On April 9, 1977, under the stewardship of then Delegate Larry Wiedebusch, the West Virginia state legislature adopted legislation establishing the West Virginia Labor-Management Advisory Council. It is a tripartite, quasi-public agency consisting of sixteen representatives from organized labor and industry, and ten top state officials from the fields of labor, commerce, and education. At the time of its creation, the council was heralded as the first statewide forum of its kind in the United States. The council placed the state "in the forefront of a national movement toward enhanced labor-management cooperation" (WVLMAC 1978a). A by-product of the severe labor-management strife and economic hardships of the late 1970s, public and private sector officials envisioned the council as an open, non-confrontational arena that had the potential to "develop long-term partnerships between labor and management that will create a dependable, competitive, and rewarding environment in which to work, live, and conduct business" (WVLMAC 1991 a).

Today, however, numerous criticisms have mounted against the previously acclaimed council. Most notably, it has come under attack for its lack of involvement in labor-management disputes found around the state. In addition, there is a growing feeling among legislators and administration officials that the council is now outdated and, therefore, dispensable. Indeed, even a cursory glance at a list of the council's past accomplishments reveals that the council is not what it used to be. Besieged by numerous problems, including inter- and intra-departmental squabbling in the executive branch, an inattentive legislature, an uninspired membership, and the lack of a perceived mandate to act, the once-proud council seems to be teetering on the edge of extinction. Senator Wiedebusch, the council's legislative sponsor, believes it "still has great potential;" yet, if the council does not turn itself around in the near future, Wiedebusch says he is "just as willing to abolish it" (Wiedebusch 1994).

This article briefly traces the council's historical development and its changing structure, examines the council's initiatives, compares it with councils in two neighboring states, and offers some recommendations for revitalizing it.

The Council's Historical Development

West Virginia's Labor-Management Advisory Council was "the first state agency in the nation devoted entirely to improving relationships between employees and employers" (WVLMAC 1991 a). With the backing of the Rockefeller administration, especially the Commissioner of Labor
Stephen Cook, Delegate Wiedebusch sponsored the legislation with the hope that it would induce top representatives of labor and management to work together with state officials to resolve their problems away from the bargaining table (Frye 1987). The council was widely seen as a novel remedy to the state's industrial and economic woes.

Two general factors in the second half of the 1970s contributed to the legislature's creation of the council. First, the state suffered from both real and perceived industrial relations conflict. Second, the state's industrial base and economic stability were steadily eroding.

Industrial Strife in West Virginia

During the second half of the 1970s, West Virginia was plagued by a string of bitter wildcat and official strikes involving tens of thousands of West Virginia miners (Franklin 1977). West Virginia miners, one journalist commented, were striking "over safety, compulsory shift rotation, gasoline rationing, seniority rights, Black lung legislation, cutbacks in health benefits; they struck over the right to strike, and they struck against the court orders enjoining them from striking" (Seltzer 1978).

As a result of the wildcat strikes and the historic 111day coal miners'strike of 1977-78, West Virginia endured a disproportionate degree of labor unrest during the latter half of the 1970s. In 1977, for example, although West Virginia's population amounted to only 1.4 percent of the nation's total, the state accounted for 8.1 percent of the nation's total number of work stoppages, 11.8 percent of the nation's total number of workers involved in work stoppages, and 7.1 percent of the nation's total number of workers' days idled. That year, 39.2 percent of the nonagricultural workforce in the state, at one time or another, participated in a work stoppage (USDC 1979). This was also not just a one time affair. In 1972, 1974, and 1976 over 25 percent of the state's non-agricultural workforce participated in some kind of strike (USDC 1982).

State officials also believed that the prevailing public perception that West Virginia was an unfriendly setting for industry to conduct business had a negative effect on industrial recruitment and job growth in the state. In 1977, for example, the coverage of problems in the coal industry, according to one state news service, was "the second most important story of the year" (WVCA 1978). The tense and often antagonistic relationship between organized labor and management, according to labor, management, and state officials alike, was seen as a major impediment to the state's future economic vitality.

Decline in West Virginia's Industrial Base

The second major factor leading to the creation of the West Virginia Labor-Management Advisory Council was the state's accelerated decline in its industrial base. This economic downturn, despite general increases in coal prices, was linked directly to the immediacy of the coal mining strikes and the negative public perception of labor-management relations in West Virginia. The bitter labor-management strife, particularly in the coal mining industry, afflicted the economic stability of an already imperiled state economy. The employment density in the mining sector-where a staggering 10.9 percent of the state's workforce was employed in 1977-suffered a net loss of jobs between 1972 and 1984. From 1976 to 1978, for example, the bituminous coal mining industry lost 12,500 jobs, a 19.5 percent decline in surface and underground mining employment. The state also suffered a steep decline in its manufacturing base, losing 32,000 manufacturing jobs between 1972 and 1983, a 26 percent decline in manufacturing employment (WVDES 1986).

Coal miners were not the only ones affected by the sluggish economy. Coal producers also felt the pinch of a stagnant state economy, as coal output in both surface and underground mines fell during the decade. Producers not only had to deal with wildcat strikes, but also with stricter federal environmental restraints, tightened occupational, safety, and health standards, and the hiring of untrained workers (USDL 1982). According to the Bituminous Coal Operators' Association (BCOA), between 1973 and 1976 the industry lost close to 5 million man-days and over 55 million tons of coal production due to wildcat strikes alone (Clark 1981). In terms of the state's overall economic growth, the average annual percentage increase in gross state product from 1971 to 1981 was 2.47 percent, far below the national average of 3.31 percent (USDC 1991).

The Political Response

Faced with these problems, many officials in the Rockefeller administration and the state legislature viewed the West Virginia Labor-Management Advisory Council as an antidote to the state's industrial and economic woes. It became painfully obvious to state officials that a declining industrial base and antagonistic labor-management relations were adversely affecting the state's economic development. The damage wrought by labor unrest in the state-both real and perceived-was impairing the state's already faltering economy, and was placing a great deal of political pressure on legislators to find a solution. In response to these crises, Rep. Wiedebusch, in collaboration with Commissioner Cook, drafted legislation creating the council. Wiedebusch and the administration championed the council as a forum that would bring antagonistic labor and business interest groups together to promote the interests of the state, rather than their own economic interests. The council was immediately viewed by public officials as "a catalyst for improving the overall relationship between labor and management at the work

place and in our communities in addition to assisting in the State's economic development efforts" (WVLMAC 1990a).

The state's labor and business leaders supported the council's creation primarily out of their own economic self-interest. In order to ensure their mutual economic prosperity, key leaders of peak business and labor organizations in the state came to a basic consensus on two major points. First, bitter labor-management struggles, such as the numerous wildcat strikes, had to be averted in the future. Second, there was an acute need for public relations damage control, as the widespread perception of the state's endemic labor-management hostility could not be vanquished by the solitary efforts of either labor or management. With the assistance and positive reinforcement of state officials, labor and management realized that they could combine their forces in an effort to rejuvenate the state's industrial viability. Paul Rusen, then-President of District 23, United Steel Workers, summed up the no nonsense attitude of many of the private sector members who attended the council's first meeting when he stated, the "steelworkers will put energy and effort into the work of the Council" (WVLMAC 1978b).

