What Makes Neighborhood Associations Effective in Urban Governance? Evidence From Neighborhood Council Boards in Los Angeles
| Author | Bo Wen,Hui Li,Terry L. Cooper |
| Published date | 01 November 2019 |
| Date | 01 November 2019 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0275074019854160 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
research-article2019
Article
American Review of Public Administration
2019, Vol. 49(8) 931 –943
What Makes Neighborhood Associations
© The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
Effective in Urban Governance? Evidence From
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074019854160
DOI: 10.1177/0275074019854160
Neighborhood Council Boards in Los Angeles
journals.sagepub.com/home/arp
Hui Li1 , Bo Wen2, and Terry L. Cooper3
Abstract
This study examines the perceived effectiveness of neighborhood councils (NCs) in Los Angeles, a government-sanctioned
and financed institutional innovation in urban governance. The study considers NC boards as a dynamic and open social
system that interacts with NCs’ internal and external environment. We propose that three factors—internal capacity,
external networking, and attention-action congruence—are related to perceived NC effectiveness. The findings from a
questionnaire survey of 80 NCs show that NC leaders perceive their organizations to be moderately effective. While
internal capacity contributes to all three dimensions of effectiveness, external networking enhances NCs’ effectiveness in
solving community issues and advising about city policies. Attention-action congruence, which examines the correspondence
between NC board members’ issue orientation and actual actions, is positively related to NCs’ effectiveness in advising about
city policies. The study concludes with considerations for enhancing the effectiveness of neighborhood associations.
Keywords
urban governance, neighborhood council, board, organizational effectiveness, Los Angeles
Urban governance refers to the institutional arrangements
participation in city governance. Andrews, Ganz, Baggetta,
through which local governments, neighborhood associa-
Han, and Lim (2010) argued that political context and
tions, and residents make collective decisions and deliver
resources are important, but the existence of committed
public services in the urban setting (Cooper, Bryer, & Meek,
activists and interdependent leadership, who can turn
2006; Emerson, Nabatchi, & Balogh, 2012; Fung, 2009). It
resources into programs and support activities, is vital to the
includes a wide array of major functions, including planning,
effectiveness of civic associations in coordinating collective
coordinating, and implementing projects, allocating action.
resources, organizing, and advocating (Chaskin & Garg,
These studies have enriched our understanding of the vari-
1997). Urban governance establishes the conditions for citi-
ous factors contributing to the effectiveness of neighborhood
zens to channel their voices and participate in local policy
associations. However, few have examined the role of board
issues. Neighborhood associations, which bridge the rela-
members, who are the stewards of the organizations and act
tionship between citizens and local government, are essential
accordingly on behalf of the organizations they oversee.
elements of neighborhood governance (Chaskin & Organizational boards serve two important functions for
Greenberg, 2015; Marwell, 2004; Musso, Weare, Bryer, &
organizations: monitoring management on behalf of stake-
Cooper, 2011). Thus, the effectiveness of neighborhood
holders and providing resources (Hillman & Dalziel, 2003).
associations determines, to a large extent, how urban gover-
As Pfeffer and Salancik (1978) note, “when an organization
nance functions.
appoints an individual to a board, it expects the individual
Neighborhood associations have been characterized vari-
will come to support the organization, will concern himself
ously as grassroots neighborhood organizations, civic asso-
with its problems, will variably present it to others, and will
ciations, community-based organizations, or city-sanctioned
governing structures created at the community level by the
1
people of each area. Scholars have been particularly inter-
The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong
2City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong
ested in examining the effectiveness of neighborhood asso-
3University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA
ciations. For example, Berry, Portney, and Thomson (2002)
have identified four conditions for success of neighborhood
Corresponding Author:
Hui Li, Department of Politics and Public Administration, The University
associations: a citywide system, adequate resources, political
of Hong Kong, Rm. 9.46, The Jockey Club Tower, Pokfulam, Hong Kong.
