INFORMATION TO USERS This reproduction was made from a copy of a manuscript sent to us for publication and m icrofilm ing. W hile the most advanced technology has been used to pho­ tograph and reproduce this manuscript, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. Pages in any manuscript may have Indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. Manuscripts may not always be complete. When it is not possible to obtain missing pages, a note appears to indicate this. 2. When copyrighted materials are removed from the manuscript, a note ap­ pears to Indicate this. 3. Oversize materials (maps, drawings, and charts) are photographed by sec­ tioning the original, beginning at the upper left hand comer and continu­ ing from left to right in equal sections w ith small overlaps. Each oversize page is also filmed as one exposure and is available, for an additional charge, as a standard 35m m slide or in black and white paper format.* 4. Most photographs reproduce acceptably on positive microfilm or micro­ fiche but lack clarity on xerographic copies made from the microfilm. For an additional charge, all photographs are available in black and w hite standard 35m m slide format.* *For more information about black and white slides or enlarged paper reproductions, please contact the Dissertations Customer Services Department TU T1 AV y1 f1J Dissertation Information Service University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 8700488 K o rn a c k i, Jo h n J o s e p h TOW ARD A FRA M EW O R K FOR ANALYSIS IN SM ALL TOW N RESEARCH WITH A T E S T FOR C O M M U N IT Y SATISFACTION Michigan State University University Microfilms International 300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 Ph.D. 1986 PLEASE NOTE: In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible w ay from the available copy. Problems encountered with this docum ent have been identified herewith a check mark V 1. Glossy photographs or p a g e s _____ 2. Colored illustrations, paper or p rin t_______ 3. Photographs with dark b ackg ro u n d _____ 4. illustrations are poor c o p y _______ 5. Pages with black marks, not original c o p y ______ 6. Print shows through as there is text on both sides of p a g e _______ 7. Indistinct, broken o r small print on several pages 8. Print exceeds m argin requirem ents______ 9. Tightly bound copy with print lost in sp in e________ 10. * Computer printout pages with indistinct print_______ 11. P a g e(s)_____________ lacking w hen material received, an d not available from school or author. 12. P a g e (s )_____________ seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows. 13. Two pages n u m b e re d . T ext follows. 14. Curling and w rinkled p a g e s _______ 15. Dissertation contains pages with print at a slant, filmed as received 16. . Other______________________________________________________________________________ U n iv e rs ity Microfilms International TOWARD A FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYSIS IN SMALL TOWN RESEARCH WITH A TEST FOR COMMUNITY SATISFACTION By John Joseph K o m a c k i A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Resource Development 1936 ABSTRACT TOWARD A FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYSIS IN SMALL TOWN RESEARCH WITH A TEST FOR COMMUNITY SATISFACTION By John Joseph Kornacki Although social scientists have long been interested in analyzing community attitudes as indicators of well-being, they have encountered conceptual barriers communities are struct general and not measurement identical, statements for limitations. thereby making In it difficult addresses these classifying small con­ the population of all communities from determining factors problems towns; and for, all to one or a few case studies of individual communities. tion addition, by: 2) 1) developing identifying community a both satisfaction This disserta­ framework measures within a of, for and specific small town context. There are many ways to distinguish small towns. One methods classify communities by the major economic functions. influence by external environments also government and commerce. The important i is to The patterns of shape a community's distinguishing culture, features in John Joseph Kornacki this study pertain to those factors that must influence levels of community satisfaction. Frankenmuth, Michigan, is presented as'a case example of a small town with tourist-based a recreation and economy. Frankenmuth also dis­ plays a self-reliant pattern of relationships beyond its economic ties to the external several environment. different types of It represents small towns in one a type of proposed town among typological framework. An empirical analysis of residential attitudes is conducted to deter­ mine factors responsible for community satisfaction. A path model is presented satisfaction and tested to explain the determinants of in the case study community. Although predictive measures were modest, age, length of residence and home ownership variables displayed a relationship to the community satisfaction indicators coinciding with previous research findings. The typological framework is i suggested and predicting possible differences 11 as among a means for understanding attitudinal responses of John Joseph Kornacki residents for various small towns. comparing other kinds of small-town small-town community theory. the usefulness and The framework should be useful in case studies and for enchancing Further research is called reliability of this framework for in other to test settings and to suggest modifications for increased usefulness and reliability. iii FOR DEB ACKNOWLEDGMENTS When I was a young boy, my couraged my curiosity and lowed. parents believed in my dreams. tolerated More than anything else, They en­ the foolishness that often fol­ their confidence in me has helped me to think and try. There is no substitute for good among successful athletes and a simple fact for good an atmosphere of My graduate committee provided expectation, amounts of guidance and a liberal implications performance sharpened my analysis. carefully dose of patience. My Ray carefully pushed me toward building an Milt Steinmueller, as my He helped to mold the graduate education into a meaning­ reviewed draft after draft. He analytical framework that provided the­ oretical support for this research. tion for implanting a thirst questions of nurtured while working as an visited with me often. Vlasin Larry Libby's whose hectic administrative schedule was multidisciplinary fragments of my ful whole. with precise interest in small towns and never too burdensome for my many questions. committee co-chairman, mixed and, in particular, community development was broadened and assistant to Adger Carroll, Perhaps it is a truism cliche-ridden sportscasters, but it is scholarship. high keen sense for policy coaching. for He deserves particular recogni­ precision. Frank Fear, as my co- chairman and research advisor, provided almost no advice; his gift is sharing. Whether it was his insight, his computer, or his Saturday vi mornings, I vas welcome to it. I special, due to, say, superior only wish that my treatment was academic potential, but he treats all his students this way. The faculty and graduate students velopment at Michigan State the Department of Resource De­ University for problem-focused learning. interest, and talents of formed a fitting environment Their many perspectives, disciplinary contributed to my understanding of resource issues and to my approach toward undertaking research. My sincere gratitude goes to the citi 2ens of the City and Township of Frankenmuth, Michigan, who participated City Manager, Charlie occasions. Graham, was in the opinion survey. The particularly helpful on numerous The volunteers and students who took part in the dissemi­ nation and collection of the survey instrument deserve special recog­ nition and, perhaps, new shoes. Kathy Craven managed to put essor with such efficiency look good. the and entire manuscript on the word proc­ dispatch that she made the machine Rosalie Gaudrault, Phyllis McLeod, Ann Checkley, and Mary Jo Sherrod took time from busy schedules to retype earlier drafts of this document. I am grateful for their diligence and service. vii The support necessary to conclude provided by the W. K. Kellogg ever, came from my my Foundation. four-year immeasurably. I met with that distinguished The projects I worked on, places have expanded my professional horizons The late Will Keith tune in people. The greater benefit, ho w ­ association organization as a program officer. I visited, and people graduate study was generously I testify to Kellogg wanted to invest his for­ the fulfillment of that goal in a very personal way. My wife, Debra Wolffis, has carried this project as surely as she carried our son, Joseph, only the term of that pregnancy was shorter. She reviewed text, typed own professional job, brighten a gloomy day. I'm not so sure. Steel. If took She love manuscripts, care tells is of corrected errors, worked her a baby, and still managed to me that she is no Superwoman, strength, but then I married the Woman of viii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TITLE PAGE ABSTRACT...................................................... i ............................................. vl LIST OF TA BLES............................................... xiv LIST OF F I G U R E S ............................................. xvi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS CHAPTER I. PROBLEM STATEMENT........................... 1 I n t r o d u c t i o n ..................... .................... 1 Limitations in Small Town Research ................... 4 Contributions of Community Satisfaction Research .................................................................................................. 6 Toward a Context for Community Research in Small Towns ........................................ 7 Purpose of this Study.................................. 9 Organization of this S t u d y ........................... 10 CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF THE L I T E R A T U R E .................. 12 SMALL TOWN T Y P E S ........................... 12 Small Towns and Social T h e o r y ................... 12 Contemporary Approaches for Distinguishing Among Small T o w n s ................. 17 PART A: Economic Functions ......................... 17 Growth Characteristics 18 ix .................... X Page External Institutional F o r c e s ......... .. PART B: COMMUNITY SATISFACTION . . 19 ................ 22 Attitudlnal Res e a r c h .............................. 22 Focus on Community Satisfaction Res e a r c h ........................................... 25 Conceptualizations and Measurements of Community Satisfaction ....................... 27 Models of Community Satisfaction. . . . . . . . 32 Determinants of Community Satisfaction......... .34 Community Attributes ....................... 35 Community Size and L o c a t i o n .............. 38 Individual Characteristics ................ 45 CONCEPTUAL F R A M E W O R K ....................... 50 A Typological Matrix .................................. 51 Varying Approaches to Community Research . . . . . . 56 Added Theoretical Considerations for this S t u d y ......................................... 59 Satisfaction and Causal Modeling .................... 61 Examples of Path Models in Community Satisfaction Res e a r c h .................. 63 Toward a Conceptual Model for Determining Community Satisfaction ................................ 68 S u m m a ry .................................................. 74 CHAPTER III. xi Page CHAPTER IV. PART A: OVERVIEW OF THE CASE TO BE STUDIED AND THE RESEARCH METHODS TO BE EMPLOYED. . 76 THE STUDY COMMUNITY......................... 76 H i s t o r y ........................................... 76 E d u c a t i o n ........................................ 78 E c o n o m y .......................................... 82 Government........................................ 83 Classification of Frankenmuth in the F r a m e w o r k ........................................ 85 PART B: THE RESEARCH M E T H O D S ...................... 86 Survey M ethods .................................... 86 Survey Instrument ............................... 88 Data C o l l e c t i o n .................................. 89 A Note on Factor A n a l y s i s ...................... 90 Variables Made Operational...................... 93 Community Satisfaction Indicators......... 93 Attitudes Toward Change .................... 95 Support for Spending Priorities........... 95 Evaluation of Public and Private Services ........................... 97 Individual Characteristics ................ 98 Approach to Data Analysis . . . . . ........... 106 xii Page Summary................................................. CHAPTER V. 108 F I N D I N G S ..................................... 109 Profile D a t a ........................................... 109 Personal Characteristics......................... 109 Household Characteristics ...................... 110 Economic Characteristics......................... Ill Correlation Analysis .................................. Ill Individual Characteristics...................... 116 Service Evaluations and Spending Priorities 118 . . Attitudes Toward Change ......................... 118 Community Satisfaction........................... 118 Path Analysis. .................................. 119 Individual Characteristics...................... 121 Service Evaluations and Spending Priorities 122 . . Attitudes Toward Change ......................... 127 Community Satisfaction........................... 127 The Just-identified M o d e l ............................. 129 CHAPTER VI. CONCLUSIONS.................................. 133 Restatement of Study Purpose ......................... 133 Theoretical Contributions. L34 . . . . . . ........... The Typological Framework ...................... . 134 xiii Page Determinants of Community Satisfaction......... 135 Case Study Findings and Conclusions.................. 137 Profile Data and a Research M o d e l ............. 137 Findings.......................................... 138 C o n c l u s i o n s ...................................... 139 Implications from the Case Study Findings........... 140 The Typological F r a m e w o r k ...................... 140 Community Satisfaction Research ................ 141 Recommendations........................................ 142 Pol i c y .................... 142 Research........................................... 144 Limitations of the S t u d y ............................. APPENDIX A. SURVEY INSTRUMENT........................... REFERENCES................................................... 146 150 190 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2.1 Constructed Types of Communities................ 14 3.1 Types of Small Communities Using Warren's (1963) and Swansea et al., (1979) Classifications C o m b i n e d . ........................................ 53 Examples of Particular Areas for Small Town Research in the Social Sciences ................ 56 4.1 Frankenmuth Community Demographics.............. 85 4.2 Rotated Orthogonal Factor Matrix for Community Satisfaction................. 96 Rotated Orthogonal Factor Matrix for the Evaluation of Public Services ............. 99 Rotated Orthogonal Factor Matrix for the Evaluation of Private Services............. 100 4.5 Variables M e asured................................ 101 5.1 Profile of the Survey Respondents: Personal Characteristics........................ 112 Profile of the Survey Respondents: Household Characteristics ...................... 113 Profile of the Survey Respondents: Economic Characteristics. ...................... 114 Zero-order Correlations Among Model V a r i a b l e s ........................................ 117 Decomposition of Effects with Path Coefficients for Home Ownership and Income Level. ...................... 124 3.2 4.3 4.4 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 xlv LIST OF TABLES Table 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 Page Decomposition of Effects with Path Coefficients for Service Evaluations and Spending Priorities ......................... Decomposition of Effects with Path ; Coefficients for Attitudes Toward Change. . . . 125 126 Decomposition of Effects with Path Coefficients for Community Satisfaction Indicators................................... 128 Path Coefficients (Beta Weights) for all Variables in Operational M o del ................. 130 xv LIST OF FIGURES Figures 3.1 Page A Matrix for Classifying Small Towns by Primary Economic Function and the Extent of Penetration by External Institutions...................................... 