—7 ’A —_ A # 7- , W , V, —— 7 _ ,i , 7 _ 7 7 , 7, 7 , , , fl , , — é \ MICHt-(‘SAN CGUNTY GOVERNMENTS PERCEPTEON OF- ITS RESPQNSWLIT‘I’ AND THE RESPONSMLH‘Y 0F 1’HE CGC’WRATNE EXTENSION SERVICE W ECQNOMEC DEVELOPMENT 't’hqwis far the Emma m" M 5. MKIWGAM STATE UNWERSWY Danatd John Luabfim Wtfifli lllLlfllllflIflllfllUIUlllllllllllllfllllllllllllllllllll F 10459 9141 i ABSTRACT MICHIGAN COUNTY GOVERNMENT'S PERCEPTION OF ITS RESPONSIBILITY AND THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE IN ECONOMIC DEVEIOPMENT by Donald John Luebbe This was an exploratory study to determine the attitudes_of Supervisors of County Governing Boards in Michigan toward the extent to which they think County Government should assume a responsibility for promoting economic development and their attitudes regarding the extent to which they conSider the Extension Service fihgglg,bg and‘ig assisting with promoting economic development. Communities throughout the Nation are experiencing changes that involve economic considerations. The changing nature of agriculture. industry, and business has created local areas of economic distress during adjustment periods. Changes in living habits. recreational needs and educational patterns has created problems at the community level. The solution of these problems depends upon the mobilization of local citizens and organizations to devote their efforts in this directibn. The question this raises is 'Should county government assume a responsibility to promote and encourage the solution of these problems?“ The attitudes of representatives of county government toward this question is vdry important in determining if county government can be expected to assume a responsibility for helping solve these problems. The Cooperative Extension Service has also committed itself to carrying on an educational pregram that can assist people on a county or area basis to undertake planning and action programs covering a wide Donald John Luebbe scope of problems including many outside of agriculture. The Extension Service has also been assigned some responsibilities by the United States Department of Agriculture to provide assistance to counties that wish to avail themselves of the opportunities under the Area RedeveloP- ment Act (Puélic Law 87-27) and the Rural Areas Development Program. Since the Extension Service depends upon sponsorship by County Government, the attitudes of representatives of County government toward the extent they think Extension should be involved in helping out with problems of economic development will determine to a large measure the degree that Extension will actually become involved. These factors 'were reaponsibile for focusing attention on this study. The information for this study was gathered through a mailed questionnaire to three Supervisors of County Government and the County Extension.Director in each of eighteen counties in Michigan. Personal interviews were conducted in two of these counties. The sample counties were selected on the basis of having a population between 105000 and 50,000 and having been designated as counties eligible to participate in the Area RedeveIOpment Act (Public Law 87-27) before February 1, 1962. There was a seventy-nine pebcent return of questionnaires from Supervisors of County Government and ninety-four percent return from Extension'workers. Reapondents were given a choice of selecting from a five point scale consisting of large, fairly large, medium, fairly small or small in responding to specific questions. Donald John Luebbe Over seventy percent of the Supervisors who responded said that Boards of Supervisors should assume a medium to fairly large responsibility for promoting economic deveIOpment. Sixty-five percent of the Extension Directors also were of the same Opinion. Over eighty percent of the Supervisors thought Extension.§hgglg, ;bg spending a medium to large amount of time in assisting with promoting economic deve10pment. Almost ninety percent of the Extension Directors responded the same way. Seventy-five percent of the Supervisors said Extension was spending a medium to small amount of time in promoting economic development. There was a significant difference in the responses of both Supervisors and Extension Directors between the amount of time they thought Extension should be spending and the amount of time Extension was spending. Both groups indicated.by their responses that Extension should be spending more time than they presently'were in economic development. MICHIGAN COUNTY GOVERNMENT'S PERCEPTION OF ITS RESPONSIBILITY AND THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT by Donald John Luebbe A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Resource Development 1962 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author wishes to express his sincere appreciation to the members of his graduate committee for their invaluable counsel and guidance throughout the school year at Michigan State University. He especially acknowledges the help of William J. Kimball, his major adviser, and Jack C. Ferver. his minor advisor. for their most helpful guidance and counseling. Other Professors who served on the graduate committee were Milton C. Steinmueller and Raleigh Barlowe. The author also wishes to express his appreciation to Torlief S. Aasheil; Director of Montana COOperative Extension Service, and Roy Huffman, Dean, Division of Agriculture, and R. R. Renne, President, Montana State College, Bozeman, Mbntana. for making possible this year of graduate study. The author is also extremely grateful to the Farm Foundation. Chicago, Illinois, for the fellowship that was granted to help make it financially possible to take advantage of this program of graduate study at Michigan State University. The fine cooperation received from the Staff of the Michigan Cooperative Extension Service who assisted in.making this study possible is also appreciated. The patience and understanding of the author's family who had to undergo considerable adjustment was greatly appreciated as was the assistance of the author's wife in typing this manuscript. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv Chapter I.INTRODUCTION.................. 1 Description of the Problem,/ Purpose of this Study & Definitions / Basic Design of this Study, II. BACKGROUND CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . 11+ Changing Role County Government Changing Role of Extension III 0 EMF-CH DEIGN O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 28 Scope of this Study Information to be Gathered Selection of the Sample IV 0 ANALYSIS OF DATA. 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 1‘0 Returns from Respondents Analysis of Data V. SUNMARI, CONCLUSIONS.AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . 58 Summary Conclusions Recommendations BIBIAImR-APIIY O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 66 APPENDICB O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 69 Table 1. 2. 3. LIST OF TABLES Page Number and percentages of returns of question- naims O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 no Summary of reaponses on Question 1: The amount of responsibility that Boards of Supervisors should assume for economic development. . . . . . . . . . . #1 Summary of responses on Question 2: The amount of time Extension should pg spending in assisting BoardSOfsupemsorSeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee M Summary of reaponses on Question 3: Amount of time Extension should be spending in assisting Boards of Supervisors and other organizations. . . . . . . . . #6 Summary of responses on Question 4: Amount of time Extension.§hgulg be spending in assisting other organizations.................... “'7 Summary of responses on Question 5: Amount of time Extension i§_spenging to assist Boards of Supervisors.. “8 Summary of responses on Question 6: Amount of time Extension ig spending to assist Boards of Supervisors and other organizations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . #9 Summary of responses on Question 7: Amount of time Extension‘1§,§p§pgigg to assist other organizations. . #9 9. Summary of responses on Question 8: ‘Value of the Extension program as measured by adjustments that should be made in the Extension budget. . . . . . . . 50 10. Testing of sub-hypotheses by comparing predicted value of Extension's pregram with actual value as measured by responses of Supervisors. . . . . . . . . 5h ILLUSTRATION Figure 1. Map showing counties in Michigan that were included inthisstudy.....................38 iv CHAPTER,I INTRODUCTION sc t the e le Economic development is of major concern at all levels in America's modern day society. At the international level all nations are striving to improve their own economic wellAbeing as well as aiding in the deve10pment of friendly nations because of the concept that a strong and flexible national defense is dependent upon an economic base that is constantly expanding in capacity and technical proficiency.1 In our country the federal government is engaged in a number of programs to stimulate economic growth at local and national 1" 61' e One of our nation's national goals is the encouragement of economic growth, as is expressed in the Report of the President's Commission on National Goals: ”The economy should grow at the maximum rate coneistent with primary dependence upon free enterprise and the avoidance of marked inflation. Increased investment in the public sector is compatible with this goal. Such growth is essential to move toward our goal of full employment to provide jobs for the approximateky 13,500,000 net new additions to the work force during the next ten years: to improve the standard of living; and to assure United States competitive strength."2 State and local governments are also working diligently to improve their economic conditions. Some programs are designed to encourage private industry'and business to expand, and others involve actual participation of state and local governmental units in economic planning 1Donald 8. Watson. WWW. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1960). p. 468. 2Goals for Americans, Report of the President's Commission on National Goals, (Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1960). p. 10. and promotion and offering of various kinds of assistance to such measures. The objective of the state and local government is usually to encourage such measures as a means of increasing the tax base to provide financial support for needed facilities and services to the local communities. ‘Well established is the overall desirability of economic development as a normal condition of the American economy. In the normal course of events all governmental units referred to above along with business, industry and citizens in general have been striving for these goals. However, this normal process has not been sufficient in recent years to satisfy the needs, especially in certain areas of our country. There have been some factors that have created critical prob- lems. The rapid changes that have taken place in many segments of our industrial society have created areas of temporary and chronic unemployb meat. The mining and lumbering industries are examples which illustrate how the demand for certain minerals and lumber products has been sharply reduced by substitute materials such as plastics or competitive products that have greater appeal to the consumer. Some industries have become obsolete and periods of distress are experienced while adjustments are being made. Agriculture, especially} is experiencing problems in many areas. The very rapid change that has taken place in the past ten years in agricul- tural technology and mechanization has forced farmers to adjust their management and organizational operations. The many small farms have not been able to keep pace with these changes because of limited capital and land resources coupled with declining farm prices and increased costs. The larger operators and the operators that have been able to obtain capital resources have invested more heavily in land and equipment. The small operator has had to seek off-farm employment either part time or full time to provide for the needs of his family. Other communities with limited employment opportunities have found the young peeple leaving the community to seek employment as soon as they have completed their education. These areas have found themselves with a static or declining population and a proportionately smaller number of young peeple in the employable age group and a growing percentage of older citizens. Another phase of the economic problem that many communities are faced with has been the increasing demands for public facilities and services in the way of schools, hospitals, care for aged and needy, roads and sanitation. All of these needs require increased expenditures'by local and state governments. The pressure, therefore, becomes more competitive for the tax-dollar and increases the need for seeking new sources of public revenue. The need for increasing economic growth of the area is one of the major objectives, then, as local citizens attempt to provide for these services by establishing a stronger tax'base. The federal government has initiated programs designed to encourage local communities to undertake programs to help themselves in promoting economic development. The Rural DevelOpment Act of 1956 is one example of a program.designed for depressed rural areas with problems of under- employment or unemployment. This program provided for designation of pilot counties in certain states that had rural areas of underemployment or unemployment. In these counties the COOperative Extension Service ‘was given the responsibility of working with local peeple to help them analyze their resources and consider potentials for improving their economic and social well-being. In 1961 Congress passed the Area Redevelopment Act (Public Law 87-27) which provides for assisting communities with financial assistance where they have been found to have a high degree of unemployment and underemployment. In 1961 the United States Department of Agriculture also established the Rural Areas Development Program as a vehicle for cooperative effort by which rural communities might consider opportun- ities for economic development. This program stated in part, "Priority attention shall be given to requiring that initiation of activities under the R.A.D. Program and maximum participation therein.shall rest with citizens and organizations and groups of citizens and state and local governments and instrumentalities thereof in rural areas.'3 These programs are discussed in more detail in Chapter II. Most programs, whether encouraged by federal or state programs or by local organizations, eventually involve the local government and the community citizens working together to attempt to plan and achieve economic development. The federal or state governments may provide certain tools, incentives and technical assistance to aid the community, but the end result usually depends upon some action by local citizens. The problem that frequently occurs at the local level is the difficulty of mobilizing the local resources into an organizational 3United States Department of Agriculture Memorandum, No. lh48 as revised June 16, 1961. arrangement that truly represents the community to plan and promote economic development. The Chamber of Commerce may claim to represent the community as a whole when in fact it is more likely to represent only a segment of the community. The Cooperative Extension Service has helped to organize planning groups to perform program projection and other countyawide planning efforts. Here again these efforts have been criticised by other groups because they say these planning groups are primarily agriculturally oriented or are concerned only with activities that the Extension Service can'be involved in, so in reality these are conceived as Extension Service planning groups. 