1. NEIL KRAUS ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF POLITICAL SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN, RIVER FALLS NEIL.KRAUS@UWRF.EDU Interlocal Cooperation among Smaller Jurisdictions: The Western Wisconsin Intergovernmental Collaborative

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