55 3.2 Weitz Path M o d e l .................................. 65 3.3 Glasgow Path M o d e l ................................ 67 3.4 A Path Model for Community Satisfaction...................................... 69 4.1 Map of Michigan Counties......................... 79 4.2 Map of Saginaw C o u n t y ........................... 80 4.3 Map of the City and Township of Frankenmuth . . 81 4.4 Applied M o d e l .................................... 107 5.1 Path Equations.................................... 123 5.2 Just-Identified Model with Path Coefficients and Residual Effects............................. 131 xvi CHAPTER I PROBLEM STATEMENT Introduction The small town in the United States has long been the subject of social inquiry and has been viewed as a symbol and setting for Ameri­ can culture, values, and political expression. small it town is that is simple and A popular view of the monolithic (Craycraft, 1981). However, social scientists have encountered conceptual difficulties in conducting empirical investigations of small towns. The first concep­ tual difficulty pertains to identifying the complex structure of small towns. 1977). Measures of community structural variables are scarce (Miller, The critical elements that distinguish the small town as a social unit are open to question. A second difficulty is one of relating local structural variables same tested framework of theory and validating observations. to Tradi­ tional social science research has tended to focus on particular local 2 settings (Rossi, 1972). Even if structural elements of the small town can be differentiated, the structural there is no systematic research on how common elements are among other locations and what can be inferred. The history and development of the small town in the United States has paralleled the evolution of the nation. Many of the trends that affect more populous locations have major consequences for communities of less than 10,000 persons communities of this size). and (small 1982). will henceforth International economic forces, technological development (Naisbitt, towns are At the same current time, forces shift areas patterns from society there has been a growing decen­ (Dillman and Hobbs, living to recession, Influencing tralization of the federal government in refer urban to smaller 1983) and a towns (Beale, 1981). The cumulative effect of these trends presents a serious challenge to local government, communities (Block especially et al. government 1984). being asked to do "more with less". which Is sensitive prioritizing in an to era in In many rural cases, areas local and small leaders are Reliable and current information, local concerns, of constrained is required resources for planning (Benke and and Bonds, 3 1984; Harmston, then a better 1983). If local decision making understanding is needed about is how to be people improved, feel about their community and why they feel as they do. It has been a task of social science to problems in communities (Dillman and Hobbs, also been concerned level (Rossi, The facilitating of maker this and dissertation 1) social developing comparing differences identifying 1982). decision is scientist difficulties in small town research. by: both a framework of, in will and clarify Social science has making at the local and provide show the fit between insights addressing the for both conceptual This objective will be achieved for in community measures to classifying satisfaction determining satisfaction within one type of small town. tation define 1972). objective decision with help the framework for classifying small towns. small, amount factors them; for In addition, selected small towns and and 2) community the disser­ town and the Community attitude and commu­ nity satisfaction research methods will be used to determine relevant variables 1978). within the community (Marans and Rogers, 1975; Deseran, A small town typology will be presented to provide a context for drawing comparison among locations (Swanson et al. 1979). 4 Limitations in Small Town Research Because and of its the significant location, social and sociologists and economic economists investment in a home have looked long communities as an appropriate setting for social science research. the same time, planners, public officials, and other local at At leaders have been interested in providing attractive and liveable settings for residents and businesses. Small — town research has tended the "typical" small town analysis of (Rossi, on particular local settings 1972). the ongoing activities of this piece of the research. one example. Indiana, to focus The Lynda* The Lynds* A systematic, descriptive locale become the center­ classic study Middletown compared the community, (1926) is in this case Muncie, at one point in time to the same community at a later date. Another often cited investigation Bensman (1958), compared the community of Springport, New York to the "image of a metropolis*'. focus, and a small town, by Vidich and Although valuable in describing the process­ es of social transformation, purpose, of each study is substantially different in methodology and, therefore, contributes our general understanding of communities than is preferable. less to 5 A more deliberate effort is needed to design and conduct complementary research. As Stein (I960: 94) notes: Theory has to point toward further cumulative research. It is precisely the problems of accumulation that has made theorizing about the community so difficult. Community studies are confined to space and time... Also needed is a more consequences study, various structural such as age, teristics, Eberts of deliberate effort community differences (1982: as 290) total makes identify structural include population and measure differences. residential income level and education, such to For the this characteristics, as well as community charac­ and primary some recommendations for economic social function. research in this area: Research is needed on using community structure variables in models of causal determinants of community resources and social well-being. One might conclude from a review of prior defining, literature that efforts at measuring and comparing structure are fundamental to under­ standing small decisions to communities govern them. and for Also, making one can necessary and conclude that appropriate efforts to 6 construct a framework would aid in organizing and facilitating such analysis of structure. Contributions of Community Satisfaction Research Community satisfaction measures are an important element for judging community well-being. One of the first attempts to secure measures of satisfaction with community was His research the provided the first made by careful E. L. attempt Thorndike at (1939). evaluating quality of American cities through individual assessments. the Since that time, social scientists have looked at various aspects of satisfaction with community 1973; Goudy, the been results life to 1945; Jesser, 1967; Durand 1977; Molnar et a l . , 1979; and Glasgow, of these acknowledged related (Davies, policy studies that appear when decisions or sometimes community action and 1982). Eckart, Although contradictory, satisfaction programs, they it has measures can be are highly predictive of the success or failure of community efforts (Ladewig and McCann, 1980). To provide an appropriate context for community satisfaction research, it is helpful, if not necessary, to define community and to provide a 7 framework for differentiating among communities — particularly among different types of small towns. Toward a Context for Community Research in Small Towns The term "community" implies human relationships logical, economic, geographic, and sociological. that are psycho­ "Community" may mean people with shared interests, common characteristics or concerns asso­ ciated because of other reasons such as "an academic community". term "community" people are also may clustered. sociological sense, denote a Broadening describes specific that shared geographic concept, interests area "community" or behavior that people display by virtue of the common location. The where in a patterns "Community" has an economic meaning in terms of exchange or transaction activities. The "theory of community" is in a process of growth and revision. could say, in fact, that evolution and development. community Warren theory (1963:9) is in a constant One state of provides a useful defini­ tion of community to be "that combination of social units and systems that perform the major social functions having locality relevance". He further describes these major social functions as "(1) production, distribution and consumption; (2) socialization; (3) social control; 8 (4) social participation; and (5) mutual support". explains essentially economic activities; describe sociocultural activities, The first function the remaining four functions viz., the transmission of knowl­ edge, control of behavior, involvement in organizations or activities, and the sharing or caring among individuals. A problem facing any student of U. S. communities, towns, is generate how to general settings formulate a statements and variations study that and make accommodate the in community plan particularly small size. observations wide A viable and variety approach is of to consider certain common elements of communities and to develop a set of "ideal units" types". that Butler (1976) differentiates sociocultural constructed communities characteristics. Minar a "typology according and Greer to of communal demographic (1969) discuss and four concepts of community within four "kinds" of community. Warren (1963: 12), after describing community mentioned earlier, nities. five social functions of developed a four-fold typology of commu­ Warren suggested that degree of local autonomy was the first way that American the extent linkages. the communities differed. to which A second the type locality of is By local autonomy, independent difference was of he meant extra-community coincidence of service, 9 i.e., the extent churches, to schools, etc.) identification with dents find group. (or The which the fail final service are common locale was to find) dimension areas a the was to of local the area. third an (stores, Psychological dimension, community horizontal units whereby important pattern, resi­ reference which described the structural or functional relationship between local units — both individual and organizational. Swanson et al. small town "external typology forces" distinction Bensman, (1979) has have used the Warren based the of on society proven and useful in functions degree of surrounding previous to construct a penetration by communities. case studies the Such a (Vidich and 1958). Purpose of this Study Although the small curiosity may have of problem. citly social hindered understood town in the United scientists, cumulative community the that variables small lack research may Both case analysis and assumed States has towns of a long conceptual effectiveness. also have cross-sectional possess attracted Lack the framework of contributed studies have well- to the impli­ certain common attributes or 10 structural elements although there is a dearth of empirical evidence for such claims. The purpose three ways: work for of this study is 1) by developing classifying small to address these conceptual issues in the foundation for a typological frame­ towns as a means for understanding and predicting possible differences among respondent attitudes in various small towns determinants small researched; for, 2) community by identifying satisfaction both within measures a specific of, and type of town for which survey data on respondent conditions and satis­ faction are available; and 3) showing the fit between the specific small town selected and the framework for classifying small towns. The typological framework is intended to help in designing and com­ paring small town research while assisting in the development of small town and community determinants expected theory. The identification of for community satisfaction in a specific to assist measures, small in clarifying and validating previous town, and is research on residential attitudes and in providing a basis for the testing of the typological framework for future research. 1L Organization of this Study In Chapter benefited II, is the literature reviewed. The from which literature this on investigation communities, has community processes, and community change, as well as community types, attitudes and satisfaction is voluminous. Thus, only the literature that is directly relevant to this study's primary objectives is reviewed. Chapter III presents an approach for developing a framework of analy­ sis in small town research. as one possible then presented foundation to test A typology of small towns is illustrated for community the framework. satisfaction A research model for one type of is small town where data were available for empirical analysis. Research methods, research model, including the setting, the and application the data of all variables in the collection procedures are discussed in Chapter IV. Findings will be examined in Chapter V. A restatement of the study purpose, summary of findings, conclusions to be drawn, limitations of the study, and recommendations for further research are discussed in Chapter VI. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE PART A: This the chapter is theory discrete, small of community elements towns. science presented that The research SMALL TOWN TYPES in two sections. as it pertains allow second part directly for of The to first part the descriptive, differentiation this applicable chapter to the examines and comparison reviews area yet the of of social community satisfaction. Small Towns and Social Theory Small United towns continue States. communities of to Over less an twenty than fewer than 2,500 people. be important percent 25,000. Five community of U. S. percent category residents live But, in terms of community in in the live areas numbers, in with those 13 places with 25,000 or fewer people outnumber the giant urban centers by more than 100 to 1. The popular sterotypic literature manner. Sinclair Lewis (1962). towns The are depicted Examples (1920), images still has can the be found Sherwood Anderson that they prevalent and in town in the in a somewhat descriptions of (1921) and Edgar Lee Masters others today small have conveyed contemporary about small advertising and marketing. By contrast, quick to the point scientific out that literature all small literature and the disciplines of towns community are not development alike. Both is the that contribute to the literature have been helpful in identifying and measuring the differences, as well as conceptualizing and testing those differences. Fortunately, matters. McKinney professional literature is not silent in these In his discussion of constructing types of communities, John (1966) important conduct the role of constructed makes to play empirical types it clear in typological community research. can be that He especially theory construction indicates useful. procedures four First, ways the have and in an the which constructed 14 type can help shed light on the structural nature Although all modern communities are of the probably a mixture community. of rural and urban patterns, it should be possible to identify and single out those variables types that can communities. comparisons be are a unique to powerful Third, between small tool constructed two or in town life. deriving Second, constructed generalizations about types should prove useful in drawing more communities. Fourth, constructed types may be helpful in the study of social change and about the path of development a community may follow. In this survey of community and utility of constructed (Table 2.1). theories types COMMUNITY A research, the significance can be conveyed by a simple example In this cable, a crude polar typology has been developed that suggests the differences in Table 2.1. and patterns of human action between Constructed Types of Communities COMMUNITY B (RURAL) (URBAN) Homogeneity of Action Heterogeneity of Action Familistic Organization of Activities Nonfarallistic Organization of Activities Action Guided by Tradition Action Guided by Rationality (from Dennis E. Poplin, 1979b: 124) 15 urban and rural communities. that patterns of human The typology is based on the assumption action in rural communities basic ways from those in urban communities (Poplin, differ in very 1979b). The typology helps us to understand how human activities might be pat­ terned in different found valid, communities. If the typology were tested and it would help us to