The Mayors Caucus began as a forum to foster cooperation among the municipalities in the Chicago metropolitan region. After its establishment, the Mayors Caucus became a regional stakeholder, representing the mayors in coalitions with the region’s civic organizations, developing a legislative action team to pass legislation in the Illinois General Assembly, and serving as a forum for regional consensus building. This research is a case study of the development of the Mayors Caucus as a new institution established to overcome the region’s extreme government fragmentation and decades of city—suburban hostility.
Alpert, L., J. Gainsborough, and A. Wallis.2006. Building the capacity to act regionally: Formation of the Regional Transportation Authority in south Florida. Urban Affairs Review42 (2): 143-68.
2.
Atkins, P.1997. Intergovernmental agreements: Strategies for cooperation . MIS Report29 (2): 1-11.
3.
Berg, B., and P. Kantor.1996. New York: The politics of conflict and avoidance. In Regional politics: America in a post-city age , edited by H. V. Savitch and R. K. Vogel, 25-50. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4.
Burns, N.1994. The formation of American local governments: Private values in public institutions. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
5.
Chicago Area Transportation Study.1995. Councils of mayors. Chicago.
6.
*Chicago Metropolis 2020 and the Metropolitan Mayors Caucus. 2002. Recommendations for developing attainable workforce housing in the Chicago region. Chicago.
7.
*Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning, Illinois Housing Council, Metropolitan Mayors Caucus, and Metropolitan Planning Council. 2008. Housing 1-2-3: A workbook for local officials and community leaders. Chicago.
8.
* Civic Federation of Chicago. 2003. A desktop guide to state revenue sources: A report to the education funding reform task force of the Metropolitan Mayors Caucus.
9.
Daily Southtown.2003. Time for new blood on Metra board. June 12.
10.
Diversity, Inc.2003. Letter to Jeffrey Ladd, Metra Chairman.
11.
Fiske, B., ed. 1989. Key to government in Chicago and suburban Cook County. Chicago : Univ. of Chicago Press.
12.
Ford, J.1980. Intergovernmentalism and regional governance in the 1980s. Paper presented at the Conference on Illinois Government and Politics, Springfield .
13.
Gainsborough, Juliet.2001. Bridging the city/suburb divide: States and the politics of regional cooperation. Journal of Urban Affairs23 (5): 497-512.
14.
Gove, S.K., and J.D. Nowlan.1996. Illinois politics & government: The expanding metropolitan frontier. Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska Press.
15.
Hill, E.W., H.L. Wolman, and C.C. Ford III.1995. Can suburbs survive without their central cities? Examining the suburban dependence hypothesis. Urban Affairs Review31 (2): 147-174.
16.
Hoene, C., M. Baldassare, and M. Shires.2002. The development of counties as municipal governments: A case study of Los Angeles County in the twenty-first century . Urban Affairs Review37 (4): 575-591.
17.
Jezierski, L.1996. Pittsburgh: Partnerships in a regional city. In Regional politics: America in a post-city age, edited by H. V. Savitch and R. K. Vogel, 159-81. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18.
*Johnson, E.W.2001. Chicago Metropolis 2020: The Chicago Plan for the twenty-first century. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
19.
Lawrence, M.2009. Illinoisans like government a lot more than they think . Chicago Tribune, August 30.
20.
Lindstrom, B.1998. Regional cooperation and sustainable growth: Nine councils of government in northeastern Illinois. Journal of Urban Affairs20 (3): 327-42.
21.
Lindstrom, B.2002. The role of planning agencies in suburban deconcentration . In Suburban sprawl: Public policy and private decisions, edited by W. Wiewel and J Persky, 135-56. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
*Metropolitan Mayors Caucus.2009a. Benefits of membership in the Metropolitan Mayors Caucus. Chicago.
28.
Metropolitan Mayors Caucus.2009b. Greenest region compact of metropolitan Chicago. Chicago .
29.
*Metropolitan Mayors Caucus.2009c. Service delivery task force first report to the full caucus. December 14. Chicago.
30.
Metropolitan Planning Council.1999. For rent: Housing options in the Chicago area. November. Chicago.
31.
Northwest Municipal Conference. 1958. Newsletter.
32.
Orfield, M.1997. Metropolitics: A regional agenda for community and stability . Washington, DC: Brookings Institution .
33.
Orfield, M.2002. American metropolitics: The new suburban reality. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
34.
Ostrum, V., C. Tiebout, and R. Warren.1961. The organization of government in metropolitan areas: A theoretical inquiry. American Political Science Review55:831-42.
35.
Porter, D.R., and A.D. Wallis.2002. Exploring ad hoc regionalism. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
36.
Rusk, D.1993. Cities without suburbs. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.
37.
Saltzstein, A.L.1996. Los Angeles: Politics without governance. In Regional politics: America in a post-city age, edited by H. V. Savitch and R. K. Vogel, 51-71. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
38.
Savitch, H.V., D. Collins, D. Sanders, and J.P. Markham.1993. Ties that bind: Central cities, suburbs, and the new metropolitan region. Economic Development Quarterly7 (4): 341-57.
39.
Savitch, H. V., and R. K. Vogel, eds. 1996. Regional politics: America in a post-city age. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
40.
Schmid, J.1998. Suburban factories are top polluters. Chicago Sun-Times, October 12.
41.
Schneider, M.1989. The competitive city: The political economy of suburbia . Pittsburgh: Univ. of Pittsburgh Press.
42.
Scott, A.J.1998. Regions and the world economy: The coming shape of global production, competition, and political order. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press.
43.
Scott, A.J.2000. Global city-regions: Economic planning and policy dilemmas in a neoliberal world. In Urban-suburban interdependencies , edited by R. Greenstein and W. Wiewel, 119-40. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
44.
Teaford, J.1997. Post-suburbia: Government and politics in the edge cities . Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.
45.
Wandling, R.2001. Illinois. In Home rule in America: A fifty-state handbook, edited by D. Krane, P. N. Rigos, and M. B. Hill, Jr., 128-138. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
46.
*Weir, M.2000. Coalition building for regionalism. In Reflections on regionalism, edited by B. Katz, 127-53. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
47.
Weir, M., H. Wolman, and T. Swanstrom.2005. The calculus of coalitions: Cities, suburbs and the metropolitan agenda. Urban Affairs Review40 (6): 730-60.
48.
Williams, O., H. Herman, C. Liebman, and T. Dye.1965. Suburban differences and metropolitan policies: A Philadelphia story. Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press.