The Council's Changing Structure

Providing the council's institutional history is a difficult task. It has undergone a series of administrative and statutory transformations since its creation in 1978. Two major changes, institutional reshuffling in the executive branch and an unstable membership, have affected the council's performance over the years. These two changes have influenced how the council's public and private sector members have addressed labor-management conflicts and economic development in the state. Both of these changes are examined briefly.

Administrative Reorganization

Institutionally, the council has had all the permanence of stray sheep. Although it has existed for sixteen years, the council has not been able to secure a permanent place in the executive branch. Yet, somehow it has managed to survive the whims of three administrations.

In 1977, the enabling legislation (H.B. 1677) established the council as a semi-independent, quasi-public entity to be housed within the Department of Labor. The council came under the direct supervision of the Commissioner of Labor, who was to serve as the council's executive secretary. The commissioner was also responsible for supplying the council with staff and supplies, which included a full-time research associate. Although the Department did not have abundant resources, it managed to sustain the council's activities.

In 1986, during the Moore administration, the council was placed under the Governor's Office of Community and Industrial Development (GOCID) in accordance with the Economic Development Act of 1985. The council ostensibly was moved "so as to bring its work in closer communication and cooperation with the important goals of strengthening existing industry and attracting new jobs to this state" (WVLMAC 1987a). Governor Moore stated that he looked forward to working with the council, and that the council's staff and members would be an important part of his industrial development efforts. The governor expressed that he did not want the council to be "just a committee-that for a government to be effective it has to pull together and establish a balance allowing the right hand to know what the left hand is doing and prove to be mutually beneficial" (WVLMAC 1986b).

Since October 1991, through the reorganization efforts of the Caperton Administration as required by a 1989 legislative act that revamped the executive branch, the council has fallen under the jurisdiction of the West Virginia Development Office's Business and Industry Services Division. While the legislature's 1989 effort to make the West Virginia state government a more responsive, responsible, and effective body is admirable, there seems to be little institutional support for the council in its new home. In general, the office does not view labor-management cooperation as being compatible with the state's economic development recruitment efforts. Recently, there has been talk within the Development Office to move the council back to the Division of Labor.

The administrative restructuring, while having destabilizing effects on the council, actually increased the council's annual budget. Prior to 1986, the council's annual appropriation from the legislature averaged roughly $25,000, with additional lump-sum funding coming from the Department of Labor's budget. This paid for the executive director's salary, but left little room for operating expenses. After it moved into GOCID, the council received roughly $100,000 a year, which came out of the governor's executive budget. The increased budget fully funded three staff positions, as well as paid for the council's operational expenses (WVLMAC 1987b).

Despite its budgetary increase, the council might be at the end of its financial purse-string. Although the legislature extended the council's existence in February 1991 for four more years, to July 1995 (H.B. 2232), there was a concerted effort by some members in the House of Delegates during the 1993 legislative session to scuttle the council. The council's shaky institutional foundation, despite its added resources, has undoubtedly contributed to the council's inconsistency. The council's inconsistent performance, in turn, has contributed to its precarious institutional footing.

A Membership in Flux

External and internal factors have weakened the council's effectiveness. The external actions of the legislature and the administration, combined with the internal problems that stem from a voluntary membership, have disturbed the council's makeup. More significantly, the council's membership problems have affected the council's ability to carry out its mission.

A major disruption to the council's membership occurred when the legislature changed the council's statutory makeup in 1985. Originally, the council was comprised of nineteen members. The governor, with the advice and consent of the Senate, selected sixteen voting members-eight each from the ranks of industry and labor-based on the recommendations of top industrial and labor organizations in the state, including the Chamber of Commerce, the BCOA, the Manufacturers'Association, the Retailers' Association, the West Virginia AFL-CIO, the United Mine Workers, and the Building Trades Council. Today, as was the case in 1977, the private sector members are appointed to terms of four years. I n addition to the private sector members, three ex officio, nonvoting members were automatically appointed to the council: the Commissioner of Labor, the Commissioner of Employment Security, and a representative from the Governor's Office of Economic and Community Development.

Under the Economic Development Act of 1985, the legislature expanded the council to its present day number of 26 members. In addition to the original three ex officio members, the 1985 act added three more nonvoting members to the council: the state Superintendent of Schools, one member of the Economic Development Board, and one member of the then-Board of Regents. In 1991, under an amendment to the Economic Development Act of 1985, the Employment Security Commissioner replaced the Bureau of Employment Programs Commissioner. The 1985 Act also required the governor to appoint to four-year terms, four more voting members from the field of education, including a president of a state university, a president of a state or community college, and two representatives of the public secondary schools (WVC 1993). The educators were formally added to the council in late July 1986.

The second external factor that has led to an unstable membership, as documented previously, is the lack of institutional support from top officials in the administration. The series of moves from the Department to Labor to GOCID to the Development Office altered the nature of the council's support staff. The movement also broke the council's continuity. The council's latest move to the Development Office has proven to be the most disruptive. In addition to the less-than-welcome hospitality provided by the Development Off ice, the council's executive director was asked in 1991 to simultaneously serve as the Director of the Governor's Guaranteed Work Force Program. The Work Force Program, which "is West Virginia's customized job training assistance program for both new and existing businesses," is also housed in the Development Office (WVDO 1992). While the dual appointment was intended to increase "the efficiency and effectiveness of the two programs" as well as better coordinate economic development and labor-management relations (WVLMAC 1991 a), the executive director ended up devoting much less time and attention to the activities of the labor-management council.

The internal problems affecting the council's membership result from the council's voluntary nature. The success or failure of any organization stems largely from the dedication, or lack of dedication, of its members. This applies to both the council's private and public sector members. While the six ex officio members are required by statute to serve on the council, the 20 voting members have volunteered to serve on the council. While all the members are reimbursed by the state for the expenses they incur while attending the meetings, many fail to make it to the hour-or-so long meetings. As should be no surprise with a voluntary board, many members-voting and ex officio-have had recurrent absences, which has reduced the council's effectiveness. From 1978 to 1993, the average attendance rate for council meetings was only 58 percent, hardly a sterling figure.

In a similar vein, the council has not had a good track record regarding the number of meetings it holds every year. From 1978 to 1986, the council met, on average, 2.2 times a year, which was just above its statutory requirement to meet at least two times a year. Since 1986, after the legislature amended the statute to include the education officials and require the council to meet quarterly, the council has met even less. Between July 1986 and January 1993, the council only met, on average, 1.3 times a year. Despite the repeated efforts by the staff to

have the council convene according to the state statute, the council failed to meet even once during 1989, 1991, and 1992 (WVLMAC 1978b-1 993b).

Poor attendance and infrequent meetings are not the only problems afflicting the council. It has also suffered from a rapid turnover of its membership. The council has continually had a number of seats that have not been filled by the governor. From 1978 until 1986, the council had, on average, two open seats every time the council met. Between 1986 and 1993, afterthe education officials joined the council, the number of vacant seats on the council, on average, increased to 4 per council meeting. In November 1989, Governor Caperton had to replace over half of the council's members, as he made fifteen council appointments/reappointments (WVLMAC 1989a). Vacancies on the council, from both the private and public sectors, have undermined the council's stability.

