Government in the Twilight Zone

John R. Baker

Description

While 97 percent of all American cities are smaller than 50,000 and millions of Americans experience civic life in these communities, what we know about their politics and governance is limited, particularly how local board systems operate, who the board members are, what motivates them to serve, and what they think about their experiences. Drawing on a unique and extensive set of survey data from board members, mayors, and city councilors in sixty cities across six states, Government in the Twilight Zone significantly expands our knowledge of small city boards and politics. By embedding the empirical research in the historical trajectory of small towns, John R. Baker provides a rich narrative that discusses the role of entities such as planning commissions, parks and recreation boards, and zoning appeals boards. He also clarifies how board and commission members are recruited in small cities, explains how these organizations work to make the decisions required of them, and reveals what they and their city councilors and mayors think about their importance and effectiveness.
List of Illustrations
Acknowledgments

Introduction: Government in the Twilight Zone: Volunteers to Small-City Boards and Commissions

1. “We’re Not Dead Yet”—Small Cities Become Big(ger) Players?

2. The Taxonomy of Local Boards and Commissions in Small Cities

3. The Ties that Bond and Bridge: Small-Town Board Members as Social Capitalists

4. Incentive Theory and Voluntarism: Motivations for Board Service

5. Explaining Recruitment Patterns of Board Members

6. Inside the Twilight Zone: Board Operations and Members’ Experiences

7. The View From the Top: City Councilors and Mayors Assess Their City’s Boards and Commissions

8. Exiting the Twilight Zone

Notes
References
Index

Sujets

• USA
• United States of America
• Public administration
• Region
• Regional
• États-Unis

Informations

• Publié par: State University of New York Press
• Date de parution: 05 mai 2015
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9781438456324
• Langue: English