'Whether these claims are true or not is not as important as the fact that many individuals and organizations that could offer valuable resource help to local commun- ities have shown a reluctance to lend their support to organizations that they perceive as Extension groups or Chamber of Commerce sponsored groups. County government is face to face with many of the problems at the local level. It is beseiged with requests for new services and facilities. It is also seeking ways to increase the tax base to provide the financial support needed to help provide for these demands. A question then becomes, can and should county government provide the organizational structure that sponsors the programs to plan and promote economic development? In many states county government has enabling legislation that formally authorizes the carrying out of this function. In Michigan, Act 281 of the Public Acts of 1945 provides for the creation of planning commissions which may develop programs that cover a wide scope of functions as is described in the next chapter. This act specifically refers to social and economic development. County governments may also appoint ad hoc committees to serve this function as many counties have done to comply‘with the provisions of the Area Redevelopment Act (Public Law 87-27). County governing boards must believe that the county should assume a responsibility for economic development before they will be willing to take very positivd steps toward sponsoring such functions. The county boards could look to the Cooperative Extension Service to assist them in certain organizational aspects and to furnish information to a county sponsored planning group. Here again the attitudes of county governing boards are important considerations as they must deem these activities to be desirable functions within the competence of the Extension Service. The degree of participation by the Extension workers in programs of this nature is likely to be strongly influenced by the attitudes of County governing boards. Jack Ferver's thesis provides some evidence that this is true. His study reports that the County Extension Director will probably fall into the high quarter of time-spent category on community development programs if some of those individuals who are most influential in determining his program behavior expect him to be in the high category of participation. The usual priority of influence established in this study was first the county agricultural power and/or authority represented by certain individuals on the Board of Supervisors and Commodity groups. The influence of the State or District Extension Administration was found to be secondary to the local county influence.“ “Jack Ferver, “An Analysis of the Behavior of County Extension Directors as Coordinators of Michigan State University Community Development Programs." An unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1961. p. 356. The study conducted by Ferver indicates that it may be very essential that county governing boards recognize that Extension should have a responsibility in programs concerned with community deve10pment before it is likely that Extension will actually take a very active role. Another relevant conclusion from Ferver's thesis was that the County Extension Director was more likely to be in the high category of participation if he had a favorable attitude toward community development. As a result of his studies Ferver makes a recommendation as follows: "In order to help bring about a request for unification from the counties, and at the same time render maximum service, a basic change in Extension's county program approach is suggested from the findings of this study. Instead of only attempting to involve increasing numbers and kinds of people, including officials of county government, in their own expanded county program planning efforts, County Extension offices should attempt to become more fully related to their localities as educational staff offices of county government. Some of the counties included in this study were, to varying degrees, presently'performing in this capacity. In spite of speculation to the contrary, it seems that no major reorganization of local government is in sight, and that the functions and powers of county government will increase in the future as the needs for coordination between city and town- ships becomes more urgent. County Extension offices can do much to help county government do the total county planning and development job which needs to be done. A big part of any such job is educational and organizational, and this is a part of the 36b Extension can do. County Extension offices should attempt to become part of a larger county effort. For such a relation- ship as is suggested here to become a reality, the attitude to- ‘ward county government which is held by many Extension workers will need to be changed. In the past many county governments have not been overly effective, efficient, or competent, but the future 'would seem to demand that they become so. From the interviews with county leaders in this study it‘became apparent that some new opportunities were being sensed for county government. The County Extension offices can do much to help make county government more effective in the future, but County Extension.workers must begin to see in county government an Opportunity, not an obstacle or a threat.'5 5.1m. pp. 366-367. Extension administrators in many states are concerned with the problem of how to improve upon the effectiveness of Extension's parti- cipation in planning efforts concerned with local community problems. These concerns along with the recommendations suggested by Jack Ferver led to the selection of this problem for study. flames of this Study The Extension Service is continually striving to gather information and evidence that will assist in improved programs. It is in this effort that this study was undertaken. This study attempts to provide some evidence on the extent to which representatives of County Governing Boards in Michigan consider County Government to have a responsibility for promotion of economic development, and their attitudes regarding the extent to which they consider the Extension Service 5.122214 .m and is involved in economic development. Definitiggfl Ecgnomg Develgmegt The concept of economic development was selected for this study because it seemed to be more understandable than commity development. The term community development was considered but it has so many different programs associated with the term that it would have been difficult to try to use this term in contacts with representatives of County Government. For the purposes of this study economic deve10pment mm an“... .A, ,L. 3,. .;.e eggs; .- ._ , : u. .. ._,_, 3., .1“ up, A definition of economic growth by Watson is very similar. He says economic growth can be viewed as a broad process of improvement in the efficiencies of the economic means used to attain the ends of individuals and organizations .6 In order to have economic growth it is generally recognized that these must be some kind of change in present enterprises or establishment of new enterprises that will bring new or additional income into the area. Thus the goal of local citizens and leaders in most areas is to encourage developments that will stimulate economic growth. 9.93.1331 W. is considered to be represented by the Supervisors. Michigan has what is referred to as the New York system of county govern- ment. Supervisors represent townships and urban areas and make up what is referred to as a Board of Supervisors for carrying out their responsibility in administering county government. 99.21151 W m is the title of the Extension worker who . is Chairman of the County Cooperative Extension Staff in Michigan. W W W is the title of the Extension worker who has the responsibilities for administering the ktension program in an area of the State of Michigan which will include a number of counties. Some states refer to this position as District Extension Supervisor. 6130mm 8. Watson. WW. (Houghton mrnm 00., 1960). p. 169. 10 ic De 0 s St The primary objective of this study was to deterndne the attitudes of Supervisors of County Government and Extension workers toward the responsibility of County Government for economic development and the extent that Extension §_h_c_>p_]_.d_ R and is involved in economic development. The data was gathered by means of a mailed questionnaire to three County Supervisors and the County Extension Director in each of eighteen counties in Michigan. Personal interviews were also conducted in two of these counties. The selection of the sample and formulation of the questionnaires are discussed in detail in Chapter III. The study was designed to gather the following kinds of information: (I) Attitudes of respondents toward responsibility of County Government for economic development . (2) Attitudes of respondents toward the amount of time Extension should be spending in economic development. (3) Attitudes of respondents toward the amount of time Extension is spend- ing in economic development. (‘4) Attitudes of respondents regarding the kind of organisation Extension should be and is working with on economic development activities. ( 5) To determine if representatives of County Government and Extension workers have the same or different attitudes toward each of the above questions . (6) To determine if there is a relationship between (a ) the attitude that County Supervisors have toward the County's responsibility and what they think Extension should be and is doing in economic development and (b) the value they place upon the Extension program inmeir county. 11 The previous discussion pointed out that the major objectives of this study were to determine the attitudes of respondents toward the first four kinds of information outlined on the previous page. It was decided that the responses to these questions could be most effectively presented in tables which summarized the responses to each question. In the process of gathering the evidence for the major objectives it was also decided to (1) try to determine if there was a difference in attitudes between Supervisors and Extension Directors and (2) determine if there was a relationship between the way Supervisors valued the Extension program and the way they responded on questions relating to their reSponsibility and Extension's responsibility for economic development. To measure this information two hypotheses were formulated. Number one is as follows: Generally the attitudes of County Extension Directors will be iniagreement with the attitudes of Supervisors of County government regarding the responsibility of County government and Extension for economic development. In formulating the second hypothesis it was necessary to establish a series of sub-hypotheses to cover all necessary combination of variables that could ShOW'np in the reaponses. The following three factors were considered to be the independent variables for formulating the sub-hypotheses: (a) Responsibility of County Government for economic development (b) Responsibility that Extension should have for economic develop- ment as measured by the amount of time that ghggld be spent. (c) Performance of Extension in economic develOpment as measured by the amount of time Extension is Spending. Each of these variables was scaled so that it could be evaluated from the responses into high, medium and low categories. Then depending upon 12 the manner in which these variables were scaled a prediction was made as to how the Supervisors would value the Extension program. This value factor is considered to be the dependent variable. There were twenty- seven possible combinations of sub-hypotheses formulated when all possible combinations of independent variables were considered. Only the sub-kwpotheses that actually were tested in this study are described below. The total listing of all combinations are shown in the appendix. 2a. If county governing boards consider that county government has fig}; responsibility for economic development and Extension has a high responsibility for economic development and Extension's performance is medium then they will rate the Ebctension program as having a medium value. 2b. If they consider county government as having a high responsibility and Extension as having a high responsibility. but Extension has a 1% performance then they will give the Extension program a m value. 2c. If they consider county government has a m responsibility and Extension has a my responsibility and Extension has m perfor- mance they will rate Extension highly. 2d. If they consider county government has a m reaponsibility and Extension has medium responsibility and Extension's performance is rated Egg: they will giwe the Extension program a m value. 2e. If they consider the county government has a m responsibility. and Extension has a ge__d_i_u_13 responsibility and is performing in a m category they will rate Extension's program as m. 2f. If they consider county government has a medium; responsibility and Extension has a m responsibility and Extension's performance a 13 lgg then they will give the Extension program.a|lgg_rating. 2g. If they consider county government as having a mgdygg responsi- bility and Extension as having a 1gg,responsibility andwlggjperformance they will give Extension a'mggigg’to'high,rating. 2h. If they consider county government has 8.;93 responsibility and Extension a mggigm responsibility and Extension's performance is w they will give the Extension program a medium rating. 21. If they consider county government has a 1gg_ responsibility and Extension has a medium responsibility and Extension's performance is lg! they will give the Extension program 8 lg! rating. In formulating the above sub-hypotheses, it was assumed that Supervisors would be heavily influenced in the value they placed upon the Extension program by the way they indicated Extension was performing in relation to their expectation of what Extension should be doing. For example, in hypotheses 2b Extension was expected to have a high responsibility, but if Extension's performance was actually rated low by the Supervisors then they would have given the Extension program a low rating because Extension was not performing as Supervisors think they should have performed. The variables included in these sub-hypotheses were measured in very specific terms for the purpose of this study because this seemed. to be the most practical way of actually testing these hypotheses. CHAPTER II Bac u C n ide ation The previous chapter described the problem.in general terms and outlined the purpose and design of the study. The purpose of this chapter is to consider the situation in today's society and the implications it has for County Government and the CoOperative Extension Service. Considered here are the changing roles of County Government and the Extension Service in respect to the changes in our society. Changing Belg 9f Qgggtz Government American local government has its roots deep in the past. .Most of the features of county and township government can be traced back to the Colonial Period. During this period there developed four major systems of rural government: (1) the New England town system in which the town was all important; (2) the Virginia system in which the county government in the hands of the Justices of the feace exerted major control of local governmental affairs: (3) the New‘Iork system in which town and county were interlocked through the Supervisors representing each segment; and (h) the Pennsylvania system in which both county and townships existed but the townships were subordinate. As the Great Plains and the Far 'Western states began to establish governments. a fifth type known as the Commissioner form developed.1 Nest County governments were created primarily as a convenient sub- division of the State for law enforcement. holding court, conduct ef 1Paul W. Wager, C unt Go e Ac 083 t N , (University of North Carolina Press, 1950). p. 7. 