The Council's Initiatives

The council's initiatives can be conveniently broken down into two time periods: before the education members joined the council in July 1986, and after theyjoined. During both of these periods, the council coordinated labor-management cooperation activities in three general areas. First, the council has formulated and implemented specific research and education projects around the state. Second, the council has sponsored four statewide labor-management conferences. Third, since 1986, the council has provided consulting and technical support for local and regional labor-management cooperative projects. Involvement in all three of these areas is consistent with the council's original mission: to facilitate cooperation between traditionally adversarial private economic actors at both the state and local levels. A close examination of the council's work in these three areas reveals, however, that the council has been inconsistent over the years in fulfilling its mission.

1978-1986 Initiatives

Early in its existence, the council scored a series of triumphs that enhanced its status with legislative and administration officials. In 1978, for example, the council assisted the state's industrial sector when it sent a delegation to meet with labor and management representatives at Houclaille Industries in Huntington. The council members were able to "help the firm obtain relief from new federal regulations which would have forced the plant to close" (WVLMAC 1978a). The council's actions, which included meeting with state and federal officials, resulted in the saving of 500 jobs in the Huntington area. The immediate success that the council had in fostering industrial retention in the state prompted Kentucky officials to invite Ken Sullivan, the council's Research Associate, to speak to Kentucky's newly created labor-management council in December 1978. The Kentucky officials feared there was a chance that its council might be discontinued due to a change in their administration, and felt that they could benefit from hearing about West Virginia's positive experiences (KLMAC 1978).

Although the,Houdaille case was important to establishing instant credibility, the council focused primarily on education and research efforts during its early years. For example, in 1978, the council conducted a work stoppages study in conjunction with West Virginia University and began the supervision of a $136,000 Coal Industry Labor-Management Education Project authorized by the Appalachian Regional Commission (WVLMAC 1978b). By 1984 the coal education project had trained over 300 rank and file West Virginia miners in current federal and state safety and environmental regulations and innovative negotiation and communication techniques (WVLMAC 1987a). In order to carry out its tasks more efficiently, the council created three standing committees during its first year: the Educational Committee, which was responsible for developing the informational materials for the coal education project; the Statistical Committee, which oversaw the collection, analysis, and distribution of work stoppages data; and the Financial Committee, which was responsible for developing the council's annual budget.

In retrospect, the council's first year proved to be one of its most productive years. However, the council subsequently did not embark on any new activities for three years. The Annual Reports from 1979-1981 that the council was required to submit to the governor and legislature were nearly carbon copies of the 1978 inaugural report. One reason for the council's idleness was that it had its hands full administering the Coal Industry Labor-Management Education Project. As a prime sponsor of the grant, the council had to "locate and retain consultants of subcontracts to gather and analyze data, develop teaching materials, provide instruction, and develop project evaluation instruments" (WVLMAC 1978b). The council's overextended staff was not able to fulfill the council's other responsibilities.

Another reason for its sluggish performance was that the council lacked strong internal organization and leadership. Rapid turnover in the council's limited staff hurt the council's stability. In each of the first three years of its existence, the council had to hire a new research associate. In June 1981, following the resignation of the third and last research associate, the council's chairman, Commissioner of Labor Lawrence Barker, commented that after three years of "less than satisfactory experience, Council members would perhaps have a better idea of what is needed in terms of staff" (WVLMAC 1981 b). In an effort to shore up this lack of internal management, the council hired its first full-time executive director in December 1981. The director immediately provided the council with much needed administrative stability, pushing the council's sometimes recalcitrant private and public sector members to carry out their duties.

In 1982, with the direction of the executive director, the council temporarily revitalized itself. The council produced a new brochure describing its mandate and earlier efforts, and mailed it to labor organizations and industries across the state. It also produced and aired a series of 30-second public service announcements in an effort to boost the state's labor-management image. The council established a data base documenting "successfully negotiated labor-management agreements in order to help promote an improved, positive labor~- management image for West Virginia" (WVLMAC 1982a). Also during 1982, the council sketched out the plans for an Annual Labor-Management Conference that would "promote improved communication between labor and management, and to address mutual areas of concern" (WVLMAC 1982a). Although the council only met twice in 1982, attendance by both labor and management members was up, and the council was more focused due to the guidance of the newly hired executive director. At the time, the council looked as though it would once again became an important agency in the effort to promote labor-management research and education projects in the state.

In 1984, the council finally was able to sponsor its first statewide Annual Labor-Management Conference. Tearing a page out of the Kentucky labor-management council practices, the 1984 conference had over 122 participants. "Designed to be an informal meeting where labor, management, government, and education could come together to review and discuss ways to improve relations by building stronger, more effective lines of communication," the conference was deemed to be a tremendous success (WVLMAC 1984a). Workshop topics included cooperative approaches to labor-management relations in the coal and construction industries and a success story from the Wheel ing- Pittsburgh Steel Corporation. Although plans were made for a conference the following year, three years went by until the next "annual" conference was held.

The council's education and research efforts also languished during the mid-1980s. While it continued to oversee the coal education project, the council met only five times between 1983 and July 1986. It also failed to embark on any new research or education initiatives. By its own admission, the council reported that it was "relatively inactive for the period of July 1, 1985 through June 30,1986" (WVLMAC 1986a).

1986-1993 Initiatives

Curiously, the addition of the education officials and the move to GOCID in July 1986 did not energize the council. Attendance at council meetings declined even more than during the previous period. Between August 1986 and March 1990, the council only held five meetings and only two of them had a quorum. The council did not even hold a regular membership meeting in 1989.

Over the four-year period, the staff worked largely on its own, detached from the dormant council. The staff, which obtained more resources in GOCID, managed to produce and distribute three brochures that focused on cooperative labor-management relations, leadership training, and improving work site relationships (WVLMAC 1987a). The staff also made a video highlighting successful labormanagement stories in the construction industry, and compiled nine cooperative labor-management success stories that it distributed to "the media, businesses and other concerned groups within-and external to-West Virginia" (WVLMAC 1988a).

It was also somewhat peculiar that the council, soon after it was enlarged to include educators, turned its attention away from education and research projects. Instead, the council began to devote much of its attention to local and regional labor-management cooperative programs. By providing coordination and assistance to local participants, the council has promoted fledgling local and regional labor-management cooperation efforts. Since 1987, the council has either created or assisted eightArea Labor-Management Committees (ALMCs) around the state.' The council also provided technical assistance to community-based labor-management committees and, in 1988, established the Southern West Virginia Center for Cooperative Labor- Management Relations with the assistance of an ARC grant. The Center serves 19 southern West Virginia counties by providing technical assistance to labor and management interested in cooperative programs, and by assisting in the economic development of the southern part of the state.