support, and empowerment innovations to encourage Email: lihuipa@hku.hk
932
American Review of Public Administration 49(8)
try to aid it” (p. 163). They assert that board members provide
Hollywood, and the Harbor area, where residents felt that
four primary benefits: (a) advice and counsel, (b) legitimacy,
they were not receiving municipal services in proportion to
(c) channels for communicating information between the
their taxes and compared with the rest of the city. The seces-
focal organization and its external environment, and (d) pref-
sion efforts had threatened the geographic, financial, and
erential access to commitments or support from important
political integrity of the city, which moved city officials to
elements outside the organization. In civic associations,
take neighborhood participation in governance seriously in
elected board members invest significant amounts of time,
the mid-1990s. Initially, members of the city council
expertise, and resources so that the organizations they oversee
attempted to create a system of NCs through passing a city
have sufficient external support, adequate resources, a large
ordinance. However, a city charter reform was proposed in
pool of committed participants, and effective leadership to
the late 1990s and finally adopted in 1999 to address numer-
advance their missions. Therefore, the effectiveness of neigh-
ous inadequacies in that very old document. According to the
borhood associations depends heavily on the extent to which
new charter, the goals of the NC system are to promote more
their boards can promote internal governance, navigate the
citizen participation in government, enhance the responsive-
external environment, and transform ideas into actions.
ness of government to local needs, and make NCs represen-
This study seeks to explain how board performance con-
tative of “many diverse interests in communities.”
tributes to neighborhood associations’ effectiveness by revis-
NCs are self-organized, voluntary associations that play
iting the Los Angeles Neighborhood Council (hereafter NC)
an advisory role in the city’s public-policy process concern-
System, a government-sanctioned and financed governance
ing the delivery of municipal services in their respective
structure established in 1999 that aims to promote citizen
areas (Los Angeles City Charter, Article IX). Each NC must
participation and connect citizens to the administrative sys-
be certified before becoming eligible to represent the stake-
tems of the City of Los Angeles. With financial, operational,
holder interests in its proposed jurisdiction and garner
and institutional support from the Los Angeles municipal
resources from the city government to sustain daily opera-
government, the NC system assumes three principal func-
tions. To be certified, the NC has to cover a minimum popu-
tions—promoting citizen participation, resolving commu-
lation of 20,000 residents within its boundary, collect 200 to
nity issues, and advising about city policies—that are central
500 signatures from community stakeholders, write bylaws,
to urban governance. A questionnaire survey addressing
and establish a financial accounting system. All NCs are cer-
these three functions was, therefore, designed and distributed
tified (and decertified) by the Board of Neighborhood
among NC leaders to examine their perceptions of effective-
Commissioners (BONC), which serves as the policy board
ness and factors contributing to these perceptions.
for the NC system. The commissioners are appointed by the
The findings show that despite the rosy expectations from
mayor and confirmed by the city council.
both the public and the government, NCs can only be consid-
The certification of each NC requires a governing board.
ered moderately effective. NC boards are dominated by rela-
The City Clerk administers elections to select boards to rep-
tively affluent, well-educated, White, and older men who are
resent the interests of stakeholders. The Department of
residents of the neighborhood. More notably, by integrating
Neighborhood Empowerment (DONE), also known as
theories related to board performance, agenda setting, and
Empower LA, subsequently assists certified NCs in organiz-
neighborhood governance, the study develops a framework
ing, learning to run meetings, and navigating the city bureau-
linking board performance factors to NC effectiveness.
cracy. The agency also sets regulations to ensure that NCs
Internally, NCs with higher capacity to run meetings, recruit
follow all pertinent rules.
volunteers, set goals, sustain leadership, and manage con-
Once certified, NCs become eligible to apply for $37,000
flicts—all basics of running civic associations—are likely to
in annual funding to support daily operations and hold spe-
be more effective. Externally, NCs with...
To continue reading
Request your trial