14 15 elections, road construction and maintenance, recording of legal documents and aid to the unfortunate. These functions still maintain first impor- tance in most counties, but during recent years many new functions have been added. Snider describes some of these as: health protection, hospitals, assistance to the aged and blind, libraries, parks. recreational facilities. planning,zoning, housing and many more.2 Typical of legislation enacted in many states is the Regional Planning Commission Act passed in Michigan which permits local govern- mental units such as counties to establish planning commissions. These commissions permit counties to engage in a broad scepe of possible functions. For example, the Michigan Legislation says in part: '/ “The Planning Commission: A. May'conduct all types of research studies. collect and analyze data; prepare maps, charts and tables; and conduct all necessary studies for the accom- plishment of its other duties. B. May make plans for the physical. social and economic development of the region. C. Nay act as a coordinating agency for programs and activities 05 agencies as they relate to its objectives." Even as new functions are being added to County Government. it is noted that some students of government have been very critical of County Government and its operations. 2Clyde‘F. Snider, American State and Local nggzggggt,. (Appleton & Century Crafts, Inc., 1950). p. 292. 3Stewart Harquis,'Summary of the Michigan Planning Commission Act," Institute for Community Development, Michigan State University Tech. Bulletin A 19. December, 1960. p. h. 16 Some have said that County Governmental units are too small to be efficient. Renne points out that in many rural counties the volume of work is relatively small and seasonal. The typical county with its many independent uncoordinated elected officials is wasteful and inefficient .“ It is recognized that counties are small since they were originally organized so that an individual could travel from his home to the County Seat in a day by horse and buggy. However. there is little evidence to indicate that changes will come about to any great degree in consolidation of counties because of modern methods of transportation or thinly populated rural areas. The 1957 Census of Governments lists 3.0h7 counties which is only twenty-four less than there were in the 19h0 Census. The consolidations that have taken place have been largely County Governments combining with City Government in some of the large metropolitan areas such as San Francisco. Denver and Philadelphia. The resistance that local peOple offer toward changing county boundaries and the apparent need that people seem to believe counties fulfill makes it apparent that efforts should be exerted to help make County Government more effective and useful. The Public Administration Service Report of 1956 states, "Many of these needs have been intensified in the past two decades by the assignment of additional functions to County Government in association with other levels of local government.'5 “a. R. Renne, "Too Small to be Efficient," mm; M 821123. Vol. 36. No. 2, 1947. p. 79. 5Public Administration Service. "The Changing County.’l Natigga; marginal. Ems-x. (Vol. 1+5. October. 1956). p. n34. 17 The Report mentions several virtues that are commonly possessed by no other unit of government: (1) The majority of the American public is familiar with the county as the only unit of local government: (2) Most states are too large to render the same service centrally: (3) Desira- bility of administration at local level permits compromise of state and local authority.6 As programs are undertaken that relate to the social and economic life of the local citizen it is desirable that the local government assume responsibility for protecting society from forces outside and inside the society which may serve to jeepardize the attainment of social goals. Steiner refers to the broad relationship between government and economic considerations of the community. Thus. (1) government is the principal social institution through which men make decisions about the goals and methods of the economic system: (2) government exerts its power to ensure adherence to the goals and methods.7 Since'Wbrld war II the trend to suburban living has created a whole new set of problems for many counties. suburban developments have taken place in locations often some distance from metropolitan areas. These movements have created a demand for such services as waterworks. sewage disposal. sanitation, schools, roads. building codes. fire protection. The developments have also occurred on a low density type of settlement which has created terrific demands for capital expenditures'by county governmental units.8 Plaid- pp- 434-435. 7GeorgeA. Steiner, ve en ' e ,1 (McGraw— Hill B001: 60., 1953)e p. 26o 8’Louis H. Cook, "Emergence of the Service County,“ Ngtional MuniCipal Mew. V01. M, NOe lOe pe 509e 18 Cha Exte si Econ c Dove The Extension Service has a long and successful career of working with rural peeple to help then solve their own problems. This organi- zation was originally established to extend the knowledge of research to the farms and homes of the rural communities of America. The nature of our society was principally rural and the problems that required attention were of an agricultural concern. It was only natural that Extension developed as an agricultural organization to help local peeple solve principally rural problems . The problems were frequently associated with production efficiency or marketing or allocation of the family re- sources. The approach was usually on an individual farm or family basis. The achievement of Extension in this area is exemplified by Paul Miller: "The still remarkable growth and strength of the Extension Service was affected by its alignment with the earlier and major deve10pmental needs of Mean society. ...... This is, agriculture. . . . . . . . and the convenient over-lapping of the agrarian family, the farm and the organization of labor and the productive processes. As the communities began to be affected by the improved technolog in agriculture and the industrial developments became more pronounced, new problems in the communities came to the forefront. Farms were getting larger and new families had to seek other means of livelihood. The remaining farmers were confronted with new problems that required working together. Sometimes it involved c00perative ventures to bring electricity 9Paul A. Killer, ”Adjustments Needed in Extension Thinking and Organization," m; g: m Ecopoggg,.Vol. XLI, No. 5. (December, 1959). p. 1437. rt 19 to the farms, or organization of districts to conserve soil, drain land, control weeds, or to develop joint ventures with urban and rural citizens to accomplish common objectives. In this role of helping local people to work tOgether the Extension Service played a vital part. Sociologist ChristOpher Sewer describes the kind of function that Extension has performed as a developmental organization. In describing this concept he says: “The first task of this paper is to establish that there is a particular type of large—scale organization which is different from those which have been studied in most organizational research. Much research has concentrated on the kinds of bureaucratic organizations which can achieve most of their goals with Igles which are internal within the organization and are largely under the direct authority of the administrative hierarchy. Corporations build automobiles, restaurant systems process food and serve customers, and military organizations achieve objectives by being able to direct the actions of persons occupying positions within the structure. The basic premise of this paper is that the last generation has seen the formation of a type of organization which has for its core objectives the goals of activating groups and indi- viduals which reside in locality groupings, such as the tradi- tional local community based on concensus or the ecological comp munity based on symbiosis and interdependence. Such organizations, by definition, have their primary point of residence at state. national, or regional headquarters, i.e., away from specific locality systems; but their primary function is to gain access to locality systems and to activate them to achieve specific goals which are deemed desirable by the external organization, and which can be perceived by the local residents as for the good of the locality. Access to localities is gained either'by working with existing groups, by working with individuals with the hepe that the organization's goals will be accepted and then will spread to others, or by organizing new groups within the locality which are under the direct guidance of the external organization."1o 10ChristOpher Sewer, "External Deve10pment Organizations and the Locality," a paper prepared for presentation at the Joint Meetings of the American Sociological Society and the Rural Sociological Society. (September. 1959). 20 One of the first widely adopted programs of involving local people in organized efforts in which Extension provided leadership was knowxas Land Use Planning under the Mount Weather Agreement of 1938. Henry A. ‘Wallace, Secretary of Agriculture at the time, in describing this program said, "In the Department of Agriculture we have begun a bold experi- ment in democracy. 'ws are trying to put into practice the idea that in a democracy the economic decisions ought to be made by the people. ‘We are slowly building a mechanism, county by county, in collaboration with the Land Grant Colleges and the Extension Service by means of which farmers themselves will determine the elements of their total agricultural program, will decide how these elements may be welded together in one effective program and finally, will administer that program. ‘We call this county planning. Actually the farmers in any given county immediately see that they must interest themselves in forces and problems which go far beyond the county line.'11 In January of l9h2, after this program‘was only three years old, over 1,900 counties in forty-seven states had organized some type of a planning organization. Many accomplishments of economic as well as social improvement were recorded from the actions of local planning committees as a result of this effort.12 The involvement of our country in'world'war’II diverted the atten- tion of many of the planning committees to new and different problems. The Extension Service was also stripped of the extra funds that Congress had been appropriating because of opposition to the planning program by the American Farm.Bureau Federation.13 The experience that resulted 11Henry.A.'Nallace, e Fu Ame c , (The New Republic, November 8, 1939), p. 52. 12Howard R. Tblley, The Fagge: Citizen at'war, (Macfiillan Co., 19h3). pp- Dir-175. 13Charles M. Hardin, Ezeedom in Agzicultuzal Education, (University of Chicago Press, Chicago 37, Ill., 1955), pp. 160-161. 21 from this program provided a valuable guide for Extension in working with people in community planning and development programs in later years. Following‘Wbrld'War II and through the Korean'War the efforts of Extension were directed primarily toward production efficiency. The focus of the attention was on the individual operator and on considera- tion of the resourcds at his disposal. This approach was generally known as the farm and home development approach. In this approach the assistance given the family dealt with the techniques of analyzing resources and considering the alternatives for attempting to bring the economic capacity of the farm closer in balance with the family‘s goals and aspirations. It soon became apparent to agricultural leaders and our nation's economists that with the increasing technology in agriculture that many farms lacked the potential resources to provide an adequate income for the respective farm families. Lauren Seth made the following Observation, I"This widening disparity between farm and non-farm income during recent years is a result of soaring farm.production against an inelastic demand. That is, it is a market problem, a commercial problem. A large share of agriculture is but little affected.by these changes in market conditions. Half of the farms produce only ten percent of the products for market. People living on these non-commercial farms did not profit from the boom.times of the Forties, and they are not much worse off today. Despite heavy migration from such farms in recent years, the number of peOple remaining is excessive in relation to the need for labor. ...... The solution to this problem of underemployment in agriculture Obviously cannot be found.within agriculture. It is a prdblem for the nation as a whole.'1n In an attempt to bring about some adjustment Congress passed the Rural Development Act in 1956. This program provided for designation of 1“Laurenli. Seth, 'Farm Policy for the Sixties,” Goals for Americans, (Prentice Hall Inc., December. 1960). pp. 211-212. 22 pilot counties in certain states that had rural areas where underemplqy- ment or unemployment was a major problem. The Extension Service was given the responsibility for working with local people to help them analyze their resources and consider potentials for improving their economic and social well being. In previous programs in which Extension had taken a part it was the normal procedure for Extension to play a dominant role. The major resources that were made available to the peeple in analyzing prOblems, considering alternatives, and providing the technical knowshow were usually provided directly‘hy the Extension staff or from its parent institution the Land Grant University. As counties began getting involved in rural development the local people soon realized that resources were needed from sources in addition to the Extension source. In discussing Extension's role in this program.G. H. Huffman said, "In rural development the Extension Service and the Extension worker may play an important organizing, facilitating and also substantive resource role, but at least the role is not formally dominant. Extension is considered one among many co-public and private resources capable of contributing to the local peeples organized efforts to achieve their goals through the rural development approach.'15 The Rural Development approach meant that all sectors of the local economy should become involved if the objectives of the program were to be reached. Opportunities for employment in the non-agricultural enterprises needed to be developed if employment were to be provided to the underemployed agricultural workers. 150. H. Huffman, I‘Relationship Between Program Projection and Rural Deve10pment,' Paper presented before Extension Director's meeting, August, 1960. p. 5. 23 Extension had been assigned the responsibility fqg_h§lping the local communities organize themselves to accomplish the objectives of this program. There were at least three major problems facing Extension in this assignment. First, to determine the kind of organization that would be most effective in bringing tagether the different interests in the county including business men, industrial groups, farmers and labor groups, and then to provide a setting where they could work together towards some common goals. Since the local organization was also going to require technical assistance from.many different sources, the sponsorship of the organization should be such that technical staffs from.most any source would feel willing to offer their assistance. The second problem was a result of Extension's past history of performance. To most people the Extension worker was recOgnized as primarily concerned with agricultural problems. So how could he effectively carry out responsibilities in this broader area of community problems? ‘Wbuld the non-agricultural sectors of the community be willing to work with Extension if they looked.upon Extension as agriculturally trained and oriented: Ferver makes the following comments as a result of a study he conducted: IIf County Directors do not enter the community develop- ment field except in response to county expectations, they may not enter it at all. If County Directors have not taken the initiative to expand their role beyond a traditional agricultural role, it is probable that county people will view their role as a traditional agricultural agent role. The agricultural peOple will probably make the positive statement, 'His job is to help the farmer!