anticipate some of the more signifi­ cant changes and activities that might occur as the different commu­ nities develop. The concept of typology dates to early times. Pltirlm Sorokin (1963:vii) points out that Confucious, Plato, Aristotle, St. Augustine ii and Ibn Khaldun however, tradition has in Gemeinschaft Durkheim, all long spoke been of considered sociology. and Becker, community First types. the father published Gessellschaft was a Redfield many others and Tonnies of in who the 1887, predecessor (1855-1936), to have typological his the famous works developed of type construction in the analysis of social systems. There are many different features of Gemeinschaft-like relationships. Among other things, McKinney and Loomis maintain that these relation­ ships are characterized by aid, helpfulness, mutual interdependence, 16 reciprocal wisdom. tural, and In binding contrast, functionally leadership based sentiment, authority Gessellschaft-like specific, on and based relationships upon age are and contrac- and involve the exchange of goods with economic power. Small communities can display both these types of relationships and have been classified according­ ly- The theory developed by Carle C. Zimmerman (1938) follows from the "localistic" and it Tonnies tradition and centers around concepts "cosmopolitan" communities as ideal types. of Zimmerman was perhaps the first, theorist to use empirical research through case studies in the construction of his theory. and isolated. and The localistic community is both secluded Its residents place a strong emphasis on neighborliness friendliness. Traits characterizing the cosmopolitan community are individualism and the pursuit of economic wealth. it As Zimmerman built from Tonnies, Robert K. Merton (1957) built on Zimmerman's concepts of localistic and cosmopolitan types for his work on community leadership structures. The fact that community theorists and sociologists keep developing new concepts from the foundations of Gemeinschaft and Gessellschaft suggest tions if not were important in form, that these substance, community and that distinc­ a dynamic 17 constructed typology today. dimensions The has relevance of for seclusion, understanding isolation, the community neighborliness and economic incentive have meaning today and can be useful in the design of a typological framework for small towns. Contemporary Approaches for Distinguishing Among Small Towns Economic Functions Schroeder (1981) has suggested that it is useful towns in terms of predominant economic function. types of small towns in the U. S. cultural center. agricultural Local look Another institutions. small He identifies seven are type designed is the to The prevalence of support government They are unique because of the concentration of legal, legislative at The most common type is the argl- institutions enterprises. to social the center. judicial, and service agencies is also characteristic of such towns. Other types of towns described by Schroeder include the industrial or company town, center, and functional the bedroom the college nature of suburb, town. supporting the These art colony, labels institutions the literally and recreation specify roles for the the 18 citizenry. struction The of functions not aforementioned a typological only help to distinctions framework; clarify are useful economic local and activities, in the con­ occupational but influences kinds of persons attracted to such communities. Growth Characteristics The U. S. Census data have shown that many small towns are growing in size, while many others are "holding their own" relative to population size and distress. economic activity. Still others have experienced economic Blakely and Bradshaw (1981: 36) write: ... a certain degree of growth specialization is occurring among small towns ... This specialization seems to be synergistic inasmuch as the immigration pattern to the community reinforces its cultural, economic, and political direction, consequently attracting more people of similar background. Growth can be town. Blakely and Bradshaw identify six small town growth communities that maintain such a that defined tourism/recreation the way community small of town life in ceases a small to exist town as a small context. The is usually noted for its scenic beauty. Usually immigrants are economically independent, possessing transport- 19 able skills. higher home The education of professional institution knowledge intensive as service its community base. industries. The generally communities Mixed economy has are trade a the commu­ nities, retirement communities, counter-culture communities and energy boom towns complete economic force the list. The fast growth that provides for job opportunities, to support existing and new residents. However, community and has an the services they have different capacities to sustain themselves over time. This categorization Schroeder and, towns. Certain incorporates therefore, aspects captures of growth, the the the growth dynamic suburb dimension nature for covered but remain important for a comprehensive of ignored many example, discussion small are of by not small towns. External Institutional Forces Swanson et al. (1979) provide a small town typology that follows the work of Warren (1963) in conceptualizing external institutional forces and linkages that impact smaller communities. The ignored small town has been left out of the benefits from national 20 prosperity. This society; is it information and dents show of as exists without little service flows a whole. or and problems. help are initiative outsiders, toward community offered little suspicious proaches community An from interest no is example support surrounding nonexistent have There much in or a weak might be larger areas. The incomplete. community experience from in Resi­ affairs, are collective ap­ identification with the a town now one-company abandoned by the exigencies of a changing economy. The transitional town has been affected by the generalizing influence of larger society. society. only Local moderate. service area. There is a moderate amount of penetration by mass autonomy Both and local identification external with institutions the community are part of are the A small town near a state college might be an example of this type. The coopted institutions business community by the is prevalent. has undergone larger society. possible example of penetration Absentee-owned of its local industry and Federal and state agencies have assumed many municipal and community functions. a some such a A small, community. seasonal tourist town is Towns in reservations could also be considered in this category. or near Indian 21 The absorbed is virtually town has been totally penetrated by indistinguishable from the surrounding There is a very weak identification with the town. tions are responsible for services. larger society and communities. External institu­ A bedroom suburb, or a collection of proximate rural residences with perhaps only a post office or gas station, are examples of this type of town. The self-reliant community has resisted external pressures and estab­ lished a characteristic identity. ing among residents. The operated and controlled. There is a strong sense of belong­ services and The self-reliant institutions are locally community also displays a cooperative mode of interaction with local decisions based upon shared community values and norms. These distinctions are quite useful in the construction of a typologi­ cal framework. for interpreting Relations with external economic functions, institutions provide a basis social-structural the effectiveness of local decision making. patterns and 22 PART B: The emerging vides a here. literature useful Equally satisfaction. special important framework insights from on community conceptual Both knowledge about COMMUNITY SATISFACTION basis is fields for the are types presented the framework emerging important in Part A pro­ to literature for to be developed here will this have be developed on community study because the advancement community satisfaction as a major purpose. both fields will contribute to the the of Further, actual set of community elements selected for study. Attitudinal Research Research on category of measuring Thomas refined community attitudinal attitudes and time 1959). absenteeism and attitudes. in Znaniecki, over Thurstone, satisfaction research the For turnover Attitudes considered 1932; have been of a broader science. The Is not new for example: attitudes Thorndike, research industry part social Measuring example, in in community 1919). (Likert, Is has a central on (see, have 1939; concept become Guttman, employee assessed idea the in of more 1944; performance, influence of the studies on 23 voting and aspects of other political activities. consumer behavior have Attempts focused to explain various on attitudes toward prod­ ucts, brand loyalty, and brand images. There are four major categories of contemporary attitude theories: learning theories; theories; and 4) Fishbein, 1967). 2) expectancy-value attribution The theories theories from theories; (Staats these research deal with several major concerns: of attitudes? It is possible intentions and behavior? manipulated for to relate 3) and categories 1) consistency Staats, of 1957; attitudes What are the determinants them to beliefs, opinions, How might the determinant variables may be predictive purpose? This research also treats the ways in which attitudes affect both satisfaction and performance. A major characteristic that distinguishes the concept of attitude from other concepts, such evaluative nature — or condition. Many as beliefs, intentions and behavior, is its being favorable or unfavorable about some object common attitude measurement procedures (e.g., Thurstone, Likert, and Guttman) arrive at a single number designed to index a general evaluation of favorableness or unfavorableness the object According in question, to Thurstone such (1931), as a neighborhood an attitude may be or a toward community. conceptualized as 24 the amount of affect for or against some object. refer to a person's information about an belief links an object to some attribute. to a person's willingness observable acts By contrast, beliefs object. Specifically, Behavioral intention refers to perform various behaviors (Andrews and Withey, a that refer to 1974). These concepts are based upon the assumption that people are rational beings who use the information at their disposal to form evaluations, make judgments, and arrive at decisions. determined by a person's beliefs about Attitudes, then, are partly the community. Attitudes are related to a person's intention to perform a variety of behaviors with respect to the community. Each intention is related to the corre­ sponding behavior. Both the concept of attitudes and the concept of beliefs are important to this study. As indicated above, beliefs are fundamental "building blocks" in the conceptual structure of attitude theory. of direct observation, or by way of various number of beliefs the information received from outside sources, forms of about an inference, object. In a person the case learns or of a person associates the community with various attributes. of a person's beliefs On the basis about the community serves as the forms a community, a The totality information 25 base that determines attitudes, intentions, mance in or toward one's community. Focus on Community Satisfaction Research Community satisfaction, as an area within and, ultimately, attitudinal perfor­ research, has been receiving increasing attention in the social science literature. The renewed interest stems partly from the argument noted in social indicator research that policy decisions formulated on the sole basis of objective indicators do not necessarily persons for whom the policies are relevant reflect the attitudes (Marans and Rodgers, of 1975: 299): ... only when subjective indicators of the human meaning of social change are instituted and collected over time can we as a society begin to have confidence in the usefulness of objective indicators. Sociologists and social psychologists, who have questioned or examined the role of the local community in the quality of life experiences of individuals, The have shown interest social psychological Rodgers examined whether study of in community the community local satisfaction research. community by Marans characteristics are and important 26 aspects of communities citizen well-being. are important an As link Rossi to (1972) the points national out, society local in that social trends and social policy have their direct impacts upon indivi­ duals in the form of local manifestations. setting within which the major events The local community is the in the life cycle of most individuals occur and where most individuals and households spend the greatest portions of their time. tional structures, ment. Thus, housing, community The community supplies the institu­ the social milieu, satisfaction offers and places a way to of employ­ test citizens' also been evaluations with their environment. Welfare economists terested example, social in community they economists Excessive have If a reasonable leaders the lead level public social goods cannot to of idea of growth structures, and the estimate have rates, in­ for thereby creating problems of that if communities want public services will be, and changing private and point out services. While choice satisfaction. disorganization, must manner public can engulf the local community, provision of (1982) and and services. inadequate Lovejoy et al. to plan for future growth, future what the demand for public future demand for resources may be allocated in an inefficient greater demand problems for a and conflicts specific in service the and future. reported 27 satisfaction correlated, with there the present is strong level reason of service to believe are that not perfectly those who wish a higher or lower level of service than presently available will express more dissatisfaction quate. Community than those for whom the satisfaction offers one way public services (Lovejoy et al. present to test level is ade­ the demand for 1982). Conceptualizations and Measurements of Community Satisfaction The most frequently raised questions among those who have undertaken community satisfaction research have been: 1. 2. 