During the late 1980s, the council held three more statewide Annual Conferences (1987, 1988, and 1990). By bringing together labor, management, government, and education officials in a relaxed atmosphere setting, the conferences helped to foster a greater sense of labor-management cooperation throughout the state. Workshops at the conferences included: an update of labor relations in the West Virginia construction industry; employee involvement at the workplace; guidance for the implementation of an employee assistance program; and leadership skills for team building. In addition to the workshops, participants engage in golf, tennis and other team activities in which labor and management representatives team up together. The average attendance for the three conferences was 167 leaders from the various fields.

Although the council failed to meet during 1989, 1991, and 1992, the staff-again, largely independent of the council-began to make education and research projects

Since the teleconference, and more significantly, since the departure in 1993 of longtime Executive Director Mark Julian, the council has once again become stagnant. The council cancelled its Fifth Statewide Labor-Management Conference, which was scheduled to be held in 1993. With little support from the Development Off ice, the council and its new executive director have received virtually no institutional direction. There is little evidence that the council today is doing anything to improve labor-management relations or to assist in encouraging existing and new industry.

Comparable Labor-Management Councils

In orderto compare West Virginia's Labor-Management Advisory Council with other statewide labor-management councils, one needs to look no further than to West Virginia's neighbors, Kentucky and Pennsylvania. In 1978, the legislatures in Pennsylvania and Kentucky, using West Virginia's Labor-Management Advisory Council as a paradigm, both created labor-management councils. In the 1980s, eight more states created statewide labor-management councils that were also roughly patterned after West Virginia's council .2 Unfortunately for West Virginia's citizens, the councils in Pennsylvania and Kentucky have surpassed the limited achievements of their precursor.

In contrast to West Virginia's council, which has had

Origins of the Kentucky and Pennsylvania Councils

In 1978, Governor Julian Carroll proposed, and the legislature enacted, legislation creating the Kentucky Labo r- Management Advisory Council. Two years earlier, in a relaxed-atmosphere setting, Governor Carroll brought together prominent labor and business leaders for three days to discuss how to alleviate the state's poor labor-management relations image. The creation of Kentucky's council was intended to formalize and institutionalize the casual discussions that transpired at the annual conferences. The council, in turn, was instrumental in establishing twelve local Area Labor-Management Committees, which are partly funded through the Office of Labor-Management Relations (Moberly 1992). Much of the advancement in Kentucky's labor-management relations climate is attributable to its labor-management council, the annual conference, and the ongoing and integrated efforts of its Area Labor- Management Committees.

In Pennsylvania, the initiative for a statewide partnership was launched by the state's two adversarial peak organizations in 1977. According to the first executive director of Pennsylvania's MILRITE Council (Making Industry and Labor Right In Today's Economy), the concept for the council emerged from discussions between the Pennsylvania Chamber of Commerce and PennsylvaniaAFL-CIO. In an efforttostem "the deteriorating economic conditions which prevailed in the state during the mid to late 1970s," state labor and business leaders put uncharacteristically strong pressure on state legislators to create a labor-management council (MILRITE 1990). Richard Smith, Vice Chairman, Bethlehem Steel Corporation, and Robert McIntyre, Treasurer, Pennsylvania AFL-CIO, were especially prominent actors during the council's formative years. Without such a council in place, many private sector leaders felt that "the cloud of con

frontation-strikes, lockouts, work stoppages, and general adversarial relationships," would continue, causing more downsizing and displacement in the state's traditional industries (MILRITE 1990). The legislation creating the council was signed into law on July 1, 1978, by outgoing Democratic Governor Milton Shapp.

The Kentucky Labor- Management Advisory Council

The two neighboring councils have broad mandates that enable them to contribute to their states' industrial and economic development. According to the legislation enacting Kentucky's council, it is to "function as an advisory agent of state government and provide leadership and assistance for labor and management in this state, and shall serve to effect improved labor-management relations within the state, and to thereby attract and encourage new and existing industry in this state" (KLMAC 1978). The eighteen-member advisory council consists of the Labor Secretary and the Commerce Secretary, both ex officio nonvoting members, and eight representatives each from labor and management, who are appointed by the governor. There are no members from the Kentucky General Assembly. Since 1984, the Secretary of Labor and Secretary of Commerce have rotated as chair of the council. The council meets at least twice a year, and also whenever the chairperson or a majority of members call for additional meetings. Between 1978 and 1991, the council met 49 times, an average of 3.5 times each year. The council is regularly expected to "make recommendations to the governor and the legislature on matters relating to labor-management problems in this state and any other matter it deems necessary" (KLMAC 1978).

Since 1984 the council has been staffed and assisted by the Office of Labo r- Management Relations (OLM R) in Kentucky's Department of Labor. The four-person OLMR staff is responsible for administering the council's business, as well as carrying out its responsibilities. The office's annual budget is $310,000. The staff provides technical support to the council and the local Area LaborManagement Committees, and tries to establish new cooperative efforts at both the community and plant levels. According to John Wells, the former Kentucky Secretary of Labor, the staff have the "job of a missionary," and that they "go about their work with the zeal of the converted" (Wells 1987). Wells underscores that the staff is a "group of dedicated professionals" and "is the sustaining force for on-going projects. They attend to details, translate ideas into action, and travel the state and nation spreading the labor-management gospel" (Wells 1987).

Undoubtedly bolstered by the staff's endeavors, Kentucky's council has successfully influenced public policy. Many of the industrial policies that have passed the Kentucky legislature emanated, or were considered, by the council. Since its inception, council members have frequently testified on policy decisions before legislative committees and have advised the governor. Because the council's resolutions and recommendations are typically unanimous, and thus have the full backing of both business and labor interests, its lobbying efforts have tended to rouse bipartisan support among legislators (Smith 1993). For example, the council backed, and then actively lobbied for, legislation enforcing stricter state emission standards and legislation shifting state administration of federal OSHA standards. It helped to prepare pieces of legislation that simplified the requirements for reporting black lung disabilities among coal miners, that expanded the state's apprenticeship programs, and that retained a state alcoholism treatment program administered by the AFL-CIO (Wells 1987). At the national level, Kentucky's council successfully lobbied Congress to eliminate trade barriers on the export of Kentucky bourbon (Howitt, et. al. 1991).

Perhaps even more impressive was the council's direct role in revitalizing two deeply troubled and controversial programs in the mid-1980s: the Kentucky Unemployment Insurance Program and the Workers' Compensation Program. Business and labor officials disagreed on how to salvage the two programs. The council's efforts, in conjunction with two affiliated Special Task Forces created by the governor, helped to create mutually agreeable legislation. Both bills were eventually passed by the legislature and signed into law (Howitt, et. al. 1991). Increasingly over the past few years, the council has branched out into new policy areas. For example, in its May 13, 1992 meeting the council discussed ways to contain rising health care costs in the state. It unanimously voted to ask Governor Brereton Jones to include in the legislature's "Special Session on Health Care" a discussion of workers' compensation costs (Smith 1993). Later in the meeting, Labor Secretary Carol Palmore stated that the council has "a lot to offer on the issue of health care reform and should have input into the package that will be presented at the Special Session" (KLMAC 1992).