‘ 0n the other hand, the non-agricultural people will probably make the somewhat negative statement, 'He shouldn't be 'working in these community deve10pment areas......he doesn'g know about such matters....his job is to work in agriculture."1 iSJack Ferver, I'Analysis of the Behavior of County Extension Directors as Coordinators of Michigan State University Community Development Protrams.‘ (Unpub. Ph. D. Thesis, Administration U. of'Wis., 1961). pp. 345-3h6. 24 The third problem is partly'associated with the second. If the Extension worker becomes involved in community programs of non-agricul- tural nature will the support be forthcoming for Extension work? Miller and Sower discuss this prOblem in their paper: "The dilemma of the modern County Agent is knowing what role to choose and what organization(s) will support it: to limit himself to the new production-marketing complex of the commercial- specialty farmer and thereby regain a further distinctiveness: or expand to adult educationpcoordination of other specialities with an orientation to issues of public responsibility and leadership. And the major'ggestiog,he faces is: what organizations can he count on, as in the coalitions with the farm organizations, for support in the appropriation process." In any event, the Extension Services were committed to a program involving community inprovement and resource development as one of the major areas of program emphasis outlined in the Statement of Scope and Responsibility for the COOperative Extension Service as prepared in April, 1958. This statement was developed by a Committee of State Extension Directors appointed by the Extension Committee on Organization and Policy to set forth the areas of emphasis that would reflect the official position of the Cooperative Extension Services of the respective States. This report states in part: The Extension Service has a responsibility to render appropriate educational assistance in helping people to under- stand such matters as: 1. 2. 3. h. 5. Adequate standards for community services Efficient methods of providing such services Methods of orderly planning Competitive uses of land and the relationship to proper community growth Solution of problems found in special community areas within.metropolitan areas, such as, the ruralaurban fringe and the rural slum 17Christopher Sower and Paul A. Miller, "Changing Power Structure in Agriculture and Rural Society" Paper presented at the annual meetings of the Rural SociOIOgical Society. (Ames, Iowa. August 27-29, 1961). 25 In addition to such work on a local community basis, Extension has a responsibility to provide educational and leadership assistance to people on a countyawide or area basis in developing organized programs of benefit to both farm and non-farm residents.18 Extension was becoming more and more involved in community resource development programs. The rural develOpment program stimulated this activity in the designated counties. The Scope Report had committed Extension to this area of concern. The next major development to involve Extension was the passage of the Area Redevelopment Act (P. L. 87-27) in 1961. Under Section twentyb four of this Act the Secretary of Commerce was authorized to use the services and facilities of other agencies of the Federal Government. Accordingly, the responsibility for organizational and educational leadership in rural redevelopment areas was delegated to the Secretary of Agriculture who in turn delegated this responsibility to the Federal and State Extension Services for carrying out the program at the State and local level.19 The purpose of this Act was to establish an effective program to alleviate conditions of substantial and persistent unemploya ment in certain economically distressed areas. 18'Statement of Scepe and Reaponsibility, The Cooperative Extension Service." Published by the Federal Extension Service, United States Department of.Agriculture, April, 1958. 19"Extension's Organizational and Educational Responsibilities in Administering the Area Redevelopment Act, (Public Law 87-27)." Manual prepared by the Federal Extension Service, United States Department of Agriculture. September, 1961. 26 Along with.this legislation the U. S. Department of Agriculture established the Rural Areas Development program also in June, 1961. The program was an expansion and reorganization of the earlier Rural Development pilot county program. Emphasis was given to economic develOpment, with particular attention to low-income areas, pockets of rural underemployment and places where resource deve10pment or adjustments were needed for continued economic growth. The central concern was for total economic development including enlarged and new industries, commercial enterprises, non-farm job Opportunities and improved agricultural development.20 Extension was assigned the organizational and leadership responsibility for this program also. As a result of these2many programs Extension workers have become more and more involved in community resource development. This discussion has attempted to show the evolutionary process of involving the Cooperative Extension Service in the economic resource development programs of the community. ‘Uith the growing list of problems confronting local governmentfand the concern that all local citizens,ghggl§,have for‘working‘with county officials to develop solutions, it may be most desirable fer the Extension Service to consider ways and means of directing its efforts toward helping 20"Suggested Guidelines for Extension's Organizational and Educational Responsibilities in the Rural Areas Development Program.“ Publication prepared by the Federal Extension Service, U.S.D.A.. June, 1961. 27 support and strengthen county government. Planning efforts that are organized separately from county sponsorship may only dilute the efforts of local peOple. Lacy made a study of Extension's program planning in a county ianisconsin. From the results of his study he makes the following comment: "From such a study, it is also possible that the implication may arise that the Extension Service needs to completely reorganize its thinking on program.plan- ning in relation to the over-all county needs. It.mmy be quite possible that Extension could best serve the planning needs of the county through integrating its planning into an over-all county planning effort. Instead of the Extension Service trying to involve all segments of the County in its planning, it may be possible that it could make its greatest contribution in meeting the real needs of the greatest ngmber of people by providing leadership in and becoming an intricate part of an over-all county planning effort from a broad base and at a higher level."21 21Micajah P. Lacy, 'An Analysis of Participation and Effects of Involvement in waupaca County,‘Wisconsin,' (Unpublished Pht D. Thesis Extension Administration, University of‘Wisconsin, 1961). CHAPTERIII Research Design Scopg 9; this Study This was an exploratory study designed to gather mg evidence that would reflect the attitudes of Supervisors of County Government concefning the amount of responsibility County Government should assume for economic development and the amount of time Extension M b; and iLdevoting to economic development. It was not expected that the results of this study would provide sufficient data to develop erg firm recommendations for making administrative decisions or changes in organizational policy. It was anticipated, however, that this study would provide some clues to trends and relationships that might interest some one to undertake a more comprehensive study. The future direction of Extension work could be vitally affected by the attitude and understanding of representa- tives of County Government . It was decided to confine this study to the State of Michigan because of the difficulty of making arrangements for such a study in other states where county governmental units are involved. W In the discussion in Chapters I and II it was indicated that county government has assumed responsibility for some new functions in recent years. It was also indicated that many new problems have 28 29 been develOping as a result of the changes referred to in the previous discussion. The solution of many of these problems depends upon some degree of economic development. One of the possible alternatives in solving these economic problems is for county government to assume a responsibility for promoting economic development and for the Extension Service to assist with promoting economic development. If this alternative is to have any significance it must be supported'by representatives of county government. Therefore, it was considered essential to find out from representatives of county government what their attitude was toward these responsibilities. It was also considered important to determine how County Extension Directors felt about these same questions. Another important feature of this study was to determine the attitude. of both Supervisors and Extension Directors concerning the way in which Extension should carry out its responsibility in economic development. Should this be carried out in support of county government or with other organizations in the county that may be involved in promoting economic development? In testing out the hypotheses that are concerned with measuring the value of the Extension program it was decided to ask District Extension Directors to indicate their opinions concerning the value placed by Supervisors of County Government on the respective county programs. A.summary of the kinds of information that was gathered is outlined as follows: 30 1. As Perceivg by Count! vaement a. Responsibility of County Government for economic development. b. Responsibility of Extension Service in working with County government on economic development. c. Responsibility of Extension Service in working with other organizations on economic development. d. Responsibility of Extension Service in working with other organizations and county government in economic development. e. Performance of Extension Service in working with county government on economic development. f. Performance of Extension Service in working with county government and other organizations on economic development. g. Performance of Extension Service in working with other organizations on economic development. h. ‘Value of Extension program as measured by'budget allocation for Extension work. 2. s Perce e C E an ac Variables‘g throughlg as shown for County Government. Bow The District Directors' conception of the value County Supervisors place upon the Extension program. F n o esti The questionnaires were formulated so they would reflect the attitudes of the respondents towards the information that was sought. Copies of all questionnaires are shown in the appendix. W1. A problem develOped in the formulation of the question seeking this information in the selection of words that would describe 31 the kind of action that county government could participate in as the economic development process is carried out. The phrase, ”planning for economic development," seemed to describe the desired process most effectively. However, resistance to the use of the word.p1aggigg seemed to be rather common. 'Visits with several Extension.Administrators indicated that some Supervisors of county government and Extension personnel had a negative reaction to the use of the word, planning. Further search of literature also substantiated this contention. Frank Suggitt reports in his thesis that planning fell into disrepute as a result of some of the governmental actions just before and following world Whr 11.1 Donald.Whtson also referred to the dangers involved in the use of the word planning when he says, FAs in so many fields of investigation in the social sciences, the commonly used key words applied to government's role in the economy have connotations of approval or dis- approval. Some words carry both overtones; it depends on who uses the words. Planning is a good example. This word is perhaps best avoided altogether except when it can be given a precise and wholly unambiguous meaning within an appropriate context."2 John Millett also mentions that planning is a controversial word. He says, "For twentyafive years it has been the object of bitter denunciation and enthusiastic endorsement. Like all words which epitomize conflicting social concepts, planning has different meanings and different uses. Even among those who find no terror in the idea, there is little agreement about the meaning of planning.'3 1Frank‘W} Suggitt,'Cooperative Area Analysis and Development as Applied to Michigan and its Environs.‘ (Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, Harvard University, 1956). p. 26. “Watson. 223.321". p- 6 3John D. Millett, e case a ni t o e e ‘Elgpgigg,' (Columbia university Press, 19475. p. l. 32 Therefore, the term that was selected to describe the county's method of carrying out its reSponsibility was expressed in terms of its providing financial assistance and encouraging organizational arrange- ments to promote economic develOpment. The question as finally formulated stated: The amount of responsibility that our Board of Supervisors should assume for providing financial assistance and encouraging organizational arrangements to promote economic develop- ment should be: Qaggtigg 2. ter ni e o '8 es n b e develogment. The reSponsibility of Extension in economic development for the purpose of this study was measured in terms of time spent in providing organizational help and information. Limiting the explanation of Extension's activities in economic development in terms of time spent in providing organizational help and information seems to provide a concept that was familar to Supervisors of County Government. Extension does participate in a much broader program of activities that could be classed under the category of economic development. In a number of counties Extension is assisting local organizations with research studies, area resource analysis and many other types of economic studies. The measure of the amount of time spent had to be evaluated by each individual answering the question according to how each individual relates time spent with Extension's responsibility or participation. The question as finally formulated was: I believe the amount of time our County Extension Staff should be spending in providing organizational help and information to assist our County Board of Supervisors in promoting economic develOpment should.be: 33 Questigg 3. n 5 ho 5515 S and othe o tio . An additional objective of this study was to determine if County Supervisors believe Extension should assist only Boards of Supervisors or if they should work with Boards of Supervisors and other organizations in promoting economic development. Other organizations were described as Chambers of Commerce, farm organizations, development committees, etc. This question then could be compared with the previous question which referred only to working with Boards of Supervisors. The question as formulated stated: I believe the amount of time our County Extension Staff should be spending in providing organizational help and information to assist our (1) County Board of Supervisors and (2) Other organizations in promoting economic development should be: In order to determine if Extension should work only with other organizations, another question was formulated that made no reference to Boards of Supervisors. This question as formulated stated: I believe the amount of time our County Extension Staff should be spending in providing organizational help and information to assist other organizations in their promotion of economic development should be: Qgggtigng 5, 6 and 7. DeterminingTSupervisors' opinions regarding Extension's performance in economic development These questions were formulated to obtain the attitudes of respondents on how Extension‘ig spending its time instead of how it shgplggbg spending 3“ its time. Otherwise the questions were organized the same as the previous three questions. ‘Qggstign 8. Vglge g; the Extensign pgggzgm In order to test the hypotheses that were formulated concerning the extent to which Supervisors would value the Extension program according to (a) the degree of responsibility they thought the county should assume, (b) the way they felt Extension should perform and (c) the way they thought Extension was performing in promoting economic development, a question had to be included that would express their Opinion regarding the value they placed upon the Extension program. It was thought that Supervisors think in terms of budgets and if they were willing to say that Extension's budget should be increased because of the kind of job Extension was doing they would be expressing a realistic attitude. From this reasoning the following question was developed: Considering the kind of job the Extension Service is doing in our County, if our Board of Supervisors had an Opportunity to adjust its budget allocation, in my opinion, it would be likely to feel that Extension's share of the budget should be: Increased greatly _____, Decrease some Increase some Decrease greatly Remain the same e Cou e c The first seven questions that were developed for Supervisors of County Government were also used to obtain opinions from County Extension.Directors. The questions were only changed so they would apply to the Extension Director instead of a Supervisor. 