Extrait

Government in the Twilight Zone
Government in the Twilight Zone
Volunteers to Small-City Boards and Commissions
JOHN R. BAKER
Published by State University of New York Press, Albany
© 2015 State University of New York
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America
No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission. No part of this book may be stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means including electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission in writing of the publisher.
For information, contact State University of New York Press, Albany, NY
www.sunypress.edu
Production, Jenn Bennett
Marketing, Michael Campochiaro
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Baker, John R., 1959–
Government in the twilight zone : volunteers to small-city boards and commissions / John R. Baker.
pages cm
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-4384-5631-7 (hardcover : alk. paper)
ISBN 978-1-4384-5632-4 (ebook)
1. Municipal government—United States. 2. Cities and towns—United States. I. Title. JS331.B274 2015 320.8'50973—dc23 2014026032
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Contents
List of Illustrations
Acknowledgments
Introduction Government in the Twilight Zone: Volunteers to Small-City Boards and Commissions
Chapter 1 “We’re Not Dead Yet”—Small Cities Become Big(ger) Players?
Chapter 2 The Taxonomy of Local Boards and Commissions in Small Cities
Chapter 3 The Ties that Bond and Bridge: Small-Town Board Members as Social Capitalists
Chapter 4 Incentive Theory and Voluntarism: Motivations for Board Service
Chapter 5 Explaining Recruitment Patterns of Board Members
Chapter 6 Inside the Twilight Zone: Board Operations and Members’ Experiences
Chapter 7 The View From the Top: City Councilors and Mayors Assess Their City’s Boards and Commissions
Chapter 8 Exiting the Twilight Zone
Notes
References
Index
Illustrations
Tables
Table I.1 Cities Included in the Board Member Survey Waves
Table 1.1 Population Growth of Small U.S. Cities during the 1990s
Table 1.2 Population Growth for Small Cities by Metro Area, 1990–2000
Table 1.3 Percentage of Small Cities According to Size, 1980–2010
Table 1.4 Population Growth Rates of Small Cities, 1990–2000
Table 1.5 Growth Rates for Small Cities According to Metro-Area Status, 1990s and 2000s
Table 1.6 Board Members’ Perceptions of Political Turmoil in Their Cities
Table 1.7 Has Political Turmoil in Your Community Changed Significantly in Last 5–10 Years?
Table 1.8 If Degree of Turmoil Has Changed, Has It Increased or Decreased?
Table 1.9. Relationship between Growth Rates and Perceptions of Political Turmoil
Table 1.10 Growth and Perceptions of Political Turmoil by Metro Status
Table 1.11 Perceptions of Political Turmoil According to Ranking of Most Pressing Problem
Table 1.12 Relationship between Metro Status and Most Pressing Problem
Table 1.13 Length of Residence and View of Most Pressing Problem
Table 2.1 Incidence of Boards and Commissions by State (%)
Table 2.2 Metro Status and Number of Boards
Table 2.3 Form of Government and Number of Boards
Table 2.4 List of All Boards in the 60 Small Cities and Their Frequency of Use
Table 3.1 Logit Models: Social Capitalists and Group Membership Behavior
Table 4.1 Percentage of Respondents Rating Motivations for Volunteering as Important According to Type of Board
Table 4.2 Percentage of Respondents Rating Motivations for Volunteering as Important According to Type of Government and Population
Table 4.3 Factor Analysis Results of 11 Motivation Statements
Table 4.4 Regression Models of Motivations for Volunteering
Table 5.1 Variations in Recruitment Method by Gender
Table 5.2 Variations in Recruitment Method by Population
Table 5.3 Variations in Recruitment Method by Type of Board
Table 5.4 Variations in Recruitment Method by Government Type
Table 5.5 Models of Self-Recruitment to Small-City Boards and Commissions
Table 5.6 Comparisons of Predicted Probabilities of Self-Recruiting
Table 6.1 Type of Training Received According to Type of Board
Table 6.2 Type of Training Received According to Government Structure
Table 6.3 Type of Training Received According to City Size
Table 6.4 Board Members’ Views of the Role of City Staff
Table 6.5 Type of Training Received and View of whether Staff Has Too Much Influence
Table 6.6 Type of Training Received and View of whether Staff Provides Adequate Support
Table 6.7 Logistic Regression Models of Perceptions of Board Effectiveness
Table 7.1 Logistic Regression of Difficulty of Recruiting Board Members
Table 7.2 Board Recommendation Approval Rates and Perception of Role of Boards in City
Table 7.3 Relationship between Perceptions of Role of Boards and Growth Rates
Table 7.4 Board Recommendation Approval Rates and Growth Rates
Table 7.5 Model of Perception of Increased Role for Boards and Commissions
Table 7.6 Elected Officials’ Perceptions of Staff Influence on Board by Type of Government
Table 7.7 Elected Officials’ Views of Number of Boards in Their Cities
Table 7.8 Perception on Too Many Boards and Key Contextual Variables
Table 7.9 Relationship between Prior Board Service and Belief That It Makes for Effective Councilor
Figures
Figure 1.1 Population Growth Rates of Small Cities, 2000–2010
Figure 1.2 Most Pressing Community Problem (N = 197)
Figure 2.1 Incidence of Citizen Boards and Commissions in the Sample Cities
Figure 3.1 Number of Community Groups to Which Board Members Belong
Figure 5.1 Distribution of Recruitment Methods
Figure 6.1 Distribution of Board Members According to Type of Training Received
Figure 6.2 Distribution of Scores for the Index of Board Effectiveness
Figure 7.1 City Councilor and Mayoral Views of Ease of Recruiting Board Members
Figure 7.2 Frequency of Personal Recruitment Efforts of Councilors and Mayors
Figure 7.3 Prior Service on City Boards Makes One a More Effective Council Member
Acknowledgments
This book represents several years of research on small-city boards and commissions in America. As I note in the Introduction , the genesis of the inquiry began when I served as a city administrator in a small town in Missouri in the early to mid-1980s. The central research questions emerged during that time, and when I began my academic career, the opportunity became available to pursue their answers in a more systematic fashion. Portions of Chapters 4 and 5 originally appeared as articles in State and Local Government Review , and I am grateful to Sage Publications for having a policy that allows authors full copyright and use authority for their work.
I want to thank my colleagues at Wittenberg University, Jeff Ankrom and Jeff Brookings, for their wise counsel and assistance with some methodological issues associated with the research. Two Wittenberg University Faculty Research Fund Board Grants allowed me to conduct the three waves of surveys that make up the bulk of the data for the project, and I greatly appreciate the enthusiastic support of my colleagues on the Board. I would also like to thank Michael Rinella at SUNY Press for seeing the promise of this work in my original manuscript proposal, and for his help and support along the way. Two anonymous reviewers made excellent suggestions that improved the manuscript, and I thank them. Finally, I want to thank the hundreds of small-city board members, city councilors, and mayors across the six states for their willingness to respond to my questions about their experiences with their board systems. I salute them for their continuing efforts to toil away in the twilight zone of small-town local governance. I know their fellow citizens do too.
INTRODUCTION
Government in the Twilight Zone
Volunteers to Small-City Boards and Commissions

Maine, the way life should be
—Bridgeton, ME
Earth so rich the city grows
—Blue Earth, MN
Where Southern Hospitality Begins
—Portsmouth, OH
The Heart of Northwest Arkansas
—Springdale, AR
A City Apart
—Forest Acres, SC
Quartzsite, Where the Sun Comes to Play
—Quartzsite, AZ
In his clarion call for more research on American local governments, Eric Oliver argues that unlike the highly ideological and partisan nature of national politics and governance, the distinguishing characteristic of local democratic politics is its managerial nature (2012, 6). Although many conflicts arise and must be mediated at the local level, they are primarily parochial and usually temporary, resolved by the managerial and custodial abilities of the local officials. In short, local political leaders must play the important role of “custodians of place” (Lewis Neiman, 2009, xvi), and as issues emerge, parochial as they may be, the expectation is that they will be managed and resolved in a way that will help maintain the quality of life and community standards expected by the citizens. As Oliver correctly notes, however, this “… does not mean that local politics are meaningless or shallow” (2012, 7), but rather that conflicts typically are associa