Theme 1: What issues are officials dealing with, and what can Extension or other parts of the
University of Missouri offer?
Think back through the past year or so, and list some of the issues that you dealt with in your role as a city or village officeholder.
Three key themes were identified in this discussion: resource and infrastructure development; environment and quality of life; and leadership issues.
Resource Development
Looming Budget Issues —Some communities are facing budget shortfalls and don’t have access to revenue streams that will alleviate their budget problems. It is expected that budget issues will accelerate.
Professional Staff —Smaller communities (less than 5,000 to 10,000 people) don’t have professional staff and are not as competitive for limited resources as larger communities. They also have to contract for studies that a larger town has professional staff to develop in-house.
Expertise in Grant Writing —Grant writers are more expensive and are requiring payment regardless of whether the grant is funded. This requires communities to invest dollars up front in grant writing resources. S ome communities don’t have budgets for the preliminary work.
Resources for Infrastructure Development —Many communities had sewer and water resources financed in the 1960s and 1970s through state and federal programs. This type of assistance is no longer available. Often there is not funding to do the preliminary work. The cost for providing sewer and water services is expected to go up considerably, perhaps doubling by 2015.
Provision of Basic Services —Even in the more metropolitan areas, there are many small communities.
Approximately 42 of 92 communities in St. Louis County have fewer than 5,000 people. These communities are struggling to provide basic services and need assistance with grant writing and planning.
This has an impact on the whole metro area as the focus tends to be on economic development or redevelopment in the city, but the future may be more closely tied to what happens in small municipalities.
Industrial Development —Some communities are struggling with industrial development. There is a unique three-county growth association around Phelps County. Rolla is oriented to education; Lebanon is industrial; two other cities are commercial; and the rest are farming. In this area, they are struggling with industrial development. They can’t find much flat land, or prices for available land are too high.
Needs of the Elderly --Issues of the elderly were raised by several communities. Providing access to health care and daily living so the elderly can live independently are current community issues. Baby boomers are coming of retirement age. Many elderly are on fixed incomes, yet expenses such as sewer rates continue to go up. In one community -- a recreation and retirement area -- 15 percent of the population is over 85. They have a good senior citizens ’ center that provides meals on wheels and also noon meals, but no public transportation.

Case Example
One small town put in a 6.5-mile sewer line and 2.5-mile water line with Department of Natural
Resources grants. The DNR grant money that funded the projects no longer exists. The town was among the last communities to receive this funding. In addition, two years ago the town put in a new water tower. The town was down to four hours of water in reserve and was able to secure financing for a 300-foot water tower with some grant money. The rest was financed with bonds.
The city contracts for professional assistance because it does n’t have many employees. The city public works department has three public employees. The city was able to pave city streets last
November with bonds and a half-cent transportation sales tax. One key is they have been able
to receive citizen support for all of their projects. The town now feels it is in a position for growth .
Environment
Pollution in Lakes —Communities have concerns about how to manage water runoff from city and agriculture. Challenges also stem from rapid growth where it may be necessary to do more to control agricultural water runoff.
Meeting Clean Water Standards —New standards in water treatment and management may prove to be a large burden on smaller communities. Communities currently operating septic systems will have to meet new standards if they discharge into streams. Another related challenge is finding an appropriate balance between establishing standards that communities can afford to deal with and protecting a resource very important to the state. One person said, “Our license plates say, “land of lakes and streams ,” and if we lower standards, that hurts tourism.” (Related to funding issues above)
Waste Water and Sewer Management —Rapid growth in some areas is causing some communities to borrow lots of money and figure out how to make payments on the debt. The challenge is not only to install systems, but also to maintain them. There is a sewer district that incorporates a lot of the rest of the county, but it is running into money problems because of the costs of transmission through areas with no customers. (Related to funding issues above)
Access to Green Space —People need to think more about green space and its relationship to their quality of life. Currently, we are not well-equipped to deal with this issue. There is a shortage of accessible green space, and in some communities, much of the green space is privately held and is not publicly accessible.
Parks and Recreation — In an urban environment, it is becoming important to think about outdoor recreation and ways to integrate parks into recreation programs. People have more time and money and want these things in their communities.
Landscaping —A lack of expertise to manage the landscaping and to select appropriate plants in small communities is another problem. Trees were used as an example. In one community, the parks and recreation department head’s spouse had a degree that is helpful, but no one on staff knows how to actually trim trees. They may be concerned that they are trimming too much or not enough.
Leadership
Quality Candidates for Elected Office —It has been more difficult to get good people to run for public office. Many people are running unopposed. Between 1996 and 2001 in Southwest Missouri, 1.1 persons ran for each office, although that number did jump after 9/11. This is also true in urban areas where it is difficult to get younger people to participate. They are busy and don’t see much benefit to public service.
I was first on city council in 1970, and I think it is tougher now for elected officials and to get good people to run for the office than it was 25 years ago. The hometown business
2