35 estio Di t ct en c Two questions were formulated for the purpose of securing additional evidence on how Supervisors value Extension programs. Since District Directors have considerable contact with Supervisors in worldng out budget arrangements and personnel changes it was thought that they would be a likely source for obtaining the additional evidence. The questions as formulated were: (1) Compared to other Counties in terms of financial condition in your opinion is County: very well supported, well supported, average, less than average or poorly supported. (2) Compared to other Counties do you feel the County Board of Supervisors in County regard the Extension program: very highly, highly, average, poorly, or very poorly. WW All questions were formulated so that the respondent could indicate how strongly he felt about the question. A five point scale was provided for the reapondent to select one of five choices for expressing his Opinion. The scale includes the following five categories: Large, fairly large, medium, fairly small, and small. Met e t o The questionnaires were mailed to the proposed respondents. In addition personal interviews were conducted in two counties to gain further insight into the attitudes and opinions of respondents . The personal interviews added to the detail of information and proved to be very helpful in explaining the attitudes of some of the Supervisors. The questionnaires were mailed out with a letter explaining the study and a self-addressed envelope was enclosed for returning the completed form. 36 he le qunties The counties in which this study was conducted were selected on the baiie of two factors: (1) Counties that had been designated Area RedevelOpment Act Counties before February 1, 1962; (2) Of these counties that had been designated AeReA. those that had a population between 10,000 and 50,000 as reported by the 1960 Census. The Area Redevelopment Act designation was used as one criterion because it was expected that County Supervisors in these counties would probably have had some opportunity to come in contact with programs related to economic development. The upper limit on the population factor‘was established to avoid large urban counties that are not typical of most counties in Michigan or most other States. These heavily populated urban counties have different problems than the more typical county in most States. Counties with less than 10,000 population were also eliminated because these counties do not have many of the type of prOblems that are found in counties with a combination of some urban developments and areas devoted largely to intensive agriculture. 'With these two sets of criteria it was possible to select twenty- three counties in Michigan as the potential counties to be included in the sample. A further precaution was also taken to try to avoid the danger of creating an unsatisfactory relationship problemrbetween Extension and the Board of Supervisors because of this study. Therefore, each County Extension Director in the twenty-three potential counties was asked if he knew of any reason the selected Supervisors should not be contacted 37 for the purpose of this study. The Extension Directors were also asked to submit the names and addresses of the selected Supervisors to assure correct mailing addresses. Four County Extension.Directors requested that their counties not be included in the study because of a possible danger they foresaw'in creating an unfavorable relationship problem between Supervisors and the County Extension Service. These counties were excluded from the sample to comply with the wishes of the County Directors. After the study was underwqy'it was also discovered that in one county two of the three selected Supervisors were out of the county for an extended period of time so it was also decided to exclude this county. This left eighteen counties for the sample. These counties are indicated on the map shown on the next page. Respgggegts l. Supervisors of County Government In selecting the Supervisors to be contacted in this study it was decided to select three in each of the counties. The three included (1) Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, (2) Chairman of the Agriculture Committee and (3)-Chairman of the‘Ways and.Means Committee. Generally speaking the Chairman of the County Board and Chairman of‘Ways and Means are Supervisors that have usually served for a longer period of time than some of the others. This should have provided them with an opportunity to experience different kinds of problems and to develop a broad under- standing of the needs and problems of county government. The Chairman of the Agriculture Committee was selected because he was likely to be vitally concerned about the role of the Extension Service since the Extension'budget and Extension program is usually worked out with the 0-1883 38 Figure 1. Map Showing Counties in Michigan.That were Included in This Study Shaded Counties represent sample Counties for this study iFWEWE at 75:00 Maw/7J0?- 155592-— . may . ALKASKA @3590. 050004 , ALGONA . I l I I _ - _- ' ..... ' - _ - _l _____ wsxrmo ,u/ssaurtfpioscou— beam I' /0500 NON ! I ! -_. _- ._L-__.J_- ._'._. MASON. LAKE [—0LME [0L WIN-Dam“ l ' ' - ' I ! .l—L HURON . .__._. _._-+-_. 34” was“ r00 1543a.” .4110; AND . ! ‘ . 3WD}: _. - _1__.—- —"1_ i ONTCALAI Eur/or 15‘0”” ' var-1 ' ' i __-_1_ _____ |____[?£M‘$E cram. - ION/A -0u~r0/v 'smmms-' I I l 55' ' _L-_-_l_._-_i_-__-_J.___J__f_(2}1KLA/v0 Moo—00‘. .EL'EGAN i BARRY tum/v i/NGHAM iuvwcyavi l Sic-IA); ' I L i |___,_'___.1_V-.-VL VAX/7971a}; -"A-r7L;1MA203—IEAL HOUN r—JACA :ON flawswnm I WAY/VF - ' ' ' i ._-_i-__,_J____ -L_- _f ..... , _, .. .l_0455 -57. 0055M, 0RA~07THILL 50/17:, LENAWEf .' MONROE ‘ BER/MW] [ l | i l I 1 I i ' —‘ l l 39 Agricultural Committee in most counties. With three Supervisors per county this provided a total of fifty-four potential respondents representing county government in the eighteen counties. Mission—ELM 09 The County Extension Directors in the selected eighteen counties were also requested to respond to a questionnaire. The District Extension.Directors who were responsible for the Extension program in the selected counties were also requested to complete a questionnaire. CHAPTER IV Analysis of data t s res e t Questionnaires were mailed to Supervisors of county government and County Extension Directors in March, 1962. The completed ques- tionnaires from a large percentage of the reapondents were received in a relatively short time. One follow-up letter was sent to twenty- two of the respondents two weeks after the first letter. Table 1 shows that seventy-nine percent of the Supervisors and ninety-four percent of the Extension workers completed questionnaires. Table 1: Number and percentages of returns of questionnaires Respondent Number sent Number returned Percentage Supervisors 9+ ’43 79% County Extension Directors 18 17 94% District Extension Directors 18(counties) 17(counties) 914% Total 90 77 85% abula o n e The questionnaires were coded by counties for tabulation of responses. The coding was by alphabetical identification and was arranged in a random arrangement to avoid disclosing the identityiof any specific county. The tabulation of responses on each question is shown on Appendix C. 41 Analysig of data The major objective of this study was to determine the attitudes of respondents toward each of the specific questions. Therefore, most of the analysis was involved.with summarizing the responses to the individual questions. ‘A statistical analysis was made of the responses of Supervisors compared.with the responses of the Extension.Directors. A further statistical analysis was made to determine any significant difference between responses when comparing certain questions with other questions. The Chi-square statistic was used for any analysis that involved the finding of significant differences. This made it necessary to combine categories of data to provide a sound analysis because of the small number of County Extension.Director responses. 'Dixon and Massey say that the sample size must be sufficiently large so that none of the Fi's (cells) is less than 1 and not more than twenty percent of the Fi's are less than 5.1 Therefore, all responses of large and fairly large 'wers combined in one cell. A five percent level of significance was used for determining significance. The responses to each question were summarized by number and percentage to show the attitudes of the respondents toward each specific question. These summaries are shown in tables that are included with a discussion of the responses to each question. gaggtigggl. The amount of responsibility that Boards of Supervisors should assume for providing financial assistance and encouraging organisational arrangements to promote economic development should be: 1Wilfred J. Dixon and Frank J. Massey, Jr. Igtggguction tg W. McGraw Hill Book Co. 1957. p. 222. 42 A.majority of the Supervisors and County Extension.Directors indicated that they thought Boards of Supervisors should assume medium.to fairly large responsibility for promoting economic development. There were seventybfive percent of the responses of Supervisors and sixty-four percent of the responses of the Directors in these two categories. The summary of responses are shown in Table 2. Table 2: Summary of responses on Question 1: The amount of responsibility that Boards of Supervisors should assume for economic development W ect NW mbe P6 hrs. lb 9.3 2 11e8 Fairly large 16 37.2 6 3503 Medium 16 37.2 5 29.1; mg, 4 9.3 1 5.9 Total #3 100.0% 17 100.0% :2 i .75 Not significant at five or ten percent level of significance.‘ *This analysis refers only to the comparison of attitudes of Supervisors and.Directors. There was no significant difference between the attitudes of the Supervisors and Directors when the responses were analyzed statistically at the five percent level of significance. The personal interviews were very useful in obtaining supporting evidence for the questionnaire. The feeling that Supervisors should assume a fairly large responsibility for economic development was strongly supported in the personal interviews with Supervisors. One Supervisor said, "There is a need for us to try to get some kind of organization going that will look after the interests of all the county. ‘He've tried to get a planning commission ’43 organized but some of the townships fought it because they 'were afraid of zoning regulations. ‘We've got people creating new subdivisions along several of our county roads and around our lakes. As soon as a few houses get built and some families move in, they want paved roads, new schools and fire protection. 'wo have to find some way to get more tax money." Another Supervisor said, “A lot of our people work outside of our county as we don't have any industry here. ‘We need more industry right here in County to help us out with our tax load. I don't think Supervisors have any choice but to promote economic development.“ Another one commented, "we have to try to get people to do more things for themselves and not depend on the government for everything. Guess we have to help convince them though how to do things for themselves. I've been a Supervisor for nearly twenty years and the job sure has changed a lot the last few years.‘I The visits with the Supervisors would indicate they feel a strong sense of responsibility for trying to help. They feel the pressure on one side to provide the services people want and on the other side the resistance toward increased taxes. They seem to need help and guidance as often they have not had the experience and training to cope with this responsibility. One Supervisor was hoping more people would live in his township and commute to work in the next county. He looked at the new homes as increased tax base. Another Supervisor was lamenting the fact that people were developing new subdivisions and building homes in his township because this created a much greater need for tax dollars to furnish the needed services than the increased tax base provided. These problems all seem to take planning, group action and understanding. Supervisors are concerned and probably want to help but are reluctant to ask for it and probably do not know what kind of help they need. These people have status and are looked to for leadership and they would like very much to provide the leadership. Qgestiog 2: The amount of time the County Extension staff should be spending in providing organizational help and information to assist County Boards of Supervisors in promoting economic development should be: The majority of Supervisors and Directors feel that Extension should be spending a medium to fairly large amount of time in this way. Over sixty-five percent of the Supervisors and seventy-six percent of the Extension Directors checked one of these two categories when they expressed their opinion. The other responses were about equally divided between the large and fairly small and small scale groupings. There was also no significant difference between the responses of Supervisors and Directors on this question. Table 3: Summary of responses on Question 2: The amount of time Extension should be spending in assisting Boards of Supervisors in promoting economic development W 21.132223 number szgent. Number Percent Large 7 16.3 2 11.8 Fairly large 15 34.9 4 23.5 Fairly small 6 13.9 1 5.9 .§gall 2 n.2, i 5.9 Total 1+3 100.0% 17 100.0% x2 = 2.77 Not significant at five or ten percent level of significance’ *Refers to analysis comparing reaponses of Supervisors with responses of Directors. Interviews with Supervisors also indicate that they feel Extension should be devoting a medium to fairly large amount of time in assisting ‘with economic development. Occasionally'a Supervisor would differ with this attitude. One Supervisor thought Extension should be spending a 45 lot more time than is currently the case in working with the county government on problems of subdivision, zoning and recreational develop- ment. He said the Extension Director had all that help from the University available and they should be getting more use from this source. Extension also had experience in working with groups and this was essential in solving many county problems today. He also recognized the Extension staff in his county was heavily overworked and probably more staff would‘be needed before they could expect more help. One Supervisor was very much opposed to Extension working on economic development unless this was just with farmers. He said farmers still needed a lot of help. lnother commented, "I am glad to see the Extension office get this new government program (A.R.A.) going to get local people to try to do something for themselves. Maybe this committee that we appointed to work with the Extension.Director can really represent all parts of the county. ‘We never had that kind of committee before, usually one section of the county is always fighting the other areas. This committee might be able to get some money to improve some of our lakes for fishing and boating. That'll bring in more business and tax dollars.