830 likes | 934 Views
Drivers in Local Government. Ron Carlee, DPA, CM Chief Operating Officer, ICMA Adjunct Professor, Public Administration/Public Policy, GWU. August 2012.
E N D
Drivers in Local Government Ron Carlee, DPA, CM Chief Operating Officer, ICMA Adjunct Professor, Public Administration/Public Policy, GWU August 2012
…creating excellence in local governance by supporting professional leaders to build sustainable communities that improve people’s lives worldwide…
INTRODUCTION The following is a collection of data from a variety of internet based sources. In virtually every case, a primary source is used. The source is documented in the “Notes” section of the PowerPoint. These data formed the basis of presentations by Dr. Carlee made to the local government professional associations in the states in George, New Work, and Texas in the first half of 2012. The data selected are illustrative of external forces that are affecting local governments. This discussion of drivers of local government is a supplement to Dr. Carlee’s article in the ICMA’s Municipal Yearbook 2012, “The Politics of Apolitical Leadership: Professional Management in a Digital and Divided Society.” Your comments and additions to the presentation are encouraged. Please contact Dr. Carlee at… rcarlee@icma.org @roncarlee
Economy • Social/Political • Environment • Technology Drivers
Negative equity rate for U.S. homeowners with a mortgage declined to 30.9% from 31.4% in the first quarter 2012. • 15.3 million homes are underwater, totaling $1.15 trillion in negative equity in the second quarter, down from 15.7 million homes and $1.19 trillion in negative equity in the first quarter. • Negative equity disproportionately affects borrowers under age 40; nearly half (48%) of homeowners with mortgages under the age of 40 are underwater. • Home values increased 0.5 percent to $151,600 from June to July 2012 Negative Equity Falls in Q2; Half of Borrowers Under 40 Underwater
Key Messages Income inequality in Canada has increased over the past 20 years. The richest group of Canadians increased its share of total national income between 1993 and 2008, while the poorest group lost share. Middle-income Canadians also lost share. Although the gap between the rich and poor widened, Canadians in the poorest income group still saw their income levels rise, albeit minimally.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/06/25/income-inequality-statscan-cuts_n_1625345.html#slide=943075http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/06/25/income-inequality-statscan-cuts_n_1625345.html#slide=943075