man no longer runs for office, and many candidates are running on only one issue. The ones on school board or park boards don’t want to run for city council. It’s a tough job, because you see the people every day. As a result, there is a lower quality of elected officials because people are scared; it takes more bravery to run than it used to.
Value for Service — Some felt officials are not thinking for the future and what is best for the community.
They noted that many people are involved because they want to keep something out of their back yard.
Sunshine Laws —Some felt that sunshine laws scare people away from public service, noting that state and national governments do not have to deal with sunshine laws. Fear of being fined or sued because of sunshine laws keeps people from participating. One person noted that in their community, a violation of sunshine laws led to three resignations because the officeholders were frustrated.
Residency and Ethics Rules —Some people have interest in a city because they have a business or job located there, but they can’t run for office because they live outside the city. They are frustrated that they d on’t have input. In one community, 10 percent of the population is in a nursing home, and they can’t run for office. Ethics laws make it difficult for a business person in a small town to be on a city council because they provide services to the city.
Customer Service —There was some discussion about the quality of customer service and its impact on quality of life in small towns. Some questioned whether or not local business and local government had good customer service. If there were better customer service, people might shop locally.
Lawsuits —Sometimes the courts will ignore the law. For example, the law says there is a $2 million cap on a type of lawsuit, and yet they will go beyond that limit and allow people to sue for a larger amount.
One person noted that they are currently facing a $10 million court case for a demolition order that years ago would not have happened because the law limited the amount for which they could be sued.
Have you used Extension programs or other parts of the University of Missouri to help you address some of the issues that you identified? If so, how?
All but one of the participants had little experience with Extension in terms of using it as a resource to address some of the issues mentioned in the first theme. Comments included:
1. I did not know you did anything like local government. I knew the Governmental Affairs Program but did not realize it was part of MU Extension.
2. Don’t know what MU extension does in this area (working with local governments).
3. Think of MU Extension for agriculture and 4-H. In Kansas, the fire department worked with them.
4. I didn’t know you were active in St. Louis County until I got a call on something—looking for a council representative. We think of you as agriculture.
5. I did not realize that the Small Business Development Centers are under MU Extension.
6. One small town spoke of its experience with Extension:
I have had some direct and outstanding association with MU Extension. We incorporated as a village in 1964 to avoid being annexed, and in 1984, we formed a board and adopted ordinances.
In the mid-1990s, Planning & Zoning was tried and failed several times. Through the Missouri
Community Assistance Program at the Department of Economic Development (MOCAP), we came into contact with MU Extension. it was a gold mine. The Extension Community
Development Specialist sat in as consultant advisor for 18 months on MOCAP. We were certified and became a 4 th class city during the process. He also participated in our Planning & Zoning as a consultant, and we passed Planning & Zoning. During the process of developing the plan, he chaired focus groups, which provided us lots of citizen participation outside of public hearings.
He helped us incorporate people outside of the city that use city services as participants in the planning —this was his suggestion. The groups met six times each. As an outsider, he provided a different perspective than that of a city official.
3