3. How can community satisfaction be defined and measured? What factors contribute to, or predict, community satis­ faction? What are the consequences of community satisfaction? Many prior studies have attempted to answer these questions. findings provide the basis for making predictions about But few cause and effect relationships. The literature has not provided a clear definition and description of the meaning of community satisfaction. The factors or characteristics 28 studied that determine community satisfaction have been limited. In addition, the problem of how to use the results of community satisfac­ tion research for public purpose has only just begun to receive attention. While some have recognized that community satisfaction is a concept of considerable breadth and depth a few have grappled with 1978; have community community 1980; conceptual 1975), issues and Marans and Rodgers, satisfaction satisfaction 1977; Rojek et al. theoretical and Ladewig and McCann, defined (Goudy, frequently in several has been ways. treated only (Deseran, 1975). For as They example, merely an operational problem with little attention being given to defining the concept or for developing theoretical frameworks that would explain the nature of community satisfaction. Deseran problems tion" (1978: of 238, community framework: refers process to of 239) "the attempted satisfaction by using situation satisfaction, experiencing a is the cognitive community." definition of the situation, of to address some of a the conceptual "definition community, dimension Community of while the of situa­ definition perceptual satisfaction, as a places emphasis on the subjective nature the perceptions of reality; beliefs in a stable objective reality 29 underlie the dimensions of perceptions the of definition phenomena. of the The situation liefs; 2) relevance; and 3) evaluations. knowledge one has about a situation, degree of salience satisfaction is situation. The the interrelationships structural aspects concept particularly is evaluative of useful to for are: 1) relevance the cognitive factual be­ of of the social, reality this indicates individual. dimension among perceptions key Factual beliefs refer to the whereas the situation has then three as Community definition psychological are study the stressed. will of and This be explained of community later. There have been satisfaction. global) Ladewig The measure 1962; Zehner, and assessment two ways first of has (Fried and clarifying been the to use Gleicher, a 1961; concept single-terra Gans 1977; and McGranahan and Wilkening, McCann (1980) of a "county's used a single-term livability" as the 1962; 1981). measure indicator (overall Gulick et or al. For example, of residents’ of community satisfaction. Davies (1945) was the community satisfaction. first researcher to use a multi-term index of Jesser (1967), using D a v i e s ’ approach, looked at community satisfaction among professionals in rural areas. Johnson 30 and Knop first (1970) used factor analysis to examine a number of items and proposed concept. that community satisfaction was geographical location. of study, index of community attachment with component. Rojek satisfaction and Kasarda Using focus Miller multi-dimensional Bach and Smith (1977) and Speare (1974) constructed an index of community satisfaction based upon assessments and a as et and al. Grader (1979) Janowitz (1975) expressed "community community limited through studied (1974) attachment" developed the social a study about and as their three-term satisfaction their opinions of housing patterns being one to community public services. economic aspects of satisfaction. A few social of community three-term scientists have attempted satisfaction, index to Durand construct a diffuse community satisfaction". index of life satisfaction dimensions, from viz., 29 and Eckart "composite Linn items natural to use comprehensive measures (1976) measure of 74) used general a or created a comprehensive categorized environment, (1973: in social three quality of relations, and to quality of life services. Community satisfaction has been measures (Andrews and Withey, frequently linked 1976; Hynson, 1975; Marans and 31 Rodgers, tion 1975). These contributes to Andrews and Withey studies demonstrated life satisfaction (1976: 12-13), and that community satisfac­ feelings of well-being. for example, developed a two-dimen­ sional conceptual model of quality of life indicators illustrating the various "domains community, of city, attractiveness, life". Such domains as dwelling, neighborhood, region and state were matched with criteria such as freedom, and interaction. Community satisfaction, in this case, is used as a predictor of general life satisfaction. Despite the volume of research, both the tion. conceptualizations Although some there are gaps and inconsistencies in and measurements researchers have built choice of community satisfaction measures others While seem to have evaluations satisfaction theoretical have devised relating been their of frameworks broad enough in their (Ladewig and McCann, approaches few satisfac­ upon past w ork on community attributes useful, community ad hoc to overall empirical to explain related to the nature of community satisfaction an studies is why a typological framework is developed here. basis. community have the essential (Glasgow, 1980), used factors 1982) , which For this study, the conceptualization offered by Deseran (1978) was most useful because it stressed item the index, evaluative rather than aspect a of global community measure for satisfaction. community A multi- satisfaction 32 was used in order to identify the community characteristics that were most responsible for community satisfaction. Models of Community Satisfaction The conceptual model developed by Marans the most to the (e.g., influential. Marans Rojek Schriner, factors and et 1979; related Many Rodgers al. 1975; community model in Goudy, Durand and Eckart, to individual and Rodgers satisfaction formulating 1977; perceptions is among researchers their Deseran, 1973). (1975) own 1978; analysis Murdock This model makes of refer residential and explicit locations. The basic purpose of this model is to link objective attributes of the environment to the subjective experiences of individuals. A person’s satisfaction with a set of circumstances is seen as dependent upon the perception and evaluation of the objective characteristics of the situation. There are and his two stages or her assessments butes of evaluation community are perceived; Furthermore, that intervene between the person's environment they it. attributes and 2) hold of According depend to Marans upon: the standards by which that individual and 1) how Rodgers, the attri­ they are judged. perceptions of community 33 attributes vary In both scale and content according to physical, social, organizational, and economic dimensions of the community. Personal characteristics, the Marans account and for Rodgers subgroup such as age or education, model as variation in the the causally are presented in prior evaluation variables of the that community. Assessments of specific community attributes are treated as interven­ ing variables between personal factors and overall community satisfac­ tion. Marans and Rodgers examine the predictive usefulness of commu­ nity satisfaction by comparing it to other domains of life experience, such as family and workplace. The concept of community satisfaction is not defined in the model. The conceptual models of Marans and Rodgers are similar. a product (1975) and Deseran (1978) Marans and Rodgers argue that community satisfaction is of objective conditions that are perceived, assessed, and valued according to salience by residents. Deseran proposes that the "definition of situation" factual beliefs, relevance. He also further by goes requires one step noting evaluation, that and community satisfaction is the evaluative link between belief and relevance in a situation, factors Deseran's that affect theoretical perspective community satisfaction specifies and, thus, the types provides of a 34 context to view the implications of the concept, a notion followed in this study. Following Deseran*s (1978) notions, Glasgow (1982) focused on the interrelationships between social psychological and structural aspects of the recent reality perception migrants to small for testing towns. The community recent satisfaction migrants in that among study were asked to use their former community as a reference of comparison. Community satisfaction and achieved is described characteristics of to be a function of individuals and the ascribed their perceptions of residential living experiences in prior and present communities. Determinants of Community Satisfaction The determinants of community satisfaction, ous researchers, teristics of educational predictors perceived faction. usually individuals. attainment, of center on local or social These social structural factors, or demographic such interaction structure. community attributes as investigated by previ­ A few as have b een studies to global or overall income charac­ level, studied have community as related satis­ 35 Community dependent gers, Attributes, upon 1975). Overall evaluations The of community community evaluation of satisfaction attributes objective is largely (Marans and characteristics Rod­ of the community is seen largely as dependent upon the subjective perceptions of those attributes and Standards reflect that individual the the the standards aspirations, brings to by which expectations, the situation. they are values, The judged. and needs assessment of community attributes thus reflect both the objective conditions of the locality, as well as the person's subjective reality (Deseran, 1978; Marans and Rodgers, Previous research "moderately to (Gulick et al. Marans and complete has very demonstrated satisfied" that with Rodgers study, satisfaction with 38 percent their 1975; Glasgow, a majority their 1962; Marans and Rodgers, of Even Goudy, the of people those the are communities 1977). respondents while of 1982). respective 1975; community, reported degrees of dissatisfaction. interpretation In the reported only 9 percent living in "substan­ dard" residential areas typically reported general community satisfac­ tion. For example, 75 percent of the residents of a Boston slum said they were satisfied with their community as a place to live Gleicher, 1961; Gans, could possible be 1962). that Burby and Weiss people are able to (Fried and (1976) reported that it concentrate on whatever 36 positive characteristics their communities have in order to explain the favorable ratings. A few studies meaningful Goudy that and pertinent (1977) spicuous indicate found in his that aspects of than others social and analysis of (1971) demonstrated political community that social (Lamanna, citizens of several rural communities. Zehner the the setting 1964; Suttles, factors attribute are were 1968). most evaluations Ladewig and McCann accessibility and more con­ among (1980) and quality of community services were salient factors to overall community satisfac­ tion. Characteristics of the environment have also been shown to be related to community satisfaction. Burby and Weiss ceptions of the quality of the environment, (1976) found that along with convenience of community services, were reasons for residential satisfaction. and Wellman (1978) per­ Marans found that residents in an area of Northern Michi­ gan were attracted to that area because of the quality of the environ­ ment -- a basis upon which the community was evaluated. These studies indicate that residential preferences are Influenced by the evaluation of community attributes mo3t salient to the individual. Findings suggest that the social setting and the convenience of facilities and 37 services often Environmental relate factors to higher have also levels been of community satisfaction. important attributes of the community that lead to increased satisfaction levels. Marans and Rodgers respondent agreement (1975) assessments' of with objective raise an additional question community attributes are, Although their conditions. permit them to address the question directly, place" suggest that respondents were aware of whether in general, data do in not assessments by "size of of objective conditions. Assessments of specific attributes reflect the presumed differences in the quality sizes. and availability of services in communities of varying Overall, community satisfaction seems to increase as the "size of place" decreases. Past findings indicate that positive evaluations of community attri­ butes or characteristics relate to higher overall community satisfac­ tion. The social setting, have been shown Yet, people appear most objective to conditions, closely reflect be services salient and dimensions satisfied with even though the objective facilities, environment of community satisfaction. their community regardless of specific reality. and Are community attributes there other factors may that account for differences in the perception of community satisfaction? 38 Community Size and Location. Social organization subject of interest among social scientists. tion of the effects of "urbanism" has Wirth*s stimulated long (1938) interest in been a formula­ explaining differences in cognitive and behavioral levels of social organization. If Earlier, Tonnies (1887) postulated the transformation of society a "Gemeinschaft" schaft" linear (i.e., a rural and familial setting) (i.e., urban and disinterested situation), increases in population size and tiation in the urban processes creased that were urban society. were mediate population, inhabitants the setting had a specific predictable density seen as of of kinship bonds, As and the the declining pattern of Durkheim called anomie, an psychological interest of social on social and essential for primary the integration causal In­ heterogeneity of characteristics of according contacts, becomes cognitive behavior. to Wirth, a weakening social significance of become socially isolated and alienated; Social of primary Structural differen­ The outcomes of an urban society, substitution of secondary community. kinds the Wirth assumed that impact settlement, forming to a "Gessell- density were factors influencing patterns of social behavior. from formal, the local residents low normative cohesion, which resulted. effects of rural and urban conditions have been scientists who have investigated relationships 39 between the location factors and community satisfaction. Wirth*s thesis on urban social structure suggests that there would be greater dissatisfaction among residents in urban settings. however, that that often are urban settings lower than have in differing rural areas. Wirth recognized, opportunity Other structures researchers have hence examined the effects of population size and density on community satisfaction (Gans, The residential influence of 1962). characteristic size of place community satisfaction. most on frequently attribute studied assessments Rodgers (1975) been and the overall A number of studies reported higher satisfac­ tion in suburban, small town, and in rural areas. and has found that only 20 percent For example, Marans of the residents in central cities of the twelve largest metropolitan areas said they were completely contrast satisfied with Similarly, 50 Davies with percent (1945) their of community residents found that as in farm a place to nonmetropolitan youth expressed live in areas. higher community satisfaction than urban youth. Speare methods did not (1974) of using multivariate the early significantly examples, affect analysis, found rather than that urban and community satisfaction. the bivariate rural locations Sauer and his 40 colleagues and (1976) community confirmed satisfaction the relationship with bivariate between analysis, rural but settings found that size of community did not significantly affect life satisfaction when using other control variables Janowitz (L974) in a regression analysis. Kasarda and found that population size and density were not strong predictors of community attachment. II For Tonnies, Wirth and their followers, were key density determinants create more of community barriers to population, density, and size satisfaction. community Larger attachments size and and limit perceptions of satisfaction. The so-called "Chicago School", largely the influence of such social scientists as W. I. Thomas, Robert Park and Earnest Burgess, postulat­ ed that the community is not a residue but a social construction with its own life-cycle normative variables. that As reflects such, ecological, the community institutional, is viewed and as a complex system of friendship, kinship, and associational networks that assimi­ late new residents and new generations. Kasarda and Janowitz (1974) proposed that the community manifests diffuse boundaries and exhibits different intensity and scope vidual social position and age. of participation depending upon indi­ The social structure of the community AI could therefore model, local be identified by networks are social local a social major networks. mediating In this influence on community attachments. Further studies concerned with determining the relationship of size of place of residence satisfaction looked have to community shown exclusively on conflicting service level of satisfaction with size of place of value not for the support results. satisfaction residence — argument and to overall Rojek and et community al. postulated (1975) that the community services would be a function of availability the attributes with of the services. that latter viewed The satisfaction as a surrogate findings, with however, services did would In­ crease as a simple linear function of the availability of services (as indexed by the population of the place of residence). residents were more satisfied with medical and City and rural commercial services than were small town residents, while satisfaction witn public educa­ tional services was unaffected by size of the place of residence. range of the size of population over 7,000. A study by Linn (1976) nity satisfaction for place categories was limited; no city The had a That may explain findings of no difference. sought to develop generalizations about commu­ three types of residential locations. Linn 42 compared opinions from samples of residents country or hinterland; metropolitan center; study the tested highest areas. levels in; (a) the open (b) small towns within a 30-mile perimeter of a and (c) hypothesis of living community within that the the group satisfaction The hypothesis was based metropolitan (b) would vis-a-vis on the belief that center. The manifest the the other the nearby lying areas offer the best mix of rural and urban amenities. the hypothesis was not supported. two out­ However, Ratings of the natural environment, social setting, and services of the communities showed that the group (a) exhibited the highest degree of community satisfaction. Johnson and Knop (1970) used factor analysis