Interlocal Cooperation: Enhancing Collaboration among Western Wisconsin Jurisdictions

1. Interlocal Cooperation among Smaller Jurisdictions: The Western Wisconsin Intergovernmental Collaborative Neil Kraus Associate Professor of Political Science University of Wisconsin, River Falls Neil.kraus@uwrf.edu

2. Context • Western Wisconsin: Pierce, Polk and St. Croix Counties • Edge of Minneapolis-St. Paul Region • Rapid Growth: 1990s and 2000s • Many MN residents relocating to more rural western WI • Region is home to thousands of commuters to M.-S.P. region

3. Context Problems Associated with Rapid Growth: • Traffic Congestion • More Development • Increasing Housing Costs • Less rural/small town, more “suburban”

4. 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

5. 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…”

6. WWIC: Not Another Layer of Government • WWIC advisory in nature • Regional 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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.

11. 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

12. Survey Results • Nearly half not familiar with WWIC • Five 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%)

13. 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?

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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