The Pennsylvania MILRITE Council

Unlike Kentucky's council, Pennsylvania's MILRITE council is an independent, self-standing advisory council. The council, whose name is an acronym for "Make Industry and Labor Right in Today's Economy," combines the specialized competence of labor and business officials with the policy-making skills of state legislators. The demand for the council arose in the late 1970s out of a concern for the state's poor labor-management relations and its ailing economy. Top officials from the state's AFL-CIO and Chamber of Commerce, concerned about the state's grave condition, persuaded the General Assembly to create an autonomous, policy-oriented council. The General Assembly, when it enacted the legislation, called on the council to be a quasi-public "economic development agency" (MILRITE 1978). The legislation was intended to "create a comprehensive economic develop

ment plan and programs for implementation of specific development objectives" (MILRITE 1978).

Pennsylvania's council, like its Kentucky counterpart, is a broad-ranged, policy oriented organization. In order to promote the state's "industrial potential," the council is to "undertake research and investigation," "create plans for economic revitalization of Commonwealth industries," and "encourage and stimulate cooperation and coordination among Federal, State, and local programs" (MILRITE 1978). By drawing upon "labor, management and government participants to promulgate plans and implement procedures," the council is to "recommend structural changes and updating of economic delivery tools of State Government to the Governor and General Assembly" (MILRITE 1978). Pennsylvania's council is empowered to enter into contracts, retain counsel, accept grants from public and private sources, borrow money, and own and dispose of funds.

The council meets bimonthly and is composed of fifteen members, including members of the state legislature. Five members are nominated by the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO; five members are nominated by the Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry; two members from each party of both houses of the legislature are selected by their respective leadership; and one member is appointed by the governor. Over the years, the governor has selected either the Secretary of Labor and Industry, the Secretary of Commerce, or the Secretary of Envi ronmental Resources to sit on the council. The private sector members are "outstanding leaders in business and labor who are the policy-making and policy-implementing executives of their respective unions and companies" (MILRITE 1978). Council members, like their West Virginia and Kentucky counterparts, receive no compensation during their six-year terms, except for expenses they incur while performing their duties. The council elects a nongovernmental member to be its chairperson for a one-year term (Garraty 1992). All council actions require a majority of affirmative votes.

Pennsylvania's council's staff consists of an executive director, two executive policy specialists, an economic development expert, the Area Labor- Management Committee's grant program administrator, and secretarial support. In addition to doing background research, preparing position papers, and drafting policy legislation, the staff also administers the state's $760,000 Area LaborManagement Committee's grant program. Thirteen Area Labor-Management Committees in Pennsylvania currently receive funding from the council. The staff's annual operating budget is currently $240,000 (Garraty 1992).

Since it started meeting regularly in 1980, Pennsylvania's council has frequently initiated and promoted industrial policy legislation. According to its sunset audit, the council has identified problem areas in the state's current economic development policies and has offered numerous policy proposals to the legislature for consideration (Sunset 1989). Indeed, the council's makeup has facilitated its function as a public policy formulator. "The fact that it has active members who serve in the legislature and the governor's cabinet," a team of researchers has noted, "has made it possible for ideas that germinate and win broad backing in the Council to move readily into the state's policy-making arenas" (Howitt, et. al. 1991).

By far, the most notable piece of legislation associated with the Pennsylvania council is the 1982 Ben Franklin Partnership Act (BFPA). It is a targeted economic development program that provides competitive matching grants to consortia made up of university, governmental, and private sector organizations. The consortia develop advanced technologies that are then applied to traditional industries. An initial $1 million appropriation by the General Assembly established the Ben Franklin Partnership Fund (BFPF), whose governing board in turn established four regional Advanced Technology Centers (ATCs) to administer the grants. From the beginning, the council was directly involved in BFPA's creation. Early in 1982, the council affirmed its desire to play an active role in stimulating the growth of advanced technology industries in Pennsylvania. During its March 1982 meeting, the council "voted unanimously to prepare legislation, in cooperation with the Governor's Office, which would define a leadership role for the MILRITE Council in the Governor's proposed Ben Franklin Partnership" (MILRITE 1982). Following the meeting, the two members of the council who served in the House of Representatives introduced a bipartisan bill which was drafted by the council's staff (called "The Advanced Technology Job Creation Act"). Because of the initial across-the-board support stemming from the council's actions, the bill, in a slightly amended form, was supported by both parties in the highly partisan General Assembly.

In addition to the Ben Franklin Partnership Act, Pennsylvania's council introduced legislation which granted the state's two state pension funds the authority to invest in venture capital limited partnerships and helped the pension funds develop a venture capital investment strategy. The council's staff designed the Pennsylvania Private Placement Separate Account, a $60 million investment fund managed by CIGNA Corporation, which provides long-term fixed-rate debt financing to Pennsylvania small and medium-sized businesses. The council was the critical player in securing funds from the General Assembly for the Area Labor-Management Committee's $760,000 Matching Grant Program. The council also helped to develop the state's technology transfer program and its Employee Ownership Assistance Program (Garraty 1992).

Recommendations for West Virginia's Council

While West Virginia's Labor-Management Advisory Council has not come close to achieving the policy success of the Pennsylvania or the Kentucky labor-management councils, it has had some notable initiatives. The

legislation that established the advisory council in 1977 was seen as a means of soothing the heated industrial relations conflict in the state and promoting economic development. For more than fifteen years, the council has brought labor and management leaders together with state officials to collectively address their problems and concerns. With varying degrees of success, it has facilitated cooperation between traditionally adversarial actors at the state and local levels. Yet, criticism, rather than praise, resonates in Charleston when the council is discussed by those who are most familiar with it.

If the council is going to survive, it needs to change on two dimensions. First, it needs top-down support from state government officials. Legislators and administration officials must begin to perceive the council as a body that exists to assist them in their duties. Second, the council needs a bottom-up commitment from its membership. The council's public and private sector members need to take it upon themselves to become more dedicated in fulfilling their responsibilities.

Top-down support by the administration and legislature is sorely needed if the council is to remain a viable body. Most importantly, the administration and the legislature must better utilize the council as an important resource. For the council to become a more effective advisory body, legislators and administration officials need to actively tap into the council for policy recommendations. The council, by bridging the public and private sectors, has the potential to work out contentious issues-such as workers'compensation, unemployment insurance, occupational safety, and health care reformthat oftentimes become stymied in the legislative prodess. The council should be encouraged to attend and testify at legislative committee hearings. Linkages between the council and the executive and legislative branches need to be formalized. The council has failed in its advisory capacity, largely because administration officials and legislators do not seek out policy suggestions from the council.

Top-down support also means that legislators and administrators respect the council's autonomy. Legislators and administration officials must not use the council as a political tool. To insure that the council is an autonomous body, it should be made an independent, self-standing agency. Funding for the council needs to be made more stable. Rather than having the council's budget be determined by its host department, the council needs to have a separate line in the governor's budget. The council also needs its own dedicated staff. At a minimum, the council needs to retain an executive director whose only responsibility is to oversee the council's activities; a director of the Area Labor-Management Committees to coordinate labor-management cooperation at the regional level; a policy analyst to conduct the council's education and resource initiatives; and adequate secretarial support. The council should also receive a separate budget line for the funding of its Area Labor-Management Committee projects and its statewide conferences.