of satisfaction items to produce results that suggested urban areas have certain advantages employment, offered medical, higher social and commercial relation services, qualities. while Campbell et rural al. in areas (1976) reported that residents of large metropolitan areas tended to be less satisfied with their community overall than with any specific charac­ teristic of it, whereas rural residents were relatively more satisfied with their community as a whole than any particular feature. These findings suggest that it is not the adequacy of the range of community attributes, but the adequacy of the specific characteristics relevant 43 to various residents that is most Important to satisfaction with the community. Miller and Crader (1979) focused on rural-urban differences along two dimensions of community satisfaction. hypothesis, satisfaction urban and residents rural showed residents Congruent with the researchers' the the highest lowest, while rural-urban mix fell between the two extremes. rural residents showed the highest tion and the urban residents were has able in between. shown that the levels lowest, of level of economic residents of the Also as hypothesized, interpersonal rural-urban satisfac­ "mix" Miller and Crader*s findings support residents research that interpersonal opportunities are more generally avail­ in rural areas, while opportunities for economic gain are more available in urban settings. Christenson relationship with (1976) used a macro-structural approach between population density and to determine residents' the satisfaction the quality and availability of community services. This study looked at the relationship between the population density of counties in North Carolina and residents' assessments of community services. Christenson tested whether higher density would correlate with greater perceptions of service availability and quality. Christenson found a stronger relationship between population density and perceived availability of services than between population density and perceived quality of services. The findings also revealed a correlation between the assessments of availability and quality of services. concluded that further investigations using Christenson satisfaction indicators could be used for monitoring the success of service delivery. Durand and Eckart (1973) studied the interaction of individual attri­ butes and residential characteristics with behavioral norms. ically, they analyzed neighborhoods. social Some of rank while teristic. the The satisfaction the neighborhoods were others authors community were heterogeneous attempted to explain of residents homogeneous concerning response Specif­ in regarding that charac­ differences by social rank when certain other personal variables were held constant. The findings gave no support who inhabit neighborhoods of to the authors' homogeneous hypothesis social rank that persons are more sat­ isfied than those who reside in socially heterogeneous neighborhoods. The findings heterogeneous suggest a willingness neighborhoods and of appear urban to residents challenge some to of tolerate Wirth's ideas on the negative effects of urbanism. These studies of community satisfaction have demonstrated some of the 45 shortcomings of this type of community research. Findings suggest that residents of rural areas are somewhat more satisfied with communities than urban residents, yet the results are not their clear-cut and the studies are difficult to compare. Individual Characteristics. There has been great interest in studying the influence of individual or personal characteristics on perceptions of community an satisfaction. individual's community Personal background standards of is said to influence comparison in evaluating aspects of (Marans and Rodgers, 1975). These standards influence the the distinctions between objective reality and subjective interpretations of reality (Deseran, 1978). or achieved positions in A major concern has been whether ascribed life are effective predictors of community satisfaction. Age, for example, has had an interesting — relationship (1967), and with community Kasanda and satisfaction. Janowitz (1974) correlation with community satisfaction. (1975), and Goudy and often contradictory — have Davies found Speare (1945), that (1974), age Jesser has no Rojek et al. (1977) have noted an association between increasing age and greater satisfaction. 46 Marans and Rodgers combines age, (1975) education, accurate predictor of single persons older residents Marital Linn, Linn status have found that life-cycle, were and family structure, community satisfaction least without alone satisfied children was not at an with has were important been most predictor more Young, communities, the that a than age alone. their home, a measure while satisfied. (Goudy, 1977; 1976). (1976), in a study of urban-to-rural migrants, found that educa­ tional level affected community satisfaction in a positive direction. Campbell et al. Wilkening (1981) (1976), Marans and Rodgers found a slight, (1967), have reported Others, such as Goudy insignificant relationships the educational level and community satisfaction. to be unrelated to community satisfaction Goudy, There 1977; Linn, has been 1976; Davies, inconsistent community satisfaction. and Rojek et (e.g. of the between Sex has been shown Campbell et al. 1945; Rojek et al. evidence (1977) 1976; 1975). affect of income on Jesser (1967), Linn (1976), and Speare (1974) reported no relationship; (1975), and McGranahan and negative relationship between educa­ tional level and community satisfaction. and Jesser (1975), al. Campbell et al. (1975) found a (1976), Marans and Rodgers slight, negative relation­ 47 ship, while somewhat Goudy different (1977) noted approach, a slightly Durand and positive Eckart one. (1973) Taking found only a a weak relationship between community satisfaction and relative economic stake (amount of personal property owned by social rank), als with individuals of differing Bauman (1968) has reported that middle class individu­ inconsistent social status were more satisfied with their community than those with consistent social status. Another personal characteristic has been residential history. that has produced Jesser found that confusing results the number of resi­ dential moves was positively related to community satisfaction. et al. (1975) found that the number of moves negatively Rojek affected community satisfaction. A related personal characteristic that has proven to be a more consis­ tent predictor has been length of residence. A number of studies have found that greater length of residence and community satisfaction are related Linn, in a positive direction 1976; Marans and Rodgers, (Bach and Smith, 1975; Rojek et al. 1977; Goudy, 1977; 1975). Another related dimension has been the idea that community attachment, or social anchorage, increases with residential duration. Kasarda and 48 Janowitz (1974) proposed a model whereby tested to an index of social bonds to community attachment. Length (Durand and Eckart, Results of of residence (as an intervening variable) of residence community attachment both directly and ence of social bonding. length was indirectly found to through was then affect the influ­ Prior studies have agreed with these findings 1973; Jesser, 1967; and Suttles, 1968). the affect of housing ownership on community satisfaction have indicated that homeowners are more satisfied with their communi­ ties than Speare, Age, renters (Bach and Smith, 1977; Campbell et al. 1976; and 1974). life-cycle, variables that satisfaction length of have among been residence and housing shown individuals. to Other be tenure are personal predictive of characteristics, community educational level and income level in particular, have produced mixed or inconsis­ tent results. More precise indicators, such as occupation and house­ hold information, may help clear some of the inconsistencies. Although tics as the relative determinants Importance of community of personal background characteris­ satisfaction has been an issue of debate in the literature, evidence to date suggests that some of these 49 characteristics, viz., social have networks predictive value, age, length predictive of residence, value. they become a useful Because home the ularly useful this study. as inputs to variables and have tool as we seek to anticipate ho w residents will respond to community conditions and actions about those conditions. ownership passible local These characteristics will be partic­ the model being developed and tested in CHAPTER III CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Social scientists have undertaken various forms of community analysis in order to improve their understanding of small towns and to provide a better basis for local decision making. One way to study the small town is to identify common or distinguishing community characteristics for each location. Another way to study small towns is to probe individual resident’s perceptions of key community attributes, perhaps those characteristics that are responsible for individual location decisions. A typological framework for understanding and comparing small and small town research will be presented in this chapter. community satisfaction as a method duals, be attitudes, proposed to towns A test of for empirically analyzing indivi­ and key characteristics of the community will also show the fit framework for classification. between a specific small town and the 51 A Typological Matrix In order to provide a basis features other of small purposes, towns, a predominant community towns, for determining whether classification economic for community framework functions (Bradshaw and Blakely, important distinguishing tend 1975; is satisfaction suggested. to characterize Harmston, 1984). for research purposes 1978; Swanson et al. Warren (1978) differ. One dependent control or over has is small the local of to classify (Vidich and Bensmen,,1968; Warren, 1979). identified local own four autonomy, Independent its for In Patterns influence from external institutions have also been used small towns or of ways the degree extra decisions. that to which community The American second a units is the communities community in is exercising coincidence of service areas, the extent to which local institutions provide services on a common boundary. A third characteristic is the psychological identification with a common locality. Finally, Warren distinguishes a horizontal units, pattern of various local coordinated by common Swanson et al. (1979) sentiments and behavior. Based upon the four characteristics of Warren, 52 have developed five cypes of small communities described by the extent of penetration by external institutions: The ignored, transitional, autonomy, but citizens coopted, absorbed, and self-reliant towns. The ignored town may have a degree of local must travel elsewhere for the majority of services. The transitional town has been affected by the generalizing effects of larger society. Citizens may exhibit only a moderate degree of identification with the community. Service areas may overlap other communities. town demonstrates significant penetration absentee ownership patterns. of local The coopted institutions with The absorbed community has been totally penetrated by outside forces and is relatively indistinguishable from the populations that surround it. community is more independent, On the other hand, the self-reliant able to build a way of life that fits local preferences while maintaining economic opportunities. Both of these approaches nities have merit. for distinguishing and classifying commu­ Both are drawn upon in the design of the typologi­ cal framework to be presented here. The characteristic types are presented in Table 3.1. 53 Table 3.1. Types of Small Towns Using Warren's (1963) and Swanson et al. (1979) Classifications Combined ___________ Variables That Define "Small Townness" (from Warren)_________ Small Town Local Coincidence Psychological Horizontal Type Autonomy of Service Identification Pattern (from Swanson) Area_ Ignored Transitional Coopted Absorbed Self-reliant moderate moderate low low high low moderate moderate low high moderate moderate moderate low high low moderate low low high It is also possible to classify small communities by the character of their predominate economic activity (Schroeder, 1981; Harmston, 1983). Economic base, employment, and location analyses may provide the basis for identifying small town economic functions. trial mix Analysis of of differences deduce other a small economic among town give function the these characteristics is economic characteristics not town well" a only purposes as include each The particular indus­ of distinctive used the (Smith, the extent to character. understand community, 1970: of public 111). the "but to Some of services provided and the environmental quality of the area. Although there are general descriptions many are ways found to classify In almost economic every functions, scheme (e.g. a few Harris, 54 1943: 86-89). Schroeder mentions seven: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Blakely and The The The The The The The Bradshaw function "seems Agricultural Center Government Center Industrial Town Bedroom Suburb Recreational Town Art Colony University Town (1981: to be 36) note that synergistic" because the predominant economic the migration pattern and cultural direction are influenced and shaped by this force. By looking at small towns as having both a definable relationship with external becomes institutions possible and a to develop definable a matrix primary to help economic function, in conceptualizing it the community and in designing small town research. The following diagram (Figure 3.1) external Swanson et is al. the result (1979) with of matching the the functional criteria criteria of of Schroeder (1981). Primary economic functions and external institutions are particularly salient for describing the small town conceptually and the matrix becomes a useful framework for identifying common characteristics and 55 for comparing other cases distinctive empirically. features could It be is acknowledged, used in though, constructing that such a matrix. Figure 3.1. A Matrix for Classifying Small Towns by Primary Economic Function and the Extent of Penetration by External Institutions (Adapted from Schroeder, Primary Economic Function___________ Ignored 1981, and Swanson et al. 1979)* Influence by External Institutions Absorbed Transitional Coopted Self-Reliant Agriculture and Mining i t Government Industry and Technology Recreation and Leisure 1 } ! 1 | i I 1 ! 1 i i i Art and Culture ! i 1 Residence (Suburb) Education and Research *Refers to penetration by external institutions other than market transactions 56 Varying Approaches to Community Research The 1) small community social structure; making; and further divided 4) researchable 2) values into that lend themselves the can be studied by local and economy; norms. particular to empirical areas examining common 3) These factors four general leadership broad and categories operational testing and analysis. to small and town areas: decision may indicators A number of investigation presented in Table 3,2. Table 3.2. Examples of Particular Areas for Small Town Research in the Social Sciences 1. Social Structural Research a. socioeconomic status b. cultural factors c. geographic patterns d. modes of interaction 2. Local Economic Research a. indicators of employment b. economic base c. locational factors d. economic functions 3. Leadership and Decision Making Research a. electoral participation b. attendance at meeting c. governmental forms d. influence patterns be are 57 4. Values and Norms Research a. important issues and decisions b. institutional and service qualities c. budget priorities d. quality of life indicators Social structural research in small towns involve such questions as: "What are the indicators of socioeconomic status and differences among residents?" Comparing a community's income distribution with the state or nation, for example, Cultural, and geographic differentiation within may reveal important distinctions. communicative the that of community. factors Social also affect structure, in social turn, plays a role in voting patterns and the design of appropriate public policies and programs. Studies of the local economy may involve the understanding and deter­ mination of how scarce local resources are used to produce goods and services beyond many and whether the local units — those economy. large goods The and local corporations, consumers, and nonprofit organizations. explain how firms determine where services economy small are itself used within or is comprised of businesses, government, Location analysis attempts to to build or expand. Economic base analysis refers to the assessment of that portion of the local economy 58 that exports functions the of all or part the town serve locality as evidenced by these analyses its of various help us economic their output. The analysis to distinguish the different dimensions — economic purposes sectors to better understand of the natural, of economic the economy. local of All community and man-made, and capital resource use; production, imports and exports, and consumption. Another form of community analysis appropriate for small towns is the study of the political system in terms of decision making patterns and processes. local all Electoral affairs, contribute cesses. These implementing local to participation, governmental the local factors local are actions. attendance forums, and or patterns leadership structure important in planning, also critical They are participation and of in influence political pro­ promoting, and elements in the development and implementation of local public policy. Community values and norms are not easily understood, yet they play an important role in the community development process. Values and norms are of considered being. local Such to be factors institutions important as and to quality services, the determination of life and indicators, the social well­ assessments establishment of of budget priorities are based on individual attitudes toward the community. 