“ Another comment suggested that it was a good idea for Extension to work for promoting economic development as long as the “-3 program was not neglected. nggtignVB: The amount of time the County Extension staff should be spending in providing organizational help and information to assist the (1) County Boards of Supervisors and (2) Other organizations in promoting economic develOpment should be: Thirty-one percent of the Supervisors said Extension should spend a large amount of time and thirty-three percent said fairly large, while forty-seven percent of the Directors thought Extension should spend a medium amount of time and twenty-nine percent said a fairly large amount of time in assisting either or both County Supervisors and other organizations in economic development. There was a significant difference at the five percent level of significance between responses of Supervisors and Extension Directors on this question, with Supervisors indicating a more active role for Extension. The reaponses are summarized in Table h. Table 4: Summary of responses on Question 3: The amount of time Extension should be Spending in assisting County Boards of Supervisors and other organizations to promote economic develOpment More 21mm Number Percent Number Percent Large 13 30e9 1 ‘ 5e9 Fairly large 14 33.3 5 29.“ Fairly small 5 11.9 3 17.6 §m§;l, .3 7.2 O 0 Total 112 100.0% 12 100L x2 = 6.27 Significant at five percent level .A separate analysis was made by comparing responses of Supervisors on Question two and three and there was no significant difference which would indicate that Supervisors feel that Extension should work with both Boards and other organizations or either one alone. Questigg u. The amount of time the County Extension staff should be spending in providing organizational help and information to assist other organizations in promoting economic develOpment should be: Sixty-nine percent of the Supervisors thought Extension should be spending a fairly large or large amount of time compared to seventeen percent of the Extension.Directors on this question. There was a very significant difference in bpinion between the two groups, with Supervisors 1+7 again indicating a more active role for Extension. Apparently the Supervisors are very anxious for Extension to work with other organizations if it helps promote economic development. In comparing Supervisors responses between Question two and this question there was no significant difference. The summary of responses to this question are shown in Table 5. Table 5: Summary of reaponses on Question 4: Amount of time Extension should be Spending in assisting other organizations in promoting economic deveIOpment W W Ngmber Percent Nggper Percent Large 12 28.6 1 5.9 Fairly large 17 #9.#' 2 11.8 Medium 5 11.9 7 41.2 Fairly small 5 11.9 h 23-5 Small .3 7.2 3 l7g§w Total 112 W 100.02% 12 100% x2 = 13.56 Highly significant at the five percent level of significance Qaggtigp 5. The amount of time Extension is spending in.providing organizational help and information to assist the Board of Supervisors in promoting economic develOpment is: Almost forty percent of the Supervisors said they thought Extension was spending a medium amount of time and anotheb thirty-seven percent said a fairly small or small amount of time was being spent by Extension in assisting Boards of Supervisors on economic development. Extension Directors were in.agreement with Supervisors. Fifty-three percent said they were spending a fairly small to small amount of time. There was no significant difference between the responses of Supervisors and County Directors. The summary of reSponses are shown on Table 6. An analysis was made of reaponses of both Supervisors and Directors regarding their opinions of what Extension should be doing (Question 2) and is doing (Question 5). There was a significant difference between these responses which would indicate that both groups feel Extension should be doing more than they are doing in assisting County Boards and other organizations to promote economic development. Table 6: Summary of responses on Question 5: Amount of time Extension is spending in assisting Boards of Supervisors to promote economic develOpment W 1.31.12.91.21: N2.._r_____r__imbe Pa can NW Large 3 7.0 h 23.6 Fairly large 7 16.3 1 5.9 Medium 17 39.5 3 17.6 Fairly small 10 23.3 6 35-3 Small 6 13.9 a 17.5 'rggl 43 100.0% 17 100 .0% x2 = 2.81 Not significant at the five percent level of significance Qgggtigp 6. The amount of time the County Extension staff is Spending in providing organizational help and information to assist the (1) Boards of Supervisors and (2) Other organizations in promoting economic develOpment is: About forty—two percent of the Supervisors said medium.and thirty percent said fairly small to small in expressing their opinions on the amount of time Extension is spending to assist both County Boards and other organizations. Extension Directors were in fairly close agreement with about thirty percent saying fairly small, thirty percent medium and thirty percent fairly large. Statistically there was no significant difference at the five percent level of significance. The summary of responses on this question are shown on Table 7. 49 Table 7: Summary of reSponses on Question 6: Amount of time Extension is Spending in assisting Boards of Supervisors and other organizations to promote economic deve10pment Supervisors Qizggtgrg Number Percent Number Pergegt Large 5 11.6 1 5.9 Fairly large 7 16.3 5 29.4 Medium 18 41.9 5 29.4 Fairly small 7 16.3 5 29.4 Sam; 1 13.9 1 5.9 293.1 43 1001093 17 m0.05% x2 = .78 Not significant at five or ten percent level of significance In comparing the responses of Supervisors on this question with Question five there was no significant difference at the five percent level of significance. Supervisors see Extension as working with both Boards of Supervisors and other organizations. Quegtign,7. The amount of time the County Extension Staff is spending in providing organizational help and information to assist other organizations in promoting economic development is: The responses of both Supervisors and Directors were distributed up and down the scale. Comparing the two groups there was no significant difference between the two at the five percent level of significance. Responses are summarized on Table 8. Tgple 8. Summary of the reaponses on Question 7: Amount of time Extension is assisting other organizations to promote economic deve10pment We: 69 Numper Percent Number Percent Large 7 16.3 1 6.0 Fairly large 12 27.9 4 23.5 Medium 12 27.9 4 23.5 Fairly small 10 23.3 4 23.5 §m§QJL gL_ 4.6 4 23.5 Tafigl 43 100.9% 17 109.9% x = 2.40 -Not significa nt at five or ten percent level of significance 50 The responses of Supervisors on this question were also compared with responses on Question five and no significant difference was found at the five percent level of significance. Qpegtigp 8. Value of Extension programs Supervisors were asked to indicate how they thought the budget for Extension would be adjusted based upon the kind of 30b that Extension was doing in their county. A.majority (53.5%) said it should be increased some. .A few comments were written by the Supervisors and several were received in interviews on this question. Some said they thought budgets should be increased in line with the general increase in cost of office expense and travel. Two of the responses said the staff needed more help if they were going to have time to do any economic deve10pment work. Two Supervisors apparently were not very well satisfied with certain Extension staff members in their county and thought'by decreasing the budget some changes might occur. District Directors were asked to reapond on how they thought the Supervisors valued the Extension program. They were in very close agreement. There was no significant differences between their responses and those of the Supervisors. .A summary of reaponses is given in Table 9. Table 9: Summary of responses on Question 8: The value of Extension work measured by'adjustments that should be made in the Extension budget W W _gmber Forge opt Number Pergegt Increase greatly" 1, 2.3 4 23.6 Increase some 23 53.5 9 52.9 Remain the same 14 32.5 3 17.6 Decrease some 4 9.4 1 5.9 Mile 1 231 0 0 19m 43 100.o§____17 1.991%... :2 a 2.15 No significant difference at 5% level of significance ..... 51 According to these responses the District Directors were able to sense the attitudes of Supervisors toward the Extension program to a fairly high degree of reliability. C-wp-e ‘0! 0- 9:00 633181- 9: w t 05-115 on 3.3.“. .; d.’ ', : . 3 WW Responses of Supervisors and Extension Directors were analyzed separately on the questions relating to the amount of time Extension is spending in providing organizational help and information to assist Boards of Supervisors in promoting economic deve10pment. The comparison of the responses of Supervisors gave a x2 value of 7.68 and the responses of the Extension Directors gave a x2 value of 7.16 on these questions. Both values are significant at the five percent level of significance. This analysis indicates that Supervisors and Extension Directors think that Extension should be Spending more time on economic deve10pment. An analysis was also made on the questions relating to the amount of time Extension should be spending and is spending in assisting Boards of Supervisors and other organizations. A comparison of responses of Supervisors on these questions gave a x2 value of 11.94-which was highly significant. This further substantiates the feeling that Super- visors think Extension should be devoting more time to economic develOp- ment. One County Extension Director commented, IThe work with A.R.A. committees has been some of the most productive work I have done. If itskeeps moving along as it is at present, it should lead to a planning commission. This would help strengthen the work of County government in this County. I just wish I could spend more time working with these programs and with Supervisors but I am worried how the farmers would feel. Exten- sion does have experience in helping organizations plan and deve10p local leadership, but can.we keep our support if we spend less time on agriculture?" 52 The comments expressed by this Extension worker are probably representative of how many feel as they have been reluctant to devote more time to programs in community and economic development because of the risk they take of endangering support for Extension work. Supervisors from two different counties mentioned that a local farm organization appears before the Agricultural Committee of the Board of Supervisors each year to discuss the budget for Extension work. This farm organization expressed a strong feeling that Extension should continue to devote its efforts primarily to agriculture. Tegting 9f hypgthegeg The major emphasis of this study was concerned with measuring the attitudes of reSpondents toward the specific questions included in this study. This analysis has been summarized in the preceding discussion in this Chapter. A secondary objective of this study was to test two hypotheses. The first hypothesis was stated as follows: Generally the attitudes of County Extension Directors will be in agteement with the attitudes of Supervisors of County government regarding the responsi- bility of County government and Extension for economic development. This hypothesis was fairly well supported by the evidence gathered in this study. There was a significant difference between attitudes of Supervisors and Extension.Directors in only two cases. Hypothesis two (2) actually consists of a series of sub-hypotheses which were formulated to test if a prediction could be made of the value of the Extension program according to (a) the amount of reaponsibility Supervisors thought County Boards should have for economic deve10pment and (b) the amount of responsibility Supervisors thought Extension should have for economic development. Depending then, on the amount of time SuperVisors perceived Extension was spending in economic development, 53 they would rate the Extension program in terms of how they felt by indicating adjustments in the Extension budget. Each of these sub- hypothesee is described separately in the following paragraphs, and a conclusion drawn from this discussion. These sub-hypotheses are also listed on Table 10 with the actual value as expressed by the Supervisors. In order to scale the questions into high, medium and low categories to test these sub-twpotheses, the responses of Supervisors were given a numerical scale: small = 1, fairly small = 2, medium = 3, fairly large = it and large = 5. The responses of Supervisors from a given county were averaged tagether and the responses classified into high, medium and low groupings. If the average value of the responses of Supervisors from a given county was over 3%, it was classified in the high group, from 2%- to 3% inclusive in the medium group and below 2% in the low group. Each of these sub-hypotheses is described in the following discussion along with the results of this study. 2a. If county governing boards consider that county government has a high responsibility for economic development and Extension has a high responsibility and Extension's performance is m then they will rate the Extension program as having a medium value. The Supervisors in Counties B, H, I and H shown on Table 10 rated the independent variables according to this hypothesis. The prediction according to this hypothesis was that they would rate the Extension pregram as medium, but three of the four gave the Extension program a high value so this hypothesis was not well supported. 2b. If they consider County government as having a £131; responsibility and Extension as having a 23.3.12 responsibility but Extension has a log performance. then they will give the Extension pregram a 12‘! value. Only County R was in this category and instead of giving this county a low Table 10: Testing of sub-lupotheses concerned with comparing the predicted value of Extension's program with actual value of Extension' s program in the sample counties Independent Variables Dependent Variable j (a) (b) (c) Reeponsibility Responsibility Performance Predicted Actual Count of of of Value of Value of County Gov. htension Extension Extension Mansion A Medium Medium Medium Medium High B High High Medium Medium High D Medium High High High High 3 Medium Medium Medium Medium High 1" Medium Medium Law Law Law G Medium Medium Law In Medium H High High Medium Medium High I High High Medium Medium hdium J Medium Low Lee Medium Medium I Low Medium Medium Medium Medium I. Medium High High High Medium M High High Medium Medium High M Medium Medium High Medium Medium 0 Medium Medium Medium Medium High P Low Medium Law Low Medium B High High Low Low High 3 Medium Medium Low low Medium '1' Medium Medium Low Low High 55 value the Supervisors gave it a high value, so from this one example this hypothesis was not supported. 2c. If Supervisors consider County governmnent has a m9§_i_u_m responsibility and Extension a high responsibility and Extension has a high performance they will rate Extension mighly. Supervisors in Counties D and L rated the independent variables according to this hypothesis. County D rated their Extension program may; and County 12. rated theirs edi n, so again from this small sample this hypothesis was only partially supported. 2d. If Supervisors consider County government has a megiym responsibility and Extension has E95331! responsibility and Extension is performing w. they will give the Extension program a m value. Only County N fell in this category and the Supervisors did rate their Extension program @- 2e. If Supervisors consider that County government has a mggimm responsibility and Extension has a m_e_d_i__um responsibility and Extension's performance is 21.19.91.132. then the Supervisors will rate Extension's program as mgdimm. Supervisors in Counties A, E and O scaled the independent variables according to this hypothesis, but Supervisors in all three counties rated the htension program highly. Therefore this hypothesis was not supported. 