Based on a national survey of small U.S. cities between 5,000 and 25,000 in size, this study classifies the level of municipal services provided by small communities and examines the community and governmental features that are related to those cities that provide higher levels of urban services. The study finds that after controlling for differences in population size, wealth, education, and metro status, those small cities that have a professional city manager and an adaptive or administrative type of local government structure are somewhat more likely to provide qualitatively higher levels of municipal services, suggesting that professional managers play an important role in advancing the level of service provided in the communities they serve.
Behn, R. (1995). The big questions in public management. Public Administration Review, 55, 313-324.
2.
Coe, C. (2003). A report on report cards. Public Performance and Management Review, 27(2), 53-76.
3.
Coe, C., & Lombardo, M. (2001). Performance comparison projects in local government: Participants' perspectives. Public Administration Review, 61, 100-110.
4.
Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc. (2004). Data on municipal police departments accredited by CALEA. Retrieved October 7, 2004, from http://www.calea.org/agcysearch/searchagcy1.cfm
5.
Farnham, P. (1986). The impact of government functional responsibility on local expenditure. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 22, 151-165.
6.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. (1999). Crime in the United States: Uniform crime reports. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
7.
Folz, D.H. (2004). Service quality and benchmarking the performance of municipal services. Public Administration Review, 64, 209-220.
8.
Folz, D.H., & French, P.E. (2005). Managing America's small communities: People, politics, and performance. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
9.
Fredrickson, H.G. (1996). The spirit of public administration. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10.
Frederickson, H.G., Johnson, G.A., & Wood, C.H. (2004). The adapted city: Institutional dynamics and organizational change. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe .
11.
Insurance Services Office. (2004). ISO's PPC program. Retrieved October 13, 2004, from http://www.iso.com/studies_analyses/ppc_program/docs/p3.html
12.
International City/County Management Association. (1999). The municipal yearbook. Washington, DC: Author.
13.
Keene, J., Nalbandian, J., O'Neill, R., Portillo, S., & Svara, J. (2007). How professionals can add value to their communities and organizations. Public Management, 89(2), 32-39.
14.
Liebert, R. (1974). Municipal functions, structure and expenditures: A reanalysis of recent research. Social Science Quarterly , 54, 765-783.
15.
Liebert, R. (1976). Disintegration and political action: The changing functions of city government in America. New York: Academic Press.
16.
Lineberry, R., & Fowler, E. (1967). Reformism and public policies inAmerican cities. American Political Science Review, 61, 701-716.
17.
Lyons, W. (1978). Reform and response in American cities: Structure and policy reconsidered. Social Science Quarterly, 59, 118-132.
18.
Montjoy, R.S., & Watson, D.J. (1995). A case for reinterpreted dichotomy of politics and administration as a professional standard in council-manager government . Public Administration Review, 55, 231-239.
19.
Morgan, D., & Pellissero, J. (1980). Urban policy: Does structure matter. American Political Science Review, 74, 999-1006.
20.
Poister, T., & Streib, G. (2003). Performance measurement in municipal government: Assessing the state of the practice. Public Administration Review, 35, 196-205.
21.
Rivenbark, W., & Kelly, J. (2003). Management innovation in smaller municipal government . State and Local Government Review, 35, 196-205.
22.
Stumm, T., & Corrigan, M.1998. City managers: Do they promote fiscal efficiency ? Journal of Urban Affairs, 20, 343-351.
23.
Svara, J.H. (1990). Official leadership in the city: Patterns of conflict and cooperation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