59 The typological framework developed here should prove helpful to researchers who undertake small town research by providing a basis for distinguishing community characteristics and for comparing communities based on economic tions. Such a functions and the penetration of external institu­ framework also provides the basis for comparing and contrasting individual community case studies. Added Theoretical Considerations for this Study Community satisfaction is one type of small town research methodology that looks into the values and norms of a locale through the assess­ ment of the quality of life of residents (Marans and Rogers, 1975). A number of community satisfaction studies have discussed the theoret­ ical relevance of personal and residential factors as determinants of satisfaction Kasarda and understand McCann (Jesser, 1967; Bauman, Janowitz, 1974; and what (1980) is meant developed of Thlbout and Kelley describe standard a or a by Hynson, community conceptual (1959) 1968; Durand 1975). and It approach point is based against Ladewig upon level which 1973; important satisfaction. In which a comparison reference Eckart, an the to and work Is used to individual evaluates the attractiveness of a relationship or how satisfactory it 60 Is. In applying this framework to community satisfaction, Ladewig and McCann (1980: community 117) is based posit that largely an on individual's the outcomes satisfaction with of the the relationships he experiences in the community or expects to experience in the communi­ ty. In sum, over outcomes community members who perceive a high degree of control interdependent they experience relationship in the community will to the community and will have a highly display a more cohesive association to the overall community. As mentioned in the literature paradigm in which community element of review, satisfaction Deseran is viewed as the definition of situation with as the situational component. tion of negative or positive Here, (1978) proposed a the evaluative the community being seen evaluation refers to the imputa­ attributes to factual beliefs (Deseran 1978: 245): Placing community satisfaction in a definition of situation context extends the utility of this concept beyond scientif­ ic concerns with describing resident's evaluations of living circumstances... It can be treated as a subjective indica­ tor of human behaviors and interactions associated with the ongoing processes and forms sociologically labeled communi­ ty... Thus, community satisfaction measures may profitably be constructed to reflect observable structural parameters of communities. Such measures then become not only indica­ tors of satisfaction but also empirically validated theoret­ ical hypotheses concerning the nature of community. 61 For the purposes of this study, the Deseran formulation of community satisfaction will be used. Next, tion. it is important It is possible to address ways to measure to measure residents' community responses to satisfac­ individual community characteristics or to develop a composite of several charac­ teristics. For example, Jesser (1967) and Goudy (1977) used a multi­ term index of characteristics associated with one's desire to live in the community as a gauge of community satisfaction. A similar method of measurement is employed here and further elaborated in the upcoming section on the operation of variables. Community satisfaction attitudes toward teristics of possible the measures have the community and respondents relationships will often related to other to the various background charac­ (Glasgow, be been examined 1982; as Weitz, part of 1983). the These empirical analysis portion of this study. Satisfaction and Causal Modeling The long-standing interest of social scientists in causal interpreta­ tion of statistical relationships has been heightened by the develop­ 62 ment of become linear a causal useful and modeling (Blalock, appropriate type 1964). of linear Path analysis modeling in has social investigation because it provides for causal determinations among sets of measured variables.* It is essentially an analytic technique using standardized equations ships. regression Although discovering the causal giving quantitative technique of for examining path analysis does possible is provide not a relation­ a method procedure of relationships, it for interpretation to an assumed or suspected causal relationship as it may operate in a given system. Path analysis is concerned with linear, additive, asymmetric relation­ ships among determined dependent a to set be of measurable dependent variable is the hypothetical upon regarded combination of variables variables. others as as linear completely in the system. relationships. Specific The variables functions. determined assumption of causal introduced into (Duncan, of the system. Residual the system when complete some order Is The assumption of closure is represented by the connecting lines between the boxes the variables Each A path diagram illustrates represented by the direction of the arrows. sent by are or error that repre­ variables are determination does not hold 1966). For more on path analysis, 3ee Duncan (1966). 63 Numerical relationships regression equations. are Path derived through coefficients, multiple or representative partial of these relationships, are then statistically determined and placed on arrowed lines or paths. Each equation, as Blalock (1971: 1-2) points out, is recursive: ... all involve one-way causation ... and can be hierarch­ ically arranged in terms of causal priorities in such a way that it becomes possible to neglect variables that are clearly dependent upon a subset of variables. Reiterating, theory in path analysis allows the social scientist to represent a the form of a linear causal model. The linear, causal models are an oversimplified representation of social reality whereby designated variables are studied for one-way relationships. Path coefficients are derived quantifying these relationships from a set of recursive regression equations in a self-contained system. Examples of Path Models in Community Satisfaction Research Janet Ayres attributes of Thibout Weitz toward and (1983) devised social change. Kelly (1959) and a path Following Ladewlg model the and to test community conceptual rationale McCann (1980), Weitz 64 suggested a causal affect residents' ordering among several attitudes toward change. indicators believed to From a sample of residents in eight Indiana communities, the study evaluated several determinants of residents' degree of attitudes. residents' the intent interest in of the study was to measure the the future of their community and their willingness to be involved in community change. As illustrated in Figure dependent variable — Moving the to the the model begins attitudes toward change — left, social of community evaluation variables. 3.2, participation, attributes, with ultimate at the extreme right. community are the attachment, intervening and dependent Individual and community characteristics are the exogenous independent variables at the far left. Weitz determined important to how that one the evaluation feels community to handle problems. and ings length of also development the Personal local attributes community's public beyond the model. the relative policy, the of most the characteristics such as age importance though was ability residence were also important determinants. suggested of about of of policy The find­ attitudes in considerations the were 65 Figure 3.2. WEITZ PATH MODEL evaluation of community attributes community attachment social participation community and individual characteristics attitudes toward change Source: Weitz (1983) 66 The Weitz model described several possible pathways in which residen­ tial characteristics and beliefs tudes toward change. per se, being the the community affected atti­ Although community satisfaction was not measured "evaluation directly about relevant of to community the attributes" determination of can be viewed satisfaction. as The model provided a basis for determining relationships among individual characteristics and certain predispositions about the community. Nina Glasgow (1983), following the theoretical ideas of Deseran (1978), presented a path model that did examine community satisfaction among a migrant population. an expanded causal consequences among model This study's major objective was of community residential satisfaction migrants. The responses of 501 individuals for attitudes to test antecedents study examined and the toward community satisfac­ tion as one dependent variable influencing mobility intentions. At the extreme right in Figure 3.3 is the ultimate dependent variable: mobility intentions. To the left are the variables, including community satisfaction. exogenous, into ten income. independent variables. sociodemographic intervening At the far, left are the Glasgow later breaks categories, such dependent as age, this category education, and 67 Figure 3.3. GLASGOW PATH MODEL community involvement community satisfaction individual characteristics mobility intentions social networks Source: Glasgow (1982) 68 Glasgow found that one's living experiences affected community satis­ faction also, and size that age of place and home was satisfaction. Although the would findings ownership directly related the analysis support the were to important increases predictors; in focused on mobility importance of community intentions, further studying community satisfaction within the smaller community. Toward a Conceptual Model for Determining Community Satisfaction The conceptual model used to represent causal relationships determin­ ing community and Glasgow. satisfaction is similar to the models tested by Weitz The variables specified are consistent with the theoret­ ical proposals and definitions about community satisfaction described by Deseran (1978) and later employed by Glasgow (1982) in her study of non-metropolitan migrants. There are some discrepancies between this model and the Glasgow model regarding intervening variables. the exogenous, independent variables are similar. similar matters are treated in more detail later. to address the rationale for this model. These However, and other It is first useful Figure 3.4. A PATH MODEL FOR COMMUNITY SATISFACTION evaluation of services priorities for spending individual characteristic attitudes toward change community satisfaction 70 The rationale for constructing three areas: basis for this new model stems from concerns in 1) data and design limitations of previous studies; 2) a better understanding of the community; and 3) potential contributions to community theory. The first data. concern refers to both limitations in research design and As Sofranko and Fliegel (1984: 366) point out: One of the lesser examined aspects of community satisfaction has been its relationship to other behaviors and orienta­ tions. There have been few attempts to evaluate the rela­ tive Importance, in a predictive sense, of satisfaction measures vis-a-vis other demographic predictors of behavior. Previous data studies have from numerous Molnar et al, also been communities 1979). limited (Goudy, 1976; 1958) Bach collections and Smith, of 1977; Although there is a tradition in social science research of examining single communities and Bensmen, to aggregate (Lynd and Lynd, 1926; Vidich few have looked empirically at community satisfac­ tion in such a case. Second, citizen attention out: (Sorter involvement et al. in 1980). decision But as making Eberts has received (1982: 288) great points 71 Effective policy depends upon understanding the causes and interrelations among original trends. Such a task is especially difficult for local policy makers because data have been limited at the village, town and township level.. Research is needed on how important well-being indicators vary for people... at local jurisdictional levels. This model attitudes concerns is constructed that and not only possible to provide measure courses insight well-being of local into but preferences identify action. and specific Because public programs and proposals are often designed to satisfy community needs, an assessment of stand community the set of attitudes satisfaction is an program development (Schmid et al. Third, the 1963). social More structure research of is needed toward change that help under­ important aspect for policy and 1983). the community on modeling is changing (Warren, the structural determi­ nants of well-being (Eberts, 1982). Since the classic work of t« Tonnies, social philosophers and sociologists have struggled with the nature of (1963), social change in have even questioned the community. Scholars, such as Warren the meaning of "community" in contempo­ rary mass society. Major economic and social changes are apparent in small America towns across larger metropolitan areas. (Dillman and Hobbs, 1982) as well as in 72 H ow does one identify and quantify in these small towns? the changes that are taking place H o w does the perception of these changes affect satisfaction w ith the community? The model presented, and describes one approach the research to answering design of which those questions particular small town representative of one it in is a part, the case of a type of small town in the typological matrix described earlier. As in the case of Glasgow, the conceptual model for community satis­ faction is based upon the theoretical considerations of Deseran (1978) viz., community definition of a satisfaction situation forms known as an evaluative community element that has in the theoretical significance. In the becomes model constructed for the ultimate dependent this study, variable, community unlike satisfaction the case of Glasgow. This allows the focus of attention to remain on causal determinants of a well-being indicator Itself rather than on a well-being indicator serving as a causal determinant of some other attitude or perception. For live the in purposes the of this study, community will be underlying aspects analyzed to of determine the desire a more to precise 73 meaning of community satisfaction. objectives of this This analysis forms one of the key study because the structural components of satis­ faction would provide for a clearer, more distinguishable measurements for the community as a social unit (Sofranko and Fliegal, 1984). Moving toward the left, attitudes toward future change and support for public spending Lovejoy study. et become al. intervening (1983) and Farther to the left, correspond to these two: past change. Moreover, the variables implications based from on the findings Weitz of (1983) are two other intervening variables that evaluation of services and attitudes service assessments and spending toward priorities can no w be systematically studied as an element of a community satis­ faction system. position of Although there these variables, is little empirical evidence their placement appears for logical as the they presuppose attitudes toward spending and the future respectively. At the far left of the model, — individual characteristics. are the exogenous As in the case independent variables of the Glasgow model, the characteristics are limited to "individual" ones — ing