For the council to be more successful, it also needs to be revamped from the bottom-up. Instilling a sense of dedication in the membership is not easily attained. The governor should try to appoint private sector members to the council who have a proven track record in furthering labor-management relations. The council must not be a haven for patronage appointees. Education and public sector officials must become more active participants on the council. All members of the council, including the education and economic development appointees, need to be dedicated to the idea of labor-management cooperation. Attendance at council meetings must be required; members should be allowed only two absences per year before being removed from the council. The council also needs to do a better job satisfying its statutory requirement of meeting four times a year. Members must be willing and able to accommodate their busy schedules to attend the quarterly meetings.

It is unlikely that these recommendations will raise West Virginia's Labor-Management Advisory Council to the level of either the Pennsylvania or the Kentucky labor-management council. At the same time, West Virginia's council has proven that it can be an important resource in furthering the state's economic development and labor-management cooperation. Many of the industrial and economic conditions that were present when the legislature created the council in 1977 still exist today. With some top-down backing and bottom-up reconditioning, West Virginia's Labor-Management Advisory Council might once again be able to assist West Virginians in their efforts to improve labor-management relations in the state.

References

Clark, Paul. 1981. The Miners'Fight for Democracy. Ithaca,

NY: Cornell University Press.

Frye, Lynne. 1987. "Labor- Management Cooperation in Wis

consin." Wisconsin Department of Development, Division
of Policy Development, Bureau of Research. Madison, WI.

Franklin, Ben. 1977. "Coal dispute talks resume tomorrow at
urging of U.S." New York Times. November 27, p. A26.

Commonwealth of Kentucky (KLMAC). 1978. "Kentucky

Labor-Management Advisory Council." Revised Statutes,

Annotated. Frankfort, KY.

Commonwealth of Kentucky, Kentucky Department of Labor

(KLMAC). 1978, 1992. "Minutes." Frankfort, KY.

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (MILRITE). 1978. "MILRITE

Act." Pennsylvania Statutes. Harrisburg, PA.

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania MILRITE

Council (MILRITE). 1982. "Minutes." Harrisburg, PA.

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Legislative Budget and Fi

nance Committee (Sunset). 1989. "A Sunset Performance Audit of the Pennsylvania Milrite Council." Harrisburg, PA.

Garraty, Robert. 1992. Executive Director, Pennsylvania MILRITE Council. Personal interview, July. Harrisburg, PA. Phone interviews, May, June and August.

Howitt, Arnold, et. al. 1989. "A National Overview of State Labor- Management Cooperation Programs." Industrial Relations Research Association Proceedings of the Forty-Second Annual Meeting. December: 58-69.

Howitt, Arnold, et. al. 1991. "Promoting Labo r- Management Cooperation: A National Perspective on State Programs." Cambridge, MA: A. Alfred Taubman Center for State and Local Government, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.

Moberly, Gary. 1992. Executive Director, Kentucky Labor- Management Advisory Council, Office of Labor-Management Relations, Kentucky Labor Cabinet.

Personal interviews, September. Frankfort, KY. Phone interviews, July, September.

Seltzer, Curtis. 1978. "A Strike that Ended an Era." The Nation. 226: 536.

Smith, Daniel. 1993. "Removing the Pluralist Blinders: Labor-Management Councils and Industrial Policy in the American States." Economic Development Quarterly. 7: 373-389.

United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census (USDC). 1991. Statistical Abstract of the United States. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census (USDC). 1982. State and Metropolitan Area Data Book. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

United States Department of Labor. (USDL). 1982. "Report on the Secretary of Labor's Symposium on Cooperative

Labor- Management Programs." Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

United States Department of Labor. (USDL). 1980. Wage Chronology.* Bituminous Coal Mine Operators and United

Mine Workers, 1933-81, Bulletin 2062. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

Wells, John Calhoun. 1987. "The Kentucky Experience." The Journal of State Government. 60: 44-53.

West Virginia Coal Association (WVCA). 1978. "Coal Facts '78." Charleston, WV: West Virginia Coal Association.

West Virginia Code (WVC). 1993. West Virginia Economic Development Act of 1985. 513-4, 1-6. Charlottesville, VA: The Michie Company.

West Virginia Department of Employment Security (WVDES). 1986. Employment and Earnings Trends Annual Summary, 1986. Charleston, WV.

West Virginia Development Office, Business and Industry Services Division. 1992. Annual Report. Charleston, WV.

West Virginia Labor-Management Advisory Council (WVLMAC). 1978a-1 993b. Annual Report. Charleston, WV.

West Virginia Labor- Management Advisory Council (WVLMAC). 1978b-1 993b. Council Minutes. Charleston, WV.

West Virginia Labor-Management Advisory Council (WVLMAC). n.d. Summary of Legislative Mandate. Charleston, WV.

Wiedebusch, Larry. 1994. West Virginia State Senator. Phone interview, May.

Residents in Clarksburg, Charleston, Huntington, Martinsburg, and Wheeling were mailed a survey during the spring and summer of 1994 to determine their views concerning the overall quality of their city's services and their city's performance as a service provider. This article provides a summary of the survey results. A more detailed analysis of the survey results is contained in the Institute for Public Aff airs'Technical Report Number 10: Citizen Evaluations of Municipal Services in West Virginia: Clarksburg, Charleston, Huntington, Martinsburg, and Wheeling.

The survey results suggest that the residents of Clarksburg, Charleston, Huntington, Martinsburg, and Wheeling are relatively satisfied with the overall quality of their city's services. They are also relatively satisfied with their city's performance as a service provider. The residents of Charleston and Wheeling expressed somewhat stronger approval ratings for the quality of their city's services and their city's performance as a service provider than did the residents of Clarksburg, Huntington and Martinsburg. The residents of all five cities generally approved of their city's police, fire, water and garbage collection services. They were somewhat less satisfied with recycling services and bridge conditions and were not satisfied with snow removal and street maintenance services. A majority of the residents in these cities also indicated that they were not willing to have their local taxes and fees increased to improve city services.

Citizen Surveys and Strategic Planning in West Virginia

Although the recent state-mandated reappraisal of property values to market levels has generated additional revenue for West Virginia's cities, they, like most other cities across the United States, are still experiencing fiscal stress (KIase 1994). Faced with increased demands for public services, and lacking the resources to respond to all of the demands, local government officials across the country and in West Virginia have adopted innovative strategies to "do more with less" such as contracting out services to the private sector. They have also engaged in strategic planning as a tool for citywide planning and collaborative problem solving. The adoption of strategic planning strategies, which focus on defining future objectives and designing strategies to achieve those objectives, can help local governments cope with a rapidly changing environment and to make the most efficient and effective use of their limited resources (Streib 1990).

Robert Jay Dilger is the Director of the Institute for Public Affairs and Professor of Political Science at West Virginia University. Kathleen Kaminski is a graduate student in the Department of Public Adminis_ tralion at West Virginia University. Sung Deuk Hahm is an Assistant Professor in the Graduate Public Policy program at Georgetown University.

