Local officials are looking for ways to maintain political polarization at a distance as it continues to rage around them around the world, according to A new investigation by the organization of non -profit research civicpulse.
A little less than a third of the leaders of the local government who participated in the survey, which was commanded by the Carnegie Corporation of New York and published on Tuesday, said that political polarization negatively affects their communities “a lot” or “many” – corresponding to the 31% that said the same thing in A previous investigation by non -profit groups before the 2024 elections.
Although their perceptions have been stable, local officials are looking for new ways to prevent that 83% of them called the substantial impact of polarization on the nation to infiltrate their communities.
The survey of nearly 1,300 community leaders across the country, conducted from January to March, is the second in a three -part series on the local impact of political polarization. The results, drawn from the municipalities of a few thousand people to tens of thousands, again suggest that local governments – especially in small communities – are more isolated from the negative effects of polarization than governments and nationals.
However, the responses have shown that local leaders believe that the community’s negative impact did not decrease even after the conclusion of the stormy elections from last year, which leads to a variety of attenuation efforts.
They include a concentration on the areas of hyperlocal policy on which the public, whatever their affiliation of the parties, can be understood; emphasize neutral language, proofs and community benefits in communications; Welcome community events to raise awareness of what local government does; And introduce volunteer opportunities and civic education.
“The conclusion that the perceptions of political polarization are due to change confirms the need for sustained commitments”, Louise Richardson, president of the Carnegie Corporation, said in a statement. “Obviously, local government leaders are looking for ways to promote more coherent environments and, in doing so, provide examples to other communities.”
Choose subjects to transcend polarization
A little less than half of the respondents, or 48%, said they chose to spend their time to political subjects that universally affect the community, such as infrastructure, housing and public security, to avoid potential politicization. Local leaders said that when opinions on subjects could come across the national party lines, they try to reframe the problems to reduce any division, with 57% of the report they considered the challenges of polarization to decide how to communicate on their work.
James Hely, member of the municipal council in Westfield, New Jersey, provided an example. He said that he and the mayor promote the construction of affordable housing in their community, but that the term can be politically loaded.
“You must be very liberal to say that I want the city to have a lot of affordable accommodation,” said Hely, a democrat.
Instead, he refreshes the problem to focus on local zoning control. Indeed, New Jersey has promulgated a law, known as “the manufacturer’s remedy”, which allows developers to continue municipalities to build affordable housing when such housing is lacking, which sometimes knew local zoning restrictions and the wishes of the community.
“Rather than saying that we want to make sure that we have affordable accommodation, you return that to say, one, we want to stop the manufacturer’s remedy; we want to prevent manufacturers from coming and crushing our zoning code,” he said.
In addition to reframing potentially polarizing subjects, the members of the Council generally stick to a program that focuses on hyperlocal problems, Hely said.
“I counted the votes that are subject to the municipal council,” he said. “About 98% to 99% (votes), there is 100% unanimously, because it just implies how much the police pay and how many traffic lights we need – things have nothing to do with the ideology.”
Hely, whose municipal council is made up of five Democrats and four Republicans, said that partisan political rhetoric is considered counterproductive within the Council and is considered prohibited when community problems are discussed.
“During official meetings of the municipal council, if someone should say, you know,” Trump is bad “or something critical at the national level, you would be considered out of limits,” he said. “You know – why are you talking about this? We are here to solve local problems.”
Zoe Warner, member of the Malvern boring council in Pennsylvania, echoed Hely. She said it is easier for the members of the Council to do their work when their voters understand “we have no control over these wider questions” which afflict discussions on national policy, such as immigration or cuts to federal agencies.
“So (we try) to work together to find solutions for things we really have control, like a building that goes up”, despite potential disagreements on things like the potential impact on traffic congestion, said Warner, a democrat.
Things that help recruit community support are “as transparent on this subject, providing as much information, bringing the developer to meet these people, trying to find as much common as possible,” she said.
Public engagement is essential, say the respondents
Forty-four percent of respondents to the survey also cited long-term volunteer opportunities as a means of fighting polarization in local communities, while 38% of those responsible for the school board described civic education as useful. Still others have said that staying connected with residents is essential.
Forty-six percent of local leaders said that the organization of “strongly” or “somewhat” community events decreased the negative effects of polarization. A high proportion has also underlined other methods of engagement as effective, such as accommodation of open meetings, the holding of informal offices and the hours of coffee (where residents meet managers in informal environment) and to invite people to participate in things such as budget planning by joining special commissions.
“It’s really quite simple,” said Jon Keeney, the mayor of Taylor Lake Village, in Texas. “I am and my advice is 100% transparent. There is nothing that is done in camera in the city. ”
Keeney said that although he was active in the Texas Republican Party for a long time, he never let these political beliefs affect his program for the city.
“I have both Democrats, Republicans and in fact independents on my advice, and I care about their ideology,” he said. He added: “I have never tried to influence any of my members of the council on what I put on the agenda in terms of voting. So there are no things behind in this regard.”
Carleigh Beriont, a selective woman from the Democratic City in Hampton, New Hampshire, agreed with the conclusions of the investigation that community engagement is essential.
“Listening is really key,” said Beriont. “As, the more I listened to residents, the more I understood that their opinions are not really represented by partisan ideology, right?
“I really think listening and being humble and organizing people in the community can be a great way to get things done,” she added. “I do not make decisions which, I think, will benefit my democratic neighbors or my republican neighbors. I try to make decisions that I know will benefit as many people as possible and to be as transparent and responsible and open to the exchange as possible. ”