to with since income, the age, Glasgow they are and model, better similar conditions "community" represented in of the respondents. characteristics the those pertain­ intervening are and As eliminated dependent lb variables. All variables are fully specified and measured in the operational model described in the next chapter. Summary A two-part framework for analysis developed and presented here. fying small in and dependent satisfaction. The distinguishing features for community causal first (as independent relationship, a basis of a small and levels the that been for of of key community determining town whether dependent otherwise extent influence it important is being or for other purposes. ordering and or has The second part is a path model variables provides satisfaction a measurement ditions research towns by primary economic function and by independent permits town The first part is a matrix for classi­ penetration by external institutions. for small The characteristics variables) influence the that level second and may of studied con­ have a community satisfaction. Together, these two parts analysis of community the subsequent communities for the framework should facilitate the satisfaction within a particular community and comparison which of of its analyses outcome with have been that of other conducted or are similar being 75 planned. It is hoped that the format and processes of this two-part framework will be useful to others who intend to conduct social structural, economic, leadership and values research on or about small towns. CHAPTER IV OVERVIEW OF THE CASE TO BE STUDIED AND THE RESEARACH METHODS TO BE EMPLOYED PART A: THE STUDY COMMUNITY The setting, including the important cultural history of the community is discussed are then presented in Part B and include a review of the survey methods. The variables the of in the Part A. The data conceptual model collection are application of statistical analysis. procedures then made operational for A description of the statistical procedures used to analyze the data is presented toward the end of the chapter. History Frankenmuth, Michigan was selected as the small town for the analysis of the determinants of community satisfaction. function, tourism and recreation. The It has, as its primary city and township of Franken­ muth, Michigan, proudly proclaim the tourist-based economy in their 77 promotional literature. characteristics of the Less obvious, self-reliant Frankenmuth displays community with independent the local leadership and cultural distinctiveness. Frankenmuth offers a unique opportunity to examine the community satisfaction in a particular small town known for progress and growth amid the turbulance of the Michigan economy. As expected, the commu­ nity depends upon tourist trade from beyond the nearby area. However, it plans and conducts its internal community affairs in a self-reliant manner. In 1845, a small section of "thumb" area company Bavaria of settled the of German on emigrants the banks of the eight-year-old State of Michigan. this pioneer settlement were a Lutheran minister, their families. from Cass the Franconia River in Included twelve farmers, the in and This religious and agricultural heritage were to play important roles in the growth and development of Frankenmuth. In the following years, the community attracted not only more farmers, but also craftsmen including that still the (Zeillnger, St. Lorenz stand. and Although 1982). St. John the Lutheran churches were built, Evangelical churches were Lutheran exclusively Churches Lutheran, 78 other Christian religious groups began to settle in the area as well, viz., Catholics, Methodists, and Fundamentalists, The community flight from grew slowly Michigan and central evenly cities until the late contributed to 1960's, a growth when of 32 percent in the City and 22 percent in the Township. Frankenmuth is Peninsula. The Flint, serve located in community the is "thumb" 15 miles area from of the Michigan Saginaw, 25 Lower miles from and 90 miles from the suburban Detroit metropolitan areas that as employment and service centers of the region (see Figures 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3). Education The history of Frankenmuth's St. Lorenz congregation. educational a relatively new begins with the As the boundaries of the parish grew larger, n ew schools were erected in outerlying areas. was system phenomena in the Although consolidation United States, pioneered the educational arrangement in 1927 (Zeilinger, Frankenmuth 1982). Both public and private school systems worked cooperatively for many years, actually sharing facilities and exchanging offerings. The State 79 Figure A.I. Map of Michigan Counties. MICHIGAN £!>'£«dl'/TTCtlWJdfli- \m J ri** »\ i 80 Figure 4.2 . Map of Saginaw County . S A G IN A W CO UNTY r-i e o. co c o 81 Figure 4.3 . V IS T A no. Map of the City and Township of Frankenmuth. N =3 S Cr* FRAN KEN j In! sWTR0STi HOLLAND KULMBAC GERA KINO SAKgR no. nr N K F R A[PUP N K E7846) N M|U T H HO. flUSCH o) H«UCK g. R A T H f l U N HO. 82 Superintendent eventually stopped this practice. In 1976, the public school system became one large township school district by a vote of the people. Continued migration to Frankenmuth and other nonmetro­ politan areas began to strain the limits of Frankenmuth schools in the sixties. were Additions were built constructed. Today, to existing buildings the boundaries of and new schools the school district encompass 65 square miles and a multiralllion dollar physical plant. Economy The German heritage has influenced the economic character and develop­ ment of the Frankenmuth community. tural goods, brewing, and German Arts and crafts, ethnic special agricul­ restaurants, small town a distinctive cultural atmosphere, have attractive given the to visitors. Tourism is the centerpiece of local economic activities. As early as 1906, eration town improvement. and community leaders were organizing Chamber of Commerce in the United that States (Zeilinger, 1982: 13). The Local Board to promote coop­ of Trade grew into a is acknowledged as "the most active Chamber for communities under 5,000 population." 83 The construction of a major freeway linking Detroit to nearby Saginaw contributed to the expansion of the tourist trade to Frankenmuth. "Bavarian dations Theme" and a expressed yearly in architecture, "Bavarian Festival," food, crafts, highlights The accommo­ the tourist appeal of the community*, Government The community of Frankenmuth has two political Frankenmuth and the Township of Frankenmuth. settled in Saginaw County State. Frankenmuth in Township 1845, was u n i t s , the City of When the German pioneers there were incorporated 435 in townships 1854 and in the governed largely by the rules drawn up by the local Lutheran Church Council and administered by the pastor. An original church document expresses the sentiment of the early leaders: There is no class distinction here...it must be their common religious background that united these people. (Zeilinger, 1982: 46) Frankenmuth Village separated from the incorporated under the laws of Michigan. the township's taxing structure, however. township in 1904 and was The village remained part of The village developed *0f the 2,800 employees in Frankenmuth, 1,800 or 64 percent are employed in tourism. (Source: Frankenmuth Chamber of Commerce) a superintendent type of government in public works as chief administrator. 1946 with the superintendent of In 1959, when the village became a city, with the superintendent becoming the city manager. The official village census in 1950 was 1,238 and 3,753 the continual last twenty subdivisions water in systems recreation public years, the have city. been facilities, library. there In has New been sanitary built. street 1979, in 1980. development sewers, storm drains, Other public improvements lighting, refuse pickup, and designated a the City Council in In the and include a major historic preservation district along the main downtown thoroughfare. The township undertaken. planned has A road city water, also grown. township zoning improvement and Commission was shared formed By extensive ordinance program fire 1970, and to oversee and map developed. police was The protection. the city-township construction updated township A was and a acquired City-Township service building, the fire department and the township cemetery. The official township census in 1980 was 2,331 residents in the whole community (see Table 4.1). for a total of 6,084 85 Table 4.1. Frankenmuth Community Demographics Demographic features Township City 2,389 724 3,853 1,354 89% $73,080 68% $76,662 1,238 1,987 $46,052,600 1.66 mills $66,057,200 8.9 mills 1980 Population Total Housing Units % Owner Occupied Median Home Value (83) Labor Force Tax Base Tax Rate (84) Source: Schneider, 1984: 8 Classification of Frankenmuth in the Framework As pointed out earlier, the primary economic base of the City Township of Frankenmuth is in recreation and tourism activities. 64 percent of Frankenmuth the also total labor displays the force independent well-defined. There cultural heritage of is employed characteristics community as described by Swanson et al. relatively is leadership strong (1979). structure. identification the community. of in these the and Over areas. self-reliant It has a strong and Its service with the area ethnic is and The development and implementa­ tion of the community survey from which this study is based is repre­ sentative of the "pro-active" self-reliant community. and independent nature of the typical 86 PART B: THE RESEARCH METHODS Survey Methods Recently, increasing numbers of professionals and other well-paid workers from metropolitan areas have become residents of the community (Lichty and Kimball, 1985). This expansion has brought new concerns for local decision makers and residents. of Frankenmuth considered issues Both the City and Township involving residential growth and both were aware of the development. Though each government had specific concerns, need vices for providing appropriate and paying for them. local These services, issues allocating created those ser­ controversy among residents and leaders and between both local governments. Facing a State requirement to update their joint City/Township master plan for economic development, opinions of the organizations, citizenry. the local leaders decided to survey the From the beginning, leaders, local and interested citizens saw this as an opportunity acquire community information for a wide sion making both applications. The decision to range of planning and deci­ to carry out the survey was 87 based on the community’s interest in anticipating and avoiding poten­ tial problems while maintaining local control. Frankenmuth again displayed the qualities of the self-reliant small town. It was evident, developing, 1981, implementing, community Office. however, of the community needed and analyzing the survey. officials A meeting was Department that contacted arranged with Resource Development the at Michigan County Extension specialists from the State University. By providing previous assistance to other communities specialists had developed a relatively low cost, in In the spring of Saginaw Extension assistance in Michigan, these scientifically valid survey procedure that specifically required active community involve­ ment and local control. The "Frankenmuth Community Opinion Survey", as the project was called, began in January, officials of 1982. Frankenmuth, It was a team effort among the citizens and fifteen graduate students and two faculty members from the Department of Resource Development at Michigan State University. 88 Survey Instrument The "Frankenmuth Community Opinion Survey", hereafter termed "survey," may be considered part_ of the lined by Kimball and Thullen 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. community (1975: development process as out­ 123) to: Examine the community situation; Arrive at goals for the community; Identify key problems; Determine the problem priorities; and Consider alternative solutions. The latter steps, such as selecting courses of action, would be con­ sidered part of the decision making phase of the process. There were survey. several key actors who were The City Manager and Township directly responsible Supervisor helped for the to initiate the study and were assisted in the coordination and communication with the community. Two university community resource development special­ ists provided technical assistance and designed the survey instrument and collection procedures. An Advisory committee, comprised of fifteen community residents was chosen to oversee the development and implementation of the survey. in a community development The graduate students who were enrolled field course provided the procedural and 89 analytical work. printing ments. and Funds copying were provided Faculty committee to reimburse survey costs, and costs other were borne community by by including travel, the City and Township govern­ the University. participants served The as advisory unpaid volun­ teers . Potential routed questions through the for the advisory worked with the graduate tionnaire. Eventually, survey were committee. suggested The by advisory citizens committee and then students and faculty to formulate the ques­ 500 City households and 450 Township house­ holds were selected on a random basis to receive the survey question­ naire. Data Collection In April, Frankenmuth techniques. buted 1982, a group of over 100 community volunteers gathered at City Over Hall to the next be trained week, the 35-page questionnaire these in questionnaire distribution community volunteers (see Appendix A) distri­ to the pre-selected households. Of the 500 City and 450 Township questionnaires distributed, 413 and 90 423 were respectively and 95 percent. completed and returned for return rates of 91 The relatively high return rate for such an extensive questionnaire demonstrated the high level of community interest. A Note on Factor Analysis Factor analysis variables the in oldest variables was the and chosen to research model. most used methods to a smaller number called factors. clarify and Factor for simplify analysis reducing several represents a large of the one of number of of presumed underlying characteristics As Kerlinger and Pedhazur (1973: 361) point out: Factors are usually derived from the intercorrelations among variables. If the correlation among five variables, for instance, are zero, no factors emerge. If, on the other hand, the variables are correlated, one or more factors emerge. Factor analysis is an arithmetical procedure for determining whether the intercorrelations among variables are due to a few common factors; the single most distinctive reducing capacity.* feature of factor analysis is its data- Factor analytic techniques enable a researcher to determine whether some underlying pattern of relationship exists in a way that a smaller set of ” factors" or components can be used as References are available for a general discussion of factor analysis; Cattrell (1965), Guttman (1954), Harmon (1967), Millar (1977) and Rummel (1966). 