Recent research indicates that most cities across the country have applied some form of strategic planning to their citywide planning process (Poister and Streib 1989; Wheeland 1993). Its basic elements include: the articulation of the organization's mission, the use of strategic analysis to identify and prioritize critical issues, the creation of an implementation strategy utilizing integrated programs to achieve long-term objectives, the use of financial projections, and an executive summary (Below, Morrisey and Acomb 1987).

Surveys often play an important role in the strategic planning process because they can help city officials identify and prioritize critical issues that are expected to be of major importance to the city's future (Below, Morrisey and Acomb 1987). Surveys also facilitate citizen participation in the planning process. This, in turn, facilitates stronger community support for the plan and fosters an atmosphere of mutual trust and confidence (Streib 1990).

Citizen surveys, when administered appropriately, can help identify service delivery problems, evaluate current services, pretest the demand for new services, influence budget priorities, identify citizen goal preferences, and send a message to residents that the city government is concerned about their opinions, which, in turn, reduces citizen feelings of isolation and alienation from government (Webb and Hatry 1973; Daneke and KlobusEdwards 1979; Watson, Juster and Johnson 1991). Citizen surveys can also help city administrators avoid "tunnel vision," where decisions are based on their own values, experiences, and personal preferences instead of on the broader community's values and needs (Daneke and Klobus-Edwards 1979; Streib 1990).

Citizen surveys, however, do have their drawbacks. Citizen responses concerning their degree of satisfaction with city services may not reflect actual service performance. Also, surveys should be subjected to rigorous statistical analysis to ensure their reliability and validity. Moreover, surveys often suffer conceptual problems, such as the poor wording of questions, which can invalidate the use of subjective survey data as a means to evaluate actual service performance (Stipak 1979). However, despite these potential problems, most researchers agree that citizen surveys are useful tools that can help city officials improve the quality of government services (Percy 1986; Daneke and Klobus-Edwards 1979; Watson, Juster and Johnson 1991).

Previous Survey Research on Citizen Satisfaction with Public Services

Citizen surveys of city services in other states suggest that most people are relatively satisfied with the performance of their city government as a service provider. This finding holds true for residents of both large and small cities. City governments generally receive the highest ratings for fire, police, water, and trash hauling services. Snow removal, street repair and planning/zoning receive somewhat lower ratings (Fitzgerald and Durant 1980; Miller and Miller 1991; Poister and Henry 1992).

Research on service evaluation also suggests that citizen's general attitudes toward their community and government have an important impact on their satisfaction with city government services. Citizens who indicate that their local government is responsive to people like themselves, who indicate that they trust public officials to do what is right, and who indicate that they have confidence in local government officials' abilities tend to indicate higher levels of satisfaction with city services than citizens who do not feel that local government is responsive to people like themselves, those who indicate that they do not trust public officials to do what is right, and those who have little confidence in local government off icials' abilities (Fitzgerald and Durant 1980; Benton and Daly 1992).

Previous research has found that, in most instances, differences in the respondent's demographic characteristics (age, income, race, religion, gender, etc.) are not significantly related to citizen attitudes toward city services. However, age can be a good predictor of citizen satisfaction with some services, such as community recreational services (Daneke and Klobus-Edwards 1979). Also, age and income were found to be positively and significantly related to citizen satisfaction with city police services, as was race (whites tend to be more satisfied than blacks) and gender (males tend to be slightly more satisfied than females) (Brown and Coulter 1983).

The West Virginia Survey

A fifteen-question survey designed to determine citizen satisfaction with municipal services was mailed to 350 randomly chosen households in Clarksburg during March 1994. Another round of surveys was mailed to randomly chosen households in Charleston, Huntington, Martinsburg, and Wheeling during the summer of 1994. Five hundred surveys were mailed to each of these cities. A total of 657 completed surveys were returned. This 28 percent response rate is considered excellent for mailed surveys. The survey results have a margin of error of plus or minus 10 percent.

My City as a Place to Live

The survey results suggest that the residents of Clarksburg, Charleston, Huntington, Martinsburg and Wheeling are relatively satisfied with their city as a place to live. When asked to rate their city as either an excellent, fair or poor place to live, approximately one-third of the respondents rated their city as an excellent place to live (33.5 percent), just over half (56.6 percent) rated their city as a fair place to live, and the remainder (9.9 percent) rated their city as a poor place to live. Charleston and Wheeling residents had the highest opinion of their city as a place to live.

City Responsiveness to Citizen Needs

The survey results also suggest that most West Virginians consider their city to be responsive to their needs. Nearly two-thirds (65.5 percent) of the respondents indicated that their city was responsive to their needs, compared to approximately one-third (34.5 percent) who said their city was not responsive to their needs. Wheeling and Charleston residents had the highest opinion of their city's responsiveness to their needs.

The residents of Clarksburg, Charleston, Huntington, Martinsburg and Wheeling are relatively satisfied with the overall quality of their city's services. As Table 2.3 shows, 14.1 percent of the respondents indicated that the overall quality of their city services was very good, 42.3 percent indicated good, 32.4 percent indicated fair, 8.3 percent indicated poor and 2.9 percent indicated very poor. Again, Charleston and Wheeling residents stand out as being the most satisfied with their city's overall quality of services.

Evaluation of Specific City Services

When asked to rate the quality of specific city services, the residents of Clarksburg, Charleston, Huntington, Martinsburg and Wheeling gave fire services and garbage collection the highest ratings. Water, police, sewage, and recycling services also received better than adequate ratings. Bridge conditions, snow removal and street maintenance received lower than adequate ratings.

Satisfaction with Specific City Services

The residents of Clarksburg Charleston, Huntington, Martinsburg and Wheeling are relatively satisfied with their city's services. They are most satisfied with fire services, water services and garbage collection. They are also relatively satisfied with sewage and police services. They are somewhat less satisfied with their recycling programs, bridge conditions, snow removal and street maintenance.

Need for Improvement

When asked to indicate if they thought the level of specific city services should be improved, kept the same or cut back, very few West Virginians indicated that city services should be cut back. West Virginians were relatively satisfied with the current level of fire, garbage collection, water, police and recycling services, but over 60 percent of them indicated that street maintenance (75.7 percent), bridge conditions (63.9 percent), and snow removal (60.7 percent) needed improvement.

Are Current Services Expensive?

The residents of Clarksburg, Charleston, Huntington and Martinsburg were asked to rate the taxes/fees they were currently being charged for fire, water and garbage collection services as being either very expensive, ex,pensive, fair, cheap or very cheap. Wheeling residents were also asked to rate their sewage fees. Very few West Virginians considered their city taxes/fees for any of these services to be either cheap or very cheap. Wheeling residents rated their sewage fees as being relatively expensive. Nearly one-quarter of the respondents from Wheeling (21.8 percent) indicated that sewage fees there are very expensive and 35.8 percent indicated expensive. A majority of the respondents in all five cities reported that they were being charged a fair amount for fire, water and garbage collection services, with a significant minority indicating either expensive or very expensive (see Table 2.7).

