Urban regime analysis has established itself as a dominant paradigm in the field of urban politics (Imbroscio 1998; Davies 2002; Davies 2003:253). Despite the variety of their concerns, nearly half of the authors contributing to the Oxford Handbook of Urban Politics (Mossberger, Clarke, and John 2012) refer to Stone's founding book Regime Politics. Nevertheless, over the last years, urban regime analysis has been the subject of increasing criticism. Some scholars argue that time has come to "bury it with honors" since its impacts in other subfields of political science prove to be rather limited (Sapotichne, Jones, and Wolfe 2007). Other scholars, including Stone himself, argue that regime analysis conserves its relevance for studying contemporary local politics if adaptations are made to its initial framework (Mossberger 2009; Burns 2015). Joining the second group of scholars, this article aims at identifying configurations of policy resources exchanges allowing the formation of urban regimes.