BASYRI, BASYRI (2008) IMPLEMENTASI PERATURAN BUPATI SUMENEP NO. 3 TAHUN 2007 TENTANG PEDOMAN PELAKSANAAN ALOKASI DANA DESA. Other thesis, University of Muhammadiyah Malang.Full text not available from this repository.
The Existence of Rule No.32 / 2004 and Rule No.33 / 2004 as revision to the existence rule. Section 215 verse (1) Rule No.32 / 2004 in explicit way stated that village development which was done by residence / city and third party stated village and village Provisional People’s Assembly. Then Government rule No.72 / 2005 about Village clearly rule about Village government, including regional government duty to formulate Regional Rule about Village budget allocation. Beside, Domestic Department has issued Rule No.140/640/SJ, March 2005 about Village budget allocation from Residence / city rule to the village government. That was the reason Sumenep residence issued Head of Residence Rule No.3 / 2007 about the Guidance of Village Budget Allocation. Based on several law which ruled about the village rights, there showed that village budget allocation was not fund which was received by residence’s mercy, but constitutional rights which should be given to the villages for one of the village income’s source. The villages in Sumenep were often confuse about application and report of village budget allocation. The writer would like to discuss about the policy implementation and find out the village budget allocation at Sumenep residence. The research used descriptive research and research location were done at Regional Secretary of Sumenep. Data source used primary data from law and village government source. Secondary data was found from documentation and archive. The data collection technique used qualitative analysis technique. After the research from data presented and analyzed, village budget allocation, distribution mechanism, coordination. For them, socialization was done by inviting all village budget allocation officer to Sumenep residence for illumination and explanation by the residence and guided by village budget allocation book. Monitoring didn’t reach the field or village, only stopped in sub-residence. From above explanation, there could be concluded that socialization was ineffective, proven from the difficult of village to apply and report since the socialization was only done face to face, that’s why in the next effort, regional government and sub-district as guidance did fixation on the problem. Monitoring didn’t get to the field. That’s why there needed responsibility of the applicant. The writer suggest to optimize socialization of village budget allocation according to the duty as stated in head of residence rule. That’s why regional government should be consistent to the monitoring of village budget allocation by the policy in whole.
|Item Type:||Thesis (Other)|
|Subjects:||J Political Science > J General legislative and executive papers|
|Divisions:||Faculty of Social and Political Science > Department of Government Sience|
|Depositing User:||Anggit Aldila|
|Date Deposited:||30 Apr 2012 03:19|
|Last Modified:||30 Apr 2012 03:19|
Actions (login required)