Table 2.7
Citizen Evaluations of Service Fees
in Five West Virginia Cities
1994

 Very Expensive Fair Cheap Very
Service Expensive    Cheap

Sewage Fee*
Fire Fee
Water Fee
Garbage Fee

*Wheeling only, IN = 179

21.8% 35.8%
14.1 24.3
13.9 29.1
12.3 24.3

39.7%
58.3
53.1
59.2

Willingness to Increase Taxes/Fees for Better Services

2.2% 0.5%
3.0 0.3
3.4 0.5
3.7 0.5

While the residents of Clarksburg, Charleston, Huntington, Martinsburg and Wheeling want more city services, most of them are not willing to have their taxes or fees increased to improve them (see Table 2.8). Respondents were most opposed to increases in taxes or fees to pay for garbage collection, water services and recycling programs and were somewhat more willing to tolerate increases for bridge improvements and street maintenance.

Table 2.8
Citizen Willingness to Accept Increases in
Taxes/Fees for Service Improvement
in Five West Virginia Cities
1994

Service

Garbage Collection
Water Quality
Recycling Program
Fire Service
Police Service
Snow Removal
Bridge Conditions
Street Maintenance

Not At All Slightly
 (1-3%)

78.5%
72.6
70.4
70.3
64.0
66.1
59.8
59.8

16.9 21.4

20.2

23.1

25.5

23.9

29.8

28.8

Moderately Considerably

(4-7%) (>7%)

4.0%
5.1
6.7
5.5
8.6

8.9

10.1

10.0

O~6
0.9
2,7
11
1,9
1.1
0.3
1.4

Demographic Characteristics

A statistical analysis of the survey responses revealed that homeowners in Martinsburg and Wheeling were more likely than renters in those cities to indicate satisfaction with the quality of city services and the city's performance as a service provider. Although there was no significant

difference between renters'and homeowners' responses in Clarksburg, Charleston and Huntington, there was a significant difference between them for the combined results for all five cities. Also, as one would expect, respondents in all five cities who viewed city government as being responsive to their needs and requests rated their city's services more favorably than those who did not view their city government as being responsive to their needs and requests. Also, respondents in all five cities who indicated that their city was an excellent place to live rated their city's services more favorably than those who indicated that their city was a poor place to live. There was no significant relationship in any of the five cities between the respondent's age, gender, income or length of residency and their views on the quality of city services and the city's performance as a service provider.

Conclusions

Like most Americans who live in cities, the residents of Clarksburg, Charleston, Huntington, Martinsburg and Wheeling are relatively satisfied with the performance of their city as a service provider and with the overall quality of their city's services. The residents of Charleston and Wheeling are somewhat more satisfied with the performance of their city as a service provider and with the overall quality of their city's services than the residents of Clarksburg, Huntington and Martinsburg.

Nationally, city governments generally receive the highest ratings for fire, police, water, and garbage collection services. Snow removal, street repair and planning/zoning receive somewhat lower ratings. The residents of Clarksburg, Charleston, Huntington, Martinsburg and Wheeling followed this national pattern, giving relatively high ratings for fire, police, water and garbage collection and lower ratings for recycling, bridge conditions, snow removal and street maintenance.

These latter four services, bridge conditions, recycling programs, snow removal and street maintenance stand out as four services that need additional attention by city officials in West Virginia. Snow removal and street maintenance were viewed as problem areas by the residents of all five cities. Recycling services received very low ratings in Huntington, average ratings in Clarksburg, Charleston and Martinsburg, and relatively good ratings in Wheeling. Bridge conditions were viewed as a major problem in Huntington. The recent opening of the new $32 million Robert C. Byrd Bridge in Huntington, however, should help to alleviate some of the concern by Huntington's residents with that city's bridge conditions.

As city officials work on these problem areas they will have to remain aware of their residents' views concerning the cost of municipal services in West Virginia. They generally view those costs as being relatively high. They are not in the mood for any additional city taxes or fees to pay for the improvement in services that they both want and expect. This, of course, means that city officials, as mentioned earlier, are being asked to "do more with less," which, in turn, elevates the importance of strategic planning and community involvement in the planning process and almost guarantees that city officials will be forced to consider more innovative service delivery strategies, such as the privatization of city services, to improve service delivery without increasing city taxes and fees.

References

Below, Patrick J., George L. Morrisey and Betty L. Acomb. 1987. The Executive Guide to Strategic Planning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.

Benton, J. Edwin and John L. Daly. 1992. "The Paradox of Citizen Service Evaluations and Tax/Fee Preferences: the Case of Two Small Cities," American Review of Public Administration. 22:4 (December): 271-287.

Brown, Karin and Philip B. Coulter. 1983. "Subjective and Objective Measures of Police Service Delivery," Public Administration Review. 43:1 (Jan/Feb): 50-58.

Bryson, John M. 1989. Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Daneke, Gregory A. and Patricia Klobus-Edwards. 1979. "Survey Research for Public Administrators." Public Administration Review. 39:5 (Sept/Oct): 421-426.

Fitzgerald, Michael R. and Robert F. Durant. 1980. "Citizen Evaluations and Urban Management: Service Delivery in an Era of Protest." Public Administration Review. 40:6 (Nov/Dec): 585-594.

Klase, Kenneth A. 1994. "Meeting Fiscal Challenges in the 1990s: Local Government Fiscal Trends in West Virginia." The West Virginia Public Affairs Reporter. 11:2 (Spring): 2-7.

Miller, Thomas J. and Michelle A. Miller. 1991. "Standards of Excellence: U.S. Residents' Evaluations of Local Government Services." Public Administration Review. 51:6 (Nov/ Dec): 503-514.

Percy, Stephen L. 1986. "in Defense of Citizen Evaluations as Performance Measures." Urban Affairs Quarterly. 22 (September): 66-83.

Poister, Theodore H. and Gregory Streib, 1989. "Management Tools in Municipal Government: Trends over the Past Decade." Public Administration Review. 49:3 (May/ June): 240-248.

Poister, Theodore H. and Gary T. Henry. 1994. "Citizen Ratings of Public and Private Service Quality: A Comparative Perspective." Public Administration Review. 54:2 (March/April): 155-160.

Stipak, Brian. 1979. "Citizen Satisfaction With Urban Services: Potential Misuse as a Performance Indicator." Public Administration Review. 39:1 (Jan/Feb): 46-52.

Streib, Gregory. 1990. "Dusting Off a Forgotten Management Tool: The Citizen Survey." Public Management. 72:7 (August): 17-19.

Watson, Douglas J., Robert J. Juster and Gerald W. Johnson. 1991. "Institutionalized Use of Citizen Surveys in the Budgetary and Policy-making Processes; A Small City Case Study." Public Administration Review. 51:3 (May/June): 233-239.

Webb, Kenneth and Harry P. Hatry. 1973. Obtaining Citizen Feedback: The Application of Citizen Surveys to Local Governments. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.

Wheeland, Craig M. 1993. "Citywide Strategic Planning: An Evaluation of Rock Hill's Empowering the Vision." Public Administration Review. 53:1 (Jan/Feb): 65-72.