2f. If Supervisors consider County government has a mgiimm responsibility and Extension has a medium responsibility and Extension‘s performance is 1,91, then they will rate the Extension program Log. Counties F, G, and S and T were in this category. Supervisors in County F rated their Extension program 193; in Counties G and S they 56 rated Extension as m and in T they rated the program high so again this hypothesis was not well supported. 2g. If Supervisors consider County government as having a m§_c_1_imm responsibility and Extension as having a Leg responsibility and 1.91 performance they will rate Extension mm to highly. Only Supervisors in J County were in this category and they rated Extension as m. 2h. If Supervisors consider the County Board has a 193; responsibility and Extension a mflum responsibility, and Extension's performance is m, then the Extension program will receive a megimm rating. Only Supervisors in K County rated the independent variables in this manner, and they gave Extension a 33% rating. 2i. If Supervisors consider the County has a 193 responsibility and Extension a mew responsibility and Extension's performance is 1 , they will rate Extension 3:33. Only Supervisors in P County were in this category and they rated Extension as m. These subohypotheses were not well supported or only partially supported. When they were not supported the Supervisors valued Extension higher in all counties except one than the predicted value. Apparently Supervisors have a high regard for Extension work and evaluate Extension on its partinipation in agriculture, tin-H, and Home Economics programs along with consideration of such factors as the size of staff, work loads. and a variety of other factors that were not measured in this study. This assumption was also supported in personal interviews with several Supervisors. One Supervisor said, “Our Extension Director isn't doing as much work in planning and helping with improvement of economic conditions as we would like to see, but we know he is working about twenty hours a day 57 now and there is a limit to what one man can do. “we need another County Agent to work mostly with the farmers so can spend more time on these other things." Another Supervisor said, "Our Extension staff works mostly with farmers. The farmers are taxpayers and what is good for them is good for County. 'we, Supervisors, have a lot of problems with these developments going in around our lakes, but I don't think Extension Agents would be much help to us with these problems, they are used to working with farm problems.‘ Comments on several questionnaires mentioned that budgets should increase in line with the general level of increased costs of maintaining offices which indicates that they thought budgets should be increased in line with general economic conditions and not particularly because of the responsibility or performance of Extension on economic development. CHAPTER.V7 Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations Susan This was an exploratory study to determine attitudes of Supervisors of County Government in Michigan concerning the amount of responsibility County Government should assume in promoting economic development and their attitudes on how much time the Extension Service should.be spending and is spending in economic deve10pment}. Opinions relating to this same information were also obtained from County Extension Directors. Strengthening the economic base of the county or community is a major objective of many local organizations and governmental units. The desire is to provide added employment opportunities and increase the tax base to help support the increasing demand for public services and facili- ties. Changes are occurring in industry and agriculture at a rapid rate. Certain industries become obsolete or uneconomical because of new technol- ogy, new competitive products or because of comparative disadvantage in relation to other areas. Employees in these industries must shift to new occupations and during the transition period local communities experience distress. The rapid changes in agriculture are forcing operators of small units or operators with limited resources to seek off-farm.employ- ment. Many local communities have a large percentage of farm families that must have some off-farm employment in order to provide for the family'needs. Other changes are occurring in the local communities that are a concern to County governments. urban residents are flocking to the suburbs. New subdivisions are being created in ever increasing numbers 58 59 outside of incorporated cities. The residents in these newly developed areas desire the same services that are available to the urban resident in the densely populated areas. Costs of water, sanitation, roads, schools and fire protection are much greeted per family unit in sparsely pepulated suburbs. The result is that County Government is receiving increasing pressure to solve these problems. Before any substantial progress can.be expedted in solving these problems the representatives of County Government must feel a concern or recognize a responsibility for helping to solve these problems. They must recognize and assume this responsibility before they will be willing to support or sponsor programs that promote economic development. The Cooperative Extension Service has also committed a large share of its resources to community development at the National and State levels. The amount of involvement of the Extension Service at the local level, however, will depend to a large degree upon the attitudes of the representatives of County Government since Extension is sponsored by County'units of County Government under cooperative agreements with State Extension Offices. Therefore, it has been the objective of this study to provide some evidence that will show what attitudes County Boards of Supervisors have toward the amount of responsibility that Counties should assume for economic development and the amount of reaponsibility they think Extension should be taking in economic development. The COOperative Extension Services throughout the Nation are continually stfiiving to improve their effectiveness in serving the needs of the people. It is in this effort that this study was undertaken so that the information it provides may help Extension continue to serve a valuable role in the future. 60 The study was conducted in eighteen counties in Michigan. The respondents in each of these counties included three Supervisors of County Government and the County Extension Director. The survey was carried on through a mailed questionnaire and with personal interviews conducted in two of these counties. W The major purpose of this study was to determine the attitudes of Supervisors of County Government toward their responsibilities and the responsibilities of the Extension Service in economic development. In terms of this purpose the following conclusions have been formulated from the results of the study: 1. Of the Supervisors who responded over seventy percent thought that the Board of Supervisors should assume a medium or fairly large responsibility for promoting economic development. Sixty-five percent of the Extension Directors also thought the Board of Supervisors should assume a medium or fairly large responsibility for promoting economic deve10pment. 2, In considering the amount of time Extension should be spending in assisting County Boards of Supervisors with economic development over eighty percent of the Supervisors said Extension should be spending a medium, fairly large or large amount of time. Over ninety percent of the Extension Directors responses were in these same three categories on this question. There was a difference of Opinion between Supervisors and Extension Directors on the questions referring to the amount of time Extension should be working with Boards of Supervisors and other organizations or 61 other organizations alone as compared to working with Boards of Super- visors alone. Over sixty-four percent of the Supervisors thought Extension should be spending a fairly large or large amount of time assisting Boards of Supervisors ggg other organizations compared to thirty-five percent of the Extension Directors. Sixty-nine percent of the Supervisors thought Extension should be spending a fairly large or large amount of time assisting other organizations with promoting economic deve10pment. Only seventeen percent of the Extension Directors' responses were in the fairly large and large categories. 3. The Supervisors were also asked to express their opinion on the amount of time they thought Extension was spending in assisting with economic deve10pment. On this question seventy-five percent of the Supervisors eiid Extension was spending a small, fairly small or medium amount of time. The responses from.Extension Directors indicated they ‘were of about the same opinion. u. The attitudes of Supervisors and Extension Directors indicate they think that Extension should be spending more time in assisting with promoting economic development than Extension has been spending. 5. The Supervisors indicated by their responses that it didn't make any difference if Extension carried out its responsibility in economic development by assisting Boards of Supervisors or by assisting other organizations such as Chambers of Commerce, farm organizations or. in working with Supervisors and other organizations. 6. Two hypotheses were tested in this study. The first hypothesis indicated that the attitudes of County Extension.Directors would be in agreement with the attitudes of the Supervisors of County Government. 62 This hypothesis was well supported in this study. The second hypothesis was concerned with the value placed upon the Extension program according to the degree of responsibility Supervisors thought the county should assume along with the way they felt Extension should be performing and was performing in assisting with promoting economic development. Sub-hypotheses were formulated for the purpose of testing this hypothesis. This hypothesis was only partially supported. Apparently Supervisors evaluate Extension on its participation in agriculture, h-H and Home Economics programs along with such factors as size of staff, work loads and a variety of factors that were not measured in this study. lasaiaiiaaa_af_ihia_aiudy There are several limitations that must be recognized.when interpreting the results of this study. The Supervisors from the sample counties gre probably more aware of the prOblems of unemployment or other signs of economic distress than might have been the case if the sample counties had been selected in a strictly random basis since all sample counties were designated as eligible for benefits under the Area Redevelopment Act (Public Law 87-27). It is unknown whether this factor would have any influence on the attitudes of these Supervisors toward economic development. The selected Supervisors were probably the more experienced members of the County Board because of their position as Chairman of important committees. Their attitudes may be influenced by their experience and responsibility as Chairmen of these committees. 63 The attitudes of Supervisors regarding Extension 's participation in economic development could also be influenced by the image they have of Extension work where its activities have traditionally been devoted to agriculture, home economics and h—H. The part of this study devoted to determining the value placed upon the Extension program by the Supervisors is limited to the one variable of economic development. It is recognized other variables have an influence in affecting the attitudes of Supervisors of County government. Recognizing these limitations. however, this study should still provide reliable evidence of how Supervisors feel.when they are con- fronted with the kind of problems found in the sample counties. W 1. This study points out that both Supervisors and Extension Directors believe that County Government should assume a fairly large responsi- bility for economic develOpment. Extension can probably make a major contribution toward helping to achieve this objective by devoting more of its efforts in this direction. A number of County Directors are doing this now. This prdbably means that Extension should assume a supportive role by helping Supervisors to assume greater leadership responsibilities and receive the recognition associated with any programs undertaken. This may create concern on the part of some Extension workers to shift the recognition and leadership responsibility to County Supervisors; however, they may actually strengthen their posi- tion in the long run. Ernest Kelby points out that this principle is 6h especially important for educational administrators. He says the school administrator may feel he is losing prestige by serving behind the scenes as a catalytic agent. However, when this approach is really understood it will become clear that the administrator has actually moved from a low order of leadership to a much higher order of perfor- mance. This role takes more skill and competence but this process of creative development of local people is a high order of leadership.1 Extension has enjoyed many successful experiences in this role and this may be the time to devote much greater'emphasis to this role. The A.R.A. and R.A~D. programs provide a useful vbhicle for Extension to gain experience and proficiency in carrying out this concept. 2. Supervisors seem to feel a need for more factual information about their county. They mentioned in the interviews that they knew changes were occurring, but lacked knowledge on the rate of change and trends to help them anticipate future needs. Projects such as the one being conducted by Kimball and Steinlueller should be of valuable assistance to Boards of Supervisors.2 This project is designed to assist the county in conducting an inventory of its resources for purposes of guiding future development. 1Ernest O. Kelby, Administeging Cgmmunity Eggcgtigg, (Prentice- Hall, Inc., 1955). pl 249. 2William J. Kimball and Milton H. Steinmueller, "Guides for local Community Resource Inventorying and Development,” Experiment Station project 630, Michigan State University. 65 3. Several Supervisors admitted they were not experienced in working with groups of people. Many of the problems they face require group understanding and action for solution. Here is an area where Extension has competency and probably can be most effective in helping County Boards with their prOblems. Therefore. it is recommended that Extension undertake some educational programs to help Supervisors through training programs in communication skills, decision-making processes and group dynamics. Studies need to be conducted first to determine the kinds of help that will be most useful for Supervisors and second to determine how to encourage Supervisors to take part in such educational programs. u. Several County Extension staffs in Michigan are doing a good job in working with Boards of Supervisors and County planning commissions to help the County government become more effective. These experiences should be evaluated for the lessons they can provide in guiding the future direction of the Cooperative Extension Service. BIBLIOGRAPHY Bookg Dixon, Wilfrid J., and Massey, Frank J., Jr., Intmductigg t3 Stattgtica; Analysts, McGraw-Hill Book Company. 1957. Hardin. Charles Ho. min Assigning; Mamas. University of Chicago 37, Illinois, 1955. Melby, Ernest 0., Administering Community Education, Prentice—Hall, Inc., 1955. Millott. John Du The _____§Proces and. W 91 Easement Flaming, Columbia University Press, l9h7. Nelson, Lowry; Ramsey, Charles; Verner, Coolie. W Strucgge m 9.1353389 MacMillan Compazv, 1960. Snider, Clyde F., Anegtcag State gm Local Cavernmegt. Appleton and Century Crafts, Inc., 1950. Steiner, George A., Goveleegt'g 3919 in Eggnog; 14:3. McGraw- Hill Book Company. 1953. Tolley, Howard R., _Tt_e_ Fame; Citizen 9.1 1181;. MacMillan Company, 19143. Wager, Baul W., m Government Agrgss thg Nattgg. University of North Carolina Press, 1950. Watson, Donald S., Ecgngmc PM: mstness _a_n_c_i_ Mat. