Michigan Public Policy Survey (MPPS)

To what extent do you agree or disagree that the Emergency Manager Law pays insufficient attention to the underlying structural problems leading to local fiscal stress?

To what extent do you agree or disagree that the Emergency Manager Law serves the interests of local residents by improving their jurisdiction’s fiscal sustainability?

To what extent do you agree or disagree that the Emergency Manager Law leads to an overemphasis on cost-cutting at the expense of service quality, public health and safety, or other important considerations?

Thinking overall, to what extent do you support or oppose the Emergency Manager Law?

To what extent would you support or oppose changing the Emergency Manager Law by requiring Emergency Managers to plan for improving factors beyond just finances (e.g., service delivery, infrastructure, quality of life)?

To what extent would you support or oppose changing the Emergency Manager Law by including provisions for possible new (time limited) local or state revenue options for jurisdictions with Emergency Managers?

To what extent would you support or oppose changing the Emergency Manager Law by requiring Emergency Managers to analyze impact on disadvantaged groups when making decisions?

To what extent would you support or oppose changing the Emergency Manager Law by requiring Emergency Managers to consider local elected official input before making decisions?

To what extent would you support or oppose changing the Emergency Manager Law by requiring Emergency Managers to consider citizen input before making decisions?

To what extent would you support or oppose changing the Emergency Manager Law by adding state-level ombudsperson oversight for citizens and local officials to appeal any Emergency Manager decision?

To what extent would you support or oppose changing the Emergency Manager Law by making other changes?

Some believe that more proactive monitoring of local government finances by the State could help avoid local fiscal emergencies through earlier detection and intervention. Others believe this may be unnecessary or even counterproductive. To what extent would you support or oppose more proactive State monitoring of finances for all local governments in Michigan?

How would you describe current levels of citizen engagement with your jurisdiction? Overall, would you say citizens in your jurisdiction are…

Next we want to focus on which particular elements of the system for funding local government in Michigan you think need to be reformed in some significant fashion. How important, if at all, do you believe it is to significantly reform: Regional taxation

To what extent do you agree or disagree that you make opportunities for engagement available, but your citizens rarely take advantage of them?

To what extent do you agree or disagree that some of your best engagement with citizens happens informally around the community (such as at the grocery store or in a restaurant, etc.)?

To what extent do you agree or disagree that most citizens you hear from are more interested in complaining than in finding solutions?

To what extent do you agree or disagree that citizens in your jurisdiction want access to information about the government's finances and operations?

To what extent do you agree or disagree that most citizens aren't willing to take the time to become well-informed on issues facing the jurisdiction?

To what extent do you agree or disagree that your jurisdiction reaches out to groups that typically might not engage in our policymaking processes (e.g., low-income or racially diverse populations)?

To what extent do you agree or disagree that citizens tend to only be engaged on issues that affect them directly and not on issues affecting the community overall?

To what extent do you agree or disagree that your jurisdiction’s decision-making is transparent to your citizens?

To what extent do you agree or disagree that you struggle to find enough citizens to serve on your jurisdiction’s appointed boards/commissions or elected offices?

In terms of their engagement in your jurisdiction’s policymaking and/or operations, how much of the time do you think you can trust the citizens in your community to be responsible participants?

One way of thinking about the proper role for citizen engagement in local policymaking is along a spectrum from low engagement to high engagement. At the low end, citizen engagement would focus just on keeping citizens informed about issues. At the high end, citizens would actually make decisions for the jurisdiction. While it might differ depending on the issue, in general, what do you think the majority of your jurisdiction’s citizens believe is the proper role for citizen engagement in local governance?

One way of thinking about the proper role for citizen engagement in local policymaking is along a spectrum from low engagement to high engagement. At the low end, citizen engagement would focus just on keeping citizens informed about issues. At the high end, citizens would actually make decisions for the jurisdiction. While it might differ depending on the issue, in general, what do you personally believe is the proper role for citizen engagement in local governance?

Now thinking about particularly controversial issues, who do you think should have the final say on the most controversial issues in your jurisdiction?

During the next twelve months, do you think your community will have good times financially, or bad times?

Thinking about the financial needs of your jurisdiction, would you say that your unit of government is less able or better able to meet its financial needs in this fiscal year compared to the last fiscal year?

To what extent, if any, would you say the behavior of local officials (professionalism, ethics, etc.) has had a positive or negative impact on the relationship between the State and local governments in Michigan?