9L "source variables" to explain interrelationships in the data. Classical factor analysis is based on the understanding that observed correlations among variables are mainly the result of some underlying regularity in the data. the that result the served of some common It follows that observed correlations must be common determinants. determinants relationships than the variables. will in the data, not Implicitly, only account it for is all assumed the ob­ but will also be smaller in number The basic model is: Zj * AjlF l + Aj2F2 + AjmFm + djUj j = 1»2-“ -n where Z. i U, J d J variable 1 in standardized form hypothetical factors unique factor for variable j standardized multiple regression coefficient for variable j on factor; (factor loading) standardized regression coefficient of variable j on unique factor j The part of the variable that is Influenced by the shared determinants is usually called common variance and the part influenced by idiosyn­ cratic determinants Is usually called unique variance. The total variance of a variable accounted for by the combination of all common 2 factors is known as the communality and designated as h . tion of unique variance for a variable is the residual The propor­ and known as 92 l-ha . This proportion is not accounted for by the factors and the regression coefficient for unique by the square root provides a reduced, common factor d. is given Every factor solution correlation variable is known as coefficient between the factor loadings. each factor and each The combination of factor loadings for each variable provides the communality. The eigenvalue is a measure of the importance of each factor. Because the sum of eigenvalues provides a measure of total variance, individ­ ual eigenvalues indicate how much of the total variance by the individual factors. An eigenvalue of at least is explained 1.0 is usually used to designate a significant factor influence. Factors are dependent usually from extracted the other, in i.e., such a way it is that orthogonal one factor is in­ to other extracted factors. Unrotated factors extracted through various provide a meaningful pattern of variables. usually quartimax suggested to rotational simplify procedures factor were methods or may not Some type of rotation is structure. used. may The In this quartimax study, procedure rotates the initial factors of several variable sets in order to force 93 high factor loadings on one factor. objective It was used because the principle in this study is to reduce the data. This method tends to maximize the first factor and simplify the rows of the factor matrix. For the community satisfaction measure, were used because responsible. several underlying varimax rotational procedures structures were assumed to be This procedure centers on simplifying the columns of the factor matrix, thereby forcing high loadings on separate factors, not necessarily on the first as with quartimax. Principal Package without interaction for the Social Sciences, programs) here. factoring Is the most widely (PA2 In the Statistical a commonly used package of computer accepted factoring method and was used In this method, the user maximizes so-called inferred factors. Variables Made Operational Community Satisfaction Indicators. Community satisfaction was measured using a multi-item list of characteristics associated with a "desire to live characteristics in was the used community". In the A 25-item questionnaire set of following multi-item procedures used by Jesser (1967) and Goudy (1977). community previous 94 Because one of the alms of this study was to identify the determinants of community analysis satisfaction using varimax in iteration factors with (PA2) was factors account items. Of plained by the first factor, eigenvalues these specific rotational without for a 83 three procedures used greater percent factors, small to and extract than 1.0 61 percent 13 percent common factors. Three identified. These variance of factor principal factoring the were of the total town, among the the variance was by the second, 25 ex­ and 9percent by the third. The rotated factor matrix containing the item loadings is presented in Table 4.2. The common variation communalities. highest Once the clustering loading variables, substance of approach and the highest of variables .50 and above interpret and label the factors. descriptive totals are included, in this as well as the was completed, case, were used the to Such interpretation was based upon a involved a label loading variables that (cf. best Ladewig reflects the and McCann, 1980). The first factor contains the highest loadings for 9 community oppor­ tunity items. entertainment These include opportunities for community Involvement, opportunities, and cost-of-living (an economic oppor­ 95 tunity). nature The second factor contains items related of the community, such as small to the small population size. The town third factor contains four items that involve the ethnic or cultural charac­ teristics of the town. These three structural elements were therefore named community opportunities, and cultural then ties. combined to The form small town characteristics, high the loading three items under structural each elements and ethnic factor were of community satisfaction that will be used in the operational model. Attitudes Toward Change. 1978). Attitudes community Attitudes are evaluative in nature (Deseran, toward satisfaction change level have (Weitz, been shown 1983). to For be this related study, dimensions of change were identified and posed to respondents: you feel Three stayed about choices the changes were same; respondents were in the available: and asked 3) became their community since 1) became a worse a better feelings place about you have place to future 1) will become worse; two How do lived here? to live. live; 2) Likewise, change: What you think will happen in the community in the next five years? three choices were available: to do Again, 2) will stay the same; and 3) will become a better place to live. Support for Spending Priorities. It has been determined that while 96 Table 4.2. Rotated Orthogonal Factor Matrix for Community Satisfaction Factor Loadings Item 1 L. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. Small population size Closeness to large city Local government School system School athletics Religious opportunities Opportunities for involvment Entertainment opportunities Cultural opportunities Recreational opportunities — adults Recreational opportunities — youth Cost-of-living Shopping facilities Quality of health care Quality of civic organizations Pride of residents in county Relationships with neighbors Small town atmosphere Limited crime Family ties German influence Job Opportunities Bavarian archetecture Clean appearance Community decorations Eigenvalue Percent of Variance '’Loadings greater than ,50 listed. Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 .56 .50 h2 .38 .13 .44 .53 .52 .43 .56 .69 .77 .42 .54 .65 .74 .59 .75 .66 .61 ,66 .68 .62 .58 .51 .61 .71 .52 .62 .48 .63 .50 .38 .57 .69 .52 .57 .56 .71 .58 .52 .62 .56 .65 .52 8.06 60.9 1.69 12.8 1.24 9.4 97 the level of demand for specific correlated, there is strong higher or lower service tudes reason toward community satisfaction for specific express is that not themselves (Lovejoy, et al. measure perfectly those who desire through atti­ 1983). For both the question of how to spend tax dollars services was asked on a four point scale: ity; 2) low priority; combined services to believe levels will city and township residents, A public 1) no prior­ 3) moderate priority; and 4) high priority. of support for public spending was based on the four types of services that were common to both the city and township. Support for education was not included because school district bound­ aries involved other communities. protection; service. not be 2) fire protection; The four services were: 3) refuse removal; and 4) 1) police ambulance It should be noted that support for priority spending should interpreted as willingness to pay higher taxes; in fact, over 41 percent of both city and township residents surveyed considered the current level of nonschool taxes as "too high." Evaluation of Public and Private Services. There has been an interest in the relationship between service satisfaction and overall community satisfaction since the pioneering w ork of Davies (1945). ly, Rojek, et al. (1975) and Goudy More recent­ (1977) have conducted studies that 98 focused on local services and community satisfaction. respondents were public services asked to evaluate common to recorded on a four-point excellent. able scale: of variables without 1) were employed, and private and poor; without iteration local private town Factor analysis was used number factoring both 59 2) fair; services and Responses 3) good; L8 were and 4) to reduce the data to a manage­ losing (PA2), township. In this study, information. quartimax Principal rotational procedures identified a single significant factor for both public services. The results of public services, are summarized in Tables 4.3 and 4.4. In the case thirds of the variation among recorded with were loadings then combined for the first 16 variables. seven variables factor accounted for two- An eigenvalue of 6.3 was greater to form the variable EVPU used than .50. These in the operational model. For private services, the first extracted factor accounted for over 71 percent of the variance for the 59 items in the questionnaire. factor had an eigenvalue of almost 16. Eleven items with This factor loadings greater than .50 were combined to form the variable EVPV used in the operational model. 99 Table A.3. Rotated Orthogonal Factor Matrix for the Evaluation of Public Services Factor Loading Item Factor 1 h 2 1. Ambulance Service .69 .48 2. Parks .72 .56 3. Recreation .84 .64 4. Community Education .82 .62 5. Parking .54 .39 6. Library .78 .58 7. Planning and Zoning .56 .46 Percent of Variance 66.9 Eigenvalue 6,3 ^Loadings greater than .50 listed. Individual common Characteristics. socioeconomic indicators satisfaction research (Weitz, and home (Glasgow, ownership 1982). Age, have been income, of 1983). shown and education individuals used in levels are community In addition, length of residence to be of some predictive value 100 Table 4.4. Rotated Orthogonal Factor Matrix for the Evaluation of Private Services Factor Loading Item Factor 1 h2 1 . Family Restaurants .57 .34 2. Private Schools .58 .50 3. Pharmacies .56 .37 4. Florist Shop .57 .36 5. Meat Processing .56 .39 6. Veterinary Services .67 .42 7. Nursing Homes .60 .44 .65 .41 Banking Services .60 .43 10. Eye Care Services .72 .50 11. Photography .69 .51 8 . Hardware Stores 9. Percent of Variance 71.7 Eigenvalue 15.9 ^Loadings greater than .50 listed. 101 In this study, both age of resident community were measured in years. and length of on graduate" to a five-point "beyond home ownership a scale in the Income was measured on a five-point scale from "less than $10,000" to "over $50,000." measured residence ranging bachelors from degree." (home owner/renter) Education was also "less The was converted than nominal high school question of to an ordinal scale through the use of dummy variables. These measures are summarized in Table 4.5 and an illustration of the operational model is presented in Figure 4.4. Table 4.5. Variables Measured Variables Measurement Community Satisfaction A summation of a four-scale response to characteristics deemed important in the "desire to live" in the community, 4 3 2 1 = = = => Very important Moderately important Slightly important Not important Factor analysis reduced the original 25 variables to 3 underlying factors. 102 Table 4.5 (Continued) (OPRT) Factor I 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. (SMTC) (ETHC) Small Town Characteristics Small population size Pride in community Small town atmosphere Limited crime Clean appearance Factor III 1. 2. 3. 4. Attitude Toward Change Opportunities for community involvement Entertainment opportunities Cultural opportunities Recreational opportunities (adult) Recreational opportunities (youth) Cost of living Shopping facilities Health care Civic organizations Factor II 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Community Opportunities Ethnic and Cultural Ties Family ties German influence Bavarian architecture Community decorations Three-item scale that answered how one felt about change in the c o m munity. 103 Table 4.5 (Continued) (PCOM) In the past five years: 1 = Worst place to live 2 = Stayed the same 3 =* Better place to live (OCOM) In the next five years: 1 3 Will become worse 2 - Will stay same 3 » Will become better Spending Priority Only four public services were common to city and township residents so they were combined here. Question referred to how local government should spend tax dollars. 1 2 3 4 (PRIO) = = = = No priority Low priority Moderate priority High priority Four services were: 1. 2. 3. 4. Police protection Fire protection Refuse collection Ambulance service Table 4.5 (Continued) Evaluation of Private Services Four-item scale that asked respondents to assess the quality of local public services. 1 2 3 4 (EVPV) = a = Poor Fair Good Excellent Factor analysis used to reduce 59 variables to a single factor comprised of eleven variables. Factor I 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Evaluation of Public Services Private Services Family restaurants Private schools Pharmacies Florist shop Meat processing and sales Veterinary services Nursing homes Hardware stores Banking services Eye care Photography Four-item scale that asked respondents to assess the quality of local public services. 1 2 3 4 = » = Poor Fair Good Excellent 105 Table 4.5 (Continued) (EVPU) Factor analysis used to reduce 16 common public services to a single factor made up 9 variables. Factor I 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Public Services Ambulance service City parks City recreation Community education Library Building inspection Elementary schools Middle schools High school Age (XAGE) Asked in years Length of Residence (XYEARS) Asked in years Home Ownership (XOWN) Asked if: 1. 2. Rent or lease home or apartment Own or in process of buying home Converted to ordinal measurement through the use of dummy variables: rent own 01 02 1 0 0 1 01 = 1 02 = 1 106 Table 4.5 (Continued) Educational Level (XED) Asked in five categories: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Household Income (XINC) Less than high school graduate Completed high school Some college Completed bachelors degree Beyond a bachelors degree Asked in five categories: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Less than $10,000 $10,000 to $19,999 $20,000 to $29,999 $30,000 to $49,999 Over $50,000 Approach to Data Analysis Subprogram PEARSON CORR, in SPSS version No. 9 (Nie et al. 1975), was used to compute Pearson product-moment correlations for pairs of vari­ ables in this study. These relationships are often termed "zero- order1' correlations because no controls for other variables are made. The Pearson correlation coefficient, r, is use to measure the strength of a relationship between two interval-level variables. In this case, the fit strength of relationship indicates the goodness of gression line to the data and, when r is squared, the of a re­ proportion of 107 Figure 4.5 Applied Model EVPU OPRT V XAGE. PRIO EVPV SMTC XYEARS EXMC XED y< .33, R The 2 town by three vari­ characteristics system explained =* .11. 11 Service assess­ spending priorities and attitudes toward past change showed the strongest positive relationships. ship, (OPRT), ties percent of the variance for OPRT: was beta of .10, between There was also a moderate relation­ length of residence and community oppor- 128 Table 5.8. Decomposition of Effects with Path Coefficients for the Community Satisfaction Indicators. Opportunities OPRT (beta) Small Town SMTC (beta) Ethnic ETHC (beta) Variables Independent Dependent XAGE Age .07 .05 .38 XYEARS Length of residency .20 .10 .03* XOWN Home ownership .02* .57 XED Education level .07* .04* .07 XINC Income level -.05* .05* .04* EVPU Public services .07 .11 .04* EVPV Private services .15 .12 .00* PRIO Spending . 18 .13 .13 0C0I1 Past change .13 -.06* .04* PCOM Future Change .05* .05* R Total effect .33 .25 .44 R2 % variance explained .11 .07 .20 fwR2 Residual .94 .96 .89 -.04* *This path coefficient was not significant at the .05 level. -.08 129 tunities. also The related accounted variables The variables to for small the in the town largest system, decomposition for of service evaluations opportunities. share of the showed a spending were or cultural ties Ethnic variance The R for ETHC was effects and among the .44 with an R moderately 2 strong of prior ,20. positive relationship from age and a more modest positive effect from spending priorities. The strength of ethnic or cultural ties as an indicator of community satisfaction for older residents was not unexpected. relationship of the spending for those public services priority variable that enhance may indicate The support the ethnic or cultural dimen­ sion of the community. The Just-Identified Model The path model with beta coefficients, now termed the just-identified model, is illustrated in Figure 5.2. Only those relationships with a significance level of .05 or less are indicated. Thus far, only direct causal effects have been discussed. There are also indirect effects from the interaction of intervening variables on 130 Path Coefficients (Beta Weights) for all Variables in Operational Model XINC EVPU EVPV .17 .19 a * * -.09 .15 .07 .09 * XAGE XYEARS XED XOWN XINC a -.13 .29 — .39 — .10 * — .08 EVPU EVPV PRIO PRIO OCOM PCOM ORRT SMTC ETHC .07 .20 .05 .10 .38 A A A .10 A A A A .15 -.19 -.12 A A A A .07 -.07 -.08 o XOWN A A A A A .15 A A A A A A .08 .11 .12 .13 A A -- .07 .15 .18 .13 ____ .61 .13 i k A A A A 1 H-* Table 5.9. .64 — OCOM PCOM A * A test showed that this path coefficient was not significant at the .05 level dependent variables. For example, in a three-variable system such as: C There can be two relationships direct effect of A on Cj and B on C. between A and C. The first is the the second is the indirect effect of A on B The total indirect effect can be calculated by multiply­ ing the effects of A to B and B