NEIL KRAUSASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN, RIVER FALLS NEIL.KRAUS@UWRF.EDU

Interlocal Cooperation among Smaller

Jurisdictions: The Western Wisconsin

Intergovernmental Collaborative

Context

Western Wisconsin: Pierce, Polk and St. Croix Counties

Edge of Minneapolis-St. Paul RegionRapid Growth: 1990s and 2000sMany MN residents relocating to more rural

western WIRegion is home to thousands of commuters to

M.-S.P. region

Context

Problems Associated with Rapid Growth: Traffic CongestionMore DevelopmentIncreasing Housing CostsLess rural/small town, more “suburban”

Background

UW – River Falls: Series of regional meetings in 2004 and 2005

Citizens, government officials, business leaders

Several Themes emerge, including the desire for “regional problem solving” as opposed to dozens of local governments addressing key issues in isolation

WWIC is Born

UWRF officially creates WWIC in 2006, registers organization as educational non-profit

By-Laws: WWIC will “engage in regional problem solving for such topics as, but not limited to, dealing with waste water, storm water management, transportation, economic development, creating sustainable communities…”

WWIC: Not Another Layer of Government

WWIC advisory in natureRegional meetings that led to WWIC made

clear that local leaders/citizens did NOT want another layer of government

Membership and participation, therefore, are totally voluntary

WWIC not able to Lobby Open to any officials from the 97

governments in the 3 county region

The WWIC Begins to Function

2006 and 2007: WWIC has quarterly meetings in different locations in 3 counties

Governments pay dues to belong and attend quarterly meetings (to offset costs for room rental, refreshments, etc.)

Each meeting focuses on a specific issue: Transportation, state politics affecting western WI, best practices with service delivery, etc.

Interlocal cooperation is a topic of meetings and purpose of informal contact at meetings

Limited Attendance and Membership

WWIC Meetings are publicized several ways: mail, email, informal contacts, some direct telephone participation, etc.

However: From the beginning, the WWIC has had a very difficult time attracting local officials to meetings

Typical meeting: 3 – 6 local governments represented

Low attendance is a frequent topic of Board meetings

Attempts to Increase Attendance

2007: Board decides to increase email communication, and use it in combination with traditional mailings re: upcoming meetings

Board also decides to waive all meeting fees and membership dues

Participation, then, becomes free for any local government officials

Little or No Impact on Attendance

2007 and 2009: Meeting attendance still small

Board continues discussion of increasing attendance

Despite poor attendance, quarterly meetings were very productive, and we received very positive feedback from the small number of attendees: beneficial information, good discussion with state legislators, etc.

Survey of Local Officials in WWIC

2010: Still little change in meeting attendance, thus Board authorizes a survey of all chief elected officials in the 3 counties (97 individuals)

Response Rate: 59% (telephone survey, followed up by mail)

Questions: Thoughts about WWIC, meeting attendance, collaboration with other jurisdictions

Survey Results

Nearly half not familiar with WWICFive percent regularly attend meetings Reasons for non-attendance:

Times not convenient (48%) Not enough time to attend (48%) Locations not convenient (22%) Not aware of meetings (22%)

Survey Results (cont.)

Forty-five percent say they’re interested in attending future meetings

Respondents read a statement describing WWIC purposes before answering:

Sixty-six percent say the purposes of WWIC are important

Local governments not opposed to interlocal cooperation?

Survey Results (cont.)

Collaborations with other governments: 29 of 57 respondents (51%) reported at least some collaborations

Of these: 25 respondents reported more than one collaboration with other governments

These numbers clearly indicate that local governments in region NOT opposed to collaboration

Nature of Interlocal Collaborations?

No survey question specifically asked what topics local governments collaborated on

Piecing this together through conversations, WWIC meetings, and the open-ended survey question: libraries, street cleaning, purchasing, etc., are issues that local jurisdictions are working together on

Most towns also need to collaborate for law enforcement

Conclusion

WWIC: Meeting attendance and participation has been discouraging

BUT: Survey results show that roughly half of local governments are collaborating with other local governments

This should be encouraging for others working with smaller jurisdictions: resistance to a regional organization does not necessarily mean resistance to collaboration