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Comparv, 1960. e Pe ca Cook, Louis 11., Emeggegce 9:. m Sam” M. National Municipal Review, Vol. 44, No. 10. 1955. Miller. Paul An W ___dNeede in mm W W. Journal of Farm Economics, Vol. )CLI, December, 1959 . Public Administration Service, The Changgg Qmmty. National Municipal Review, Vol. 45, October, 1956. \4 Wallace, Henry A., _T_h_§ Future 91 th_e_ m M. The New Republic, November 8, 1939. 67 3.9mm Extgggtgntg,Orgggtzattoggl gpg_§dtggtiona; Rgsggggtbitttteg‘tn mm tte glee Develognent Apt (Public Law 87-27). Manual prepared by the Federal Extension Service, United States Department of Agriculture, September, 1961. Goalg‘tg;.Amegtgag§,, Report of the President's Commission on National Goals. Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1960. I MarquiS. Stewart. ___rXSuma 9f ._.._the Michigan flaming Macias £910.. Institute for Community DevelOpment, Michigan State University Tech. Bull. A-19. December, 1960. Stgtgmggt gt Scopg gag Respgnsibility—-The Coopgtgtive Egtgggtgfi Seggtg . Published by the Federal Extension Service U. S. D. A., April , 1958 . Stggestgg Guidettngs‘tgg,Extegstog'g_Ozganizatigngt.ggg’Eduggttgna; We in the. Banal Areas Easement- Publication prepared by the Federal Extension Service, United States Department of Agriculture. June, 1961. W Ferver, Jack, 'An.Ana1ysis of the Behavior of County Extension Directors as Coordinators of Michigan State University Community Development Programs.” An unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1961. Huffman, G. H., ”Relationship Between Program Projection and Rural DevelOpment.' Paper presented before Extension Director's meeting, August, 1960. Kimball, William J. and Steinmueller, Milton H., “Guides for Local Community Resource Inventorying and.DevelOpment." Experiment Station Project 630, Michigan State University. Lacy, Micajah, 'An Analysis of Participation and Effects of Involve- ment in waupaca County'Wisconsin.” Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis Extension Administration, University of Wisconsin, 1961. Sower, Christopher , "External Development Organization and the Locality." A paper prepared for presentation at the Joint Meetings of the American Sociological Society and the Rural Sociological Society, September, 1959. ' 68 Sower, Christopher and Miller, Paul A., "Changing Pewer Structure in Agriculture and Rural Society." Paper presented at the annual meetings of the Rural Sociological Society, Ames, Iowa. August 27-29, 1961. Suggitt, Frank‘W;, "Cooperative Area Analysis and Development as Applied to Michigan and its Environs.” Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, Harvard University, 1956. United States Department of Agriculture Memorandum No. 1hh8 as revised June 16, 1961. APPENDICES gppendix A: Hypotheses formulated by using all possible combinations of independent variables Independent Variables —— Dependent Variable (8) Responsibility of County Gov. (b) Responsibility of Extension (C) Performance of Extensior I Value of Extension High High High High High High High High High Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium {edium Medium Medium iedium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low High High High Medium Medium Medium Low Low Low High High High Medium Medium Medium low low Low High High High Medium Medium Medium Low Low Low High Medium Low High Medium Low High Medium Low High Medium low High Medium Low Hig Medium Low High Medium Low High Medium Low High Medium Low High Medium Low Medium Medium Medium Low Medium Medium High Medium Low Medium Medium Low Low Medium Medium Medium Medium low Low Medium Low Low Low Medium 7O Appendix B-1 To: Supervisors of County Government The purpose of this questionnaire is to obtain your opinion as a Supervisor regarding the following questions. Each Supervisor will have his own ideas, so there is no right or wrong answer to any of these questions. The study will give an idea of what the majority of Supervisors, that were contacted, think about these questions. The information from individual questionnaires will be kept confidential. Only the summary of the information will be available in a report. There are several choices with each question so please check the one choice that most nearly agrees with your ideas. Words that are important to watch for are underlined as they help to show the difference in the questions. l. The amount g£_responsibility that our Board of Supervisors should assume for providing financial assistance and encouraging organizational arrangements to promote economic development should be: Large Fairly small Fairly large ' Small Medium Other (Questions 2, 3, h ask how much time do you think Extension should bg_spending.) 2. I believe the amount 9: time our County Extension Staff should bg_spending in providing organizational help and information to assist our County Board 9£_ Supervisors in promoting economic development should be: Large Fairly small Fairly large Small Medium Other 3. I believe the amount of time our County Extension Staff should be spending in providing organizatiofial help and information to assist our (1) County Board of Supervisors and (2) Other organizations (Chambers of Commerce, farm organizations, development committees, etc.) in promoting economic development should be: Large Fairly small Fairly large Small Medium Other h. I believe the amount of time our County Extension Staff should be_spending in providing organizatiofial help and information to assist (1) other organizations (Chambers of Commerce, farm organizations, development committees, etc.) in promoting economic development should be: Large Fairly small Fairly large Small Medium Other 71 -2- (Questions 5, 6 and 7 ask how much time do you think Extension lg spgnding.) 5. I think the amount of time our County Extension Staff is spending in providing organization help and information to assist our Board of Supervisors in promoting economic development i§_: Large Fairly small Fairly large Small Medium Other I think the amount 9: time our County Extension Staff i§_spending in providing organizational help and information to assist our (1) Board of Supervisors and (2) Other organizations (Chambers of Commerce, farm organi- zations, development committees, etc.) in promoting economic development ig: Large Fairly large Medium Fairly small Small Other 7. I think the amount gf_time our County Extension Staff is spending in providing organizational help and information to assist (1) other organizations (Chambers of Commerce, farm organizations, development committees, etc.) in promoting economic development is; Large Fairly large Medium Fairly small Small Other 8. Considering the kind 9:.Q29 the Extension Service is doing in our County, if our Board of Supervisors had an opportunity to adjust its budget allocation, in my opinion, it would be likely to feel that Extension' 5 share of the budget should be: Increased greatly Increased some Remain the same Decreased some Decreased greatly Other 22_not sign. Please return this qgestionnaire 12 the enclosed self—addressed envelope §§ soon §§_possible. Thank you. M. S. U. Project No. _ Appendix B-2 'To: County Extension Directors There are several choices with each question, so please check the one choice that most nearly agrees with your ideas. With this type of quesEiSn there is no right or wrong answer as everyone will have different Opinions. fThe information from the individual questionnaires will be kept confidential ‘by the student conducting this study. The analysis of the information compiled from the study will be published in a thesis. Since several questions are very similar, certain words are underlined to call attention to the differences in the questions and to important parts of the question. l. The amount of responsibility that our Board of Supervisors should assume for providing financial assistance and encouraging organizational arrange- ments £2 promote economic development should be: Large Fairly small Fairly large Small Medium Other (Questions 2, 3 and h ask how much time do you think Extension should be spending) 2. I believe the amount of time our County Extension Staff should be spending in providing organizational _help and information to assist our County Board of Supervisors in their promotion of economic development should be: Large Fairly small Fairly large Small Medium Other 3. I believe the amount of time our County Extension Staff should be spending in providing organizational help and information to assist our (1) County Board of Supervisors and (2) Other organizations (Chambers of Commerce, farm organizations, development committees, etc.) in their promotion of economic deve10pment should be: Large Fairly small Fairly large Small Medium Other h. I believe the amount of time our County Extension Staff should be spending in providing organizational help and information to assist (1) other organizations (Chambers of Commerce, farm organizations, development committees, etc.) in their promotion of economic development should be: Large Fairly small Fairly large Small Medium Other 72 -2- (Questions 5, 6 and 7 ask how much time do you think Extension is spending.) I think the amount of time our County Extension Staff is spending in providing organization help and information to assist our Board of Supervisors in their promotion of economic deve10pment i§_: Large Fairly small Fairly large . Small Medium Other I think the amount of time our County Extension Staff i§_sp§ndigg in providing organizational help and information to assist our (1) Board of Supervisors and (2) Other organizations (Chambers of Commerce, farm organizations, development committees, etc.) in their promotion of economic deve10pment is: Large Fairly small Fairly large Small Medium Other I think the amount of time our County Extension Staff is spending in providing organizational help and information to assist other organizations (Chambers of Commerce, farm organizations, development committees, etc.) in their promotion of economic development is; Large Fairly small Fairly large Small Medium Other _ Qg___£'s igg. Please return in the self-addressed enveloge as soon a§_possible. Thank y__. ' M. s. 0. Project Non Appendix B-3 To: District Extension Directors The information that would be provided by obtaining your opinion on the following two questions would serve as another valuable measure of how the Supervisors in the respective counties value the Extension program. The questionnaires that were sent to the County Supervisors contained one question relating to how they va ue the Extension prOgram in their County. Since only a sample of the supervisors were contacted in the Counties that were included in the study, your Opinion will be valuable as another measure of their attitudes. In the report of this study the Counties will not be identified, as any information relating to any specific County will remain as confidential information by the student conducting this study. It is recognized that in answering these two questions you will probably have to express your opinions in relative terms, but in your contacts with County Boards of Supervisors you have gained some impressions that will be valuable for this study. 1. Compared to other Counties in terms of County financial condition (considering the tax base and total expenditures) in your opinion is ......... County Extension Office. (a) very well supported (b) well supported (c) receiving average support (d) some what less than average (e) poorly supported 2. Compared to other Counties do you feel that the County Board of Supervisors in ........ County regards the County Extension program: (a) very highly (b) highly (c) average _____. (d) poorly (e) very poorly 73 Appendix C-l: 7n Tabulation of Opinions of respondents by counties concerning the amount of responsibility that Boards of Supervisors should assume for economic deve10pment (Question 1) County Large Fairly Large Medium Fairly Small Small A S S E B 383 E D S E S E SS E F S E G E SS H E SS 8 I SS E J S S S K E S S L S E S M S S E S N S E S O S SS E P SS E S R SS E S S S E S T S SS E Total 48 2E 163 6E 168 5E 33 3E us 1E Percent 9.3 11.8 37.2 35.3 37.2 29.u 7.0 17.6 9.3 5.9 S=Supervisors E=County Extension Director 75 Appendix C—2: Tabulation of Opinions of respondents by counties concerning the amount of time Extension should be spending in providing organizational help and information to assist Boards of Supervisors in promoting economic deve10pment (Question 2) County Large Fairly Large Medium Fairly Small Small A S E S B SS S E D S S E E S E S F S E G S E S h SSS E I S S E J S S S K S E S L S S E M S SS E N S E S O SSS E P SSS E R SS E S S E S S T S SS E Total 75 2E 153 4E 13S 9E 63 1E ZS 1E Tercent 16.3 11.8 34.9 23.5 30.2 52.9 13.9 5.9 u.7 15.9 S=Supervisors E=County Extension Directors 76 Appendix 0—3: Tabulation of Opinions of respondents by counties concerning the amount of time Extension should be spending in providing organizational help and information to assist Boards pf Supervisors and other organizations in promoting economic deve10pment (Question 3) County Large Fairly Large Medium Fairly Small Small A 33 E B SS 3 E D S S E E S E S F S E G S E S H S SS E I S E S J S S S K S S E L S S E M SS S E N S E S O S SS E P E SS R SS S E S E S S T " S S E Total 133 1E. 148 5E 73 8E SS 3E 35 CE Percent 30.9 5.9 33.3 29.h 16.7 M7.1 11.9 17.6 7.2 O Supervisors = S County Extension Directors = E Appendix 0-4: 77 Tabulation of opinions of respondents by counties concerning the amount of time Extension should be spending in providing organizational help and information to assist other organizations in promoting economic deve10pment (Question 4) County Large Fairly Large Medium Fairly Small Small A S S E B SSS E D SS E E S S E F S E G S S E H S SS E I S S E J s s s K S S E L SS E M S S E S N S E S O S SS E P S S E R SS S E S E S S T S S S E Total 123 1B 173 2E 53 7E 53 us 33 3E Percent 28.6 5.9 uo.u 11.8 11.9 u1.2 11.9 23.5 7.2 17.6 S=Supervisors E=County Extension Directors Appendix C-5: Tabulation of Opinions of respondents by counties concerning the amount of time Extension ig spending in providing organizational help and information to assist Boards 9; Sunervisors in promoting economic development (Question 5) County Large Fairly Large Medium Fairly Small Small A S S E B S S S E D S E S E S S E F S E G S E S H S SS I S S J S S S K S S E L S S E M E SSS N S S O S SS E P SS S R E S S S S E S S T SS S E Total 38 4E 78 173 3E 108 6E 68 3E Percent 7.0 23.6 16.3 37.5 17.6 23.3 35.3 13.9 17.6 S=Supervisor .E=County Extension Director 79 Appendix C-6: Tabulation of opinions of respondents by counties concerning the amount of time Extension lg Spending in providing organizational help and information to assist Boards 9; Supervisors and other grganizatiops in promoting economic deve10pment (Question 6) County Large Fairly Large {edium Fairly Small Small A S E S B S E S S D S S E E S S E F E S G E SS H SS S E I S E S J SS S K S E S L S S E M S E SS N S S E C SS S E P SSS E R S E S S S E S S T S SS E Total 58 1E 78 SE 183 5E 73 53 63 11 Percent 11.6 5.9 16.3 29.u 41.9 29.h 16.3 29.4 13.9 5.? S=Supervisors E=County Extension Director *1 'J 80 Appendix C-7: Tabulation of opinions of respondents by counties concerning the amount of time Extension is spending in providing organizational help and information to assist other organizations in promoting economic development (Question 7) County Large Fairly Large Medium Fairly Small Small A S S E B SS E S D SS E E S S E F E S G E S S H SSS E I S S E J SS S K S S E L S S E M S E SS N S S E O S SS E P S SS E R S E S S S E S S T S S S E Total 73 1E 125 NE 125 4E 103 4E 25 4E Percent 16.3 6.0 27.9 23.5 27.9 23.5 25.3 23.5 u.6 23.5 S=Supervisor EzCounty Extension Director Appendix 0—8: Tabulation of opinions of respondents by counties concerning the value of Extension work as measured by adjustments that should be made in Extension's budget 81 County Incr. Grtly Incr. Some Same Dec. Some Decr.Grtly A SS B SS S D S S E S S F S G 83 H 33 S I S S J S S S K S S L S S M SSS E S S 0 SS S P SSS R SSS S SS T SS S Total 18 238 1us MS 18 Percent 2.3 53.5 32.5 9.4 2.3 ‘ ’1’ HUMANITIES ; lborrv-.-.r A" ‘ “a" ‘1' ' .‘\, HICHIGQN STQTE UNIV. LIBRQRIES 31293104599141