We were able to get a lot of good input from outside when we didn’t have the money to hire a planner. A larger city spent $50,000 and fired their planner. Another neighbor spent $400,000 to develop their plan. We spent a few hundred dollars. The Extension specialist has background in the area of Planning & Zoning.
How might Extension or other parts of the University of Missouri better assist you in your role as officeholder or public employee?
Suggestions included:
1. Recreating Governmental Affairs Program. One participant in particular thought this program was valuable to small towns and cities.
2. Another suggested that MU Extension invest more in marketing to small towns and cities. One noted that they knew MU Extension was in the courthouse but didn’t realize they had resources that could assist local government.
3. One noted that MU Extension includes community development, not economic development, and community development resources are very important for communities.
4. Larger cities can seek assistance when they have a problem, but smaller communities have no professional staff, and all are volunteers. They could use assistance, but they won’t know about
MU Extension until Extension gets out and tells them who they are.
5. A small community lost out on a water grant because they missed a deadline, and the grantor wouldn’t give in. Assistance with grant writing is a major need.
6. The Extension service has knowledge to do community surveys, to facilitate focus groups and for grant writing. Councils of Governments are getting overwhelmed doing this. Private grant writers now charge whether you get the grant or not because the chances of getting it are lower.
Theme 2: What do officeholders know about Extension and their perceptions of its effectiveness?
What Extension programs are you aware of in your community? What is your perception of how effective these programs are? What other programs might be useful to your community?
Several items noted in this discussion related to:
Community Cooperation and Regionalization —Several ways that Extension can assist with regionalizing government services were recognized . One suggested looking at the “Hometown
Competitiveness ” program out of Nebraska, which incorporates ideas of regionalization.
Regionalization is the future, and governments will be forced to cooperate regionally. For years, I represented towns nine miles apart and talked about sharing sewer treatment.
This idea worked until football season. Can’t talk about a joint dog pound because of rivalry issues.
In another case example, two towns did a joint airport, but the towns are very competitive even though most people in the towns are related in some manner. Helping communities look for opportunities to cooperate would be a valuable service.
Innovative Practices —One community talked about a project where they were able to use some of their physical plant to meet the needs of a neighboring community. MU Extension can help share these stories as best practices.
We just entered into an agreement with a sewer district, and we will treat part of their district at our new plant. A new condo development would have had a package treatment plant. The developer gave the dollars to the other city, and they built the line to us and we treat it. The rest of the money they can put into their new plant. We had to put in a
4

cost share agreement for when the plant has to be expanded. The technology of our plant is such that it beats any water in the state.
Leadership Development —The MU leadership program has a lot to offer small communities. It needs to be expanded and coordinated with local governments. Leadership programs may help get qualified people to run for public office. Think about developing council members as potential candidates for city council. One person suggested developing a reality show about city government. Sixth- and seventh- graders did not know what you could do in public service.
Help Communities Look to the Future —MU Extension could meet with smaller municipalities to tell them about storm clouds in the future. For instance, the pooled sales tax system (in the St. Louis area) may break down, and this will hurt the smaller municipalities. Extension needs to work with them to think about their resources in the future.
Communication —Participants agreed that MU Extension needs to do a better job of informing cities and the public about the services they offer. They suggested using local newspapers to get out information about what is offered. One person noted that in most counties, there are only eight or 10 city governments, and if staff could visit one a month, that could make a difference. These visits could be reported in the local newspaper. In addition, chamber meetings are a good place to share what is going on in MU Extension. In some areas, a different entity sponsors the meeting each month, and Extension could sponsor a meeting. Another suggestion was to meet with mayors when they have gatherings or conferences. There are lots of opportunities for collaborative efforts, and it is important for MU Extension to participate and look for opportunities to collaborate.
Theme 3: Perceptions about the University of Missouri
What is the most important way the University of Missouri impacts your community?
Perceptions of the University as a resource included:
1. A place where my kids can get an education.
2. UM Rolla is the resource in my area and has good programs for high school seniors to help small towns.
3. Football and basketball.
4. Extension folks do many things but mostly around agriculture and youth activities.
5. One per son’s spouse got involved with Extension and was elected to the Extension council. Most of her work has been agriculture-related, and when she realized they offered some other community programs, it piqued her interest, and she became more involved with those programs.
6. Planning will play big in the community. They would like to see the University hire a planner.
7. Medical care; one of the participants had a surgery at the hospital.
8. Veterinary medical resources are utilized.
9. Many veterans use the veteran ’s hospital.
10. The Public Policy Research Center (PPRC) at the University of Missouri-St Louis runs some training programs for cities. They did not know that Extension was involved with PPRC.
Challenge for MU Extension
It became clear during this dialogue that most of the people who participated in the focus group saw the
University of Missouri as a largely untapped resource when it came to working with small towns and cities. The challenge for Extension is to make resources available to cities in ways that don’t exceed the capacity of MU and MU Extension to meet other commitments. It was interesting to note that of the six people who participated in the focus group, three were known to have fairly extensive experiences with
MU Extension. Only one of them acknowledged that relationship. It appears that the others were able to connect to the state and regional Extension staff as resources but did not make the connection between the people and the institution they work for —MU Extension.
5

