), 121-148.
15. Legislative Revenue Office. (1990, Sept. 6). Impact of Measure 5: 1.5% property tax limit. Research Report 3-90, Salem, OR: State of Oregon.
16. Legislative Revenue Office. (1992, July 1). Presentation materials. Salem, OR: State of Oregon.
17. Legislative Revenue Office. (1992b, Jan. 21). Presentation Materials. Salem, OR: State of Oregon.
18. Lemov, P. (1994). Taxes: The struggle for balance. Governing (Aug.) 31-34.
19. Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The science of muddling through. Public Administration Review, 19, 79-88.
20. Lindblom, C. E. (1990). Inquiry and change: The troubled attempt to understand and shape society. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
21. Mapes, J., & McCarthy, N. (1992, June 24). Roberts calls special session. Oregonian, p. A1.
22. McCarthy, N. (1992a, June 20). Roberts sees some sales tax support. Oregonian, p. A1.
23. McCarthy, N. (1992b, June 23). Roberts finishes drafting major elements of tax plan. Oregonian p. B8.
24. McCarthy, N. (1992c, July 2). Governor bends ears for tax plan before loss. Oregonian, p. A14.
25. Miller, T. I., & Miller, M. A. (1991). Standards of excellence: U.S. residents' evaluations of local government services, Public Administration Review, 51(6), 503-514.
26. Perot, R. (1992). United we stand: How we can take back our country. New York: Hyperion.
27. Rittel, H. W. J., & Wegger, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155-169.
28. Simon, H. (1976). Administrative Behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organizations (3rd rev. ed.). New York: Free Press.
29. Utility Tax Discarded. (1993, Jan. 21). Register-Guard, p. A10.
30. Walth, B. (1992, July 2). House rejects Roberts' tax plan." Register-Guard, p. A1.
31. Watson, D. J., Juster, R. J., & Johnson, G. W. (1991). Institutionalized use of citizen surveys in the budgetary and policy-making processes: A small city case study. Public Administration Review, 51(3), 232-239.
32. Weeks, E. C., Hallock, M., Lemert, J. B., & McKinley, B. (1992). Citizen participation in policy formation: A review of Governor Roberts' conversation with Oregon. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.
33. Weeks, E. C., & Simonsen, W. (1992). Eugene decisions: Results of citizen input. Eugene, OR: City of Eugene (January).
34. Weeks, E. C., & Weeks, S. (1992). Eugene decisions: Results of citizen input. Eugene, OR: City of Eugene (July).
35. Wildavsky, A. (1984). The politics of the budgetary process (4th ed.). Boston: Little, Brown.