MU personnel for focus group:
Steve Jeanetta, MU Extension Community Development Specialist, facilitator
Mary Anne McCollum, MU Constituent Relations Manager, recorder
Sandy Stegall, MU Extension Constituent Relations Coordinator, recorder
Dr. Judith Stallmann, MU Professor of Agricultural Economics, Rural Sociology and Public Affairs; MU
Extension Community Development Specialist, recorder
Focus Group Participants:
Eleven city officials accepted the invitation to participate in the focus group. They were chosen to get a broad cross-section by geography, city size, city office, and elected or appointed office. Six of those who accepted the invitation participated in the focus group.
6

Mary Simon Leuci
Assistant Dean, College of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources
Community Development Program Director
University of Missouri
232 Gentry Hall
Columbia, MO 65211
573-884-9034 leucim@missouri.edu
Judith Stallmann
State Community Economics Specialist and
Professor of Agricultural Economics, Rural
Sociology and Public Affairs
University of Missouri
231 Gentry Hall
Columbia, MO 65211
573-882-6455
Julianne Stone, Director
Local Government Partnership
East-West Gateway:
One Memorial Drive, Suite 1600
St. Louis, MO 63102
Phone: 314-421-4220, 618-274-2750
Fax: 314-231-6120,
StallmannJ@missouri.edu
Tony DeLong
County Council Coordinator/Special Project
Support
University of Missouri
PO Box 718
Reeds Spring, MO
(417) 272-8707 delongt@missouri.edu
Julie.Stone@ewgateway.org
UM-St. Louis:
One University Blvd., 406 Tower
St. Louis, MO 63121
Phone: 314-516-4585
Fax: 314-516-5210 stoneju@umsl.edu
City of St. Louis, St. Louis County, St. Charles,
Franklin and Jefferson counties and included municipalities
The Local Government Partnership is a cooperative effort sponsored by University of Missouri-St. Louis (PPA), University of Missouri Extension and East-West Gateway Council of
Governments.
Eber Cude
Local Government Specialist
University of Missouri Extension
301 Historic 66 E. Ste. 127
Waynesville, MO 65583
573-774-6177
CudeE@missouri.edu
Camden, Crawford, Dent, Douglas, Gasconade,
Howell, Laclede, Maries, Miller, Oregon, Ozark,
Phelps, Pulaski, Shannon, Texas and Wright counties
Ron Higginbotham
Community Development Specialist
University of Missouri Extension
1012 N. Highway UU
Columbia, MO 65203
573-445-9792
HigginbothamR@missouri.edu
Audrain, Benton, Boone, Callaway, Carroll,
Chariton, Cole, Cooper, Howard, Moniteau,
Morgan, Osage, Pettis and Saline counties
7

Bill Elder
Director, Office of Social and Economic Data
Analysis
University of Missouri
625 Clark Hall
Columbia, MO 65211
573-882-7396
ElderW@missouri.edu
Tom Johnson, Frank Miller Chair in Agricultural
Economics
State Community Economics Specialist and
Professor - Agricultural Economics and Public
Affairs
Director of Community Policy Analysis Center
University of Missouri
215 Middlebush Hall
Columbia, MO 65211
573-882-2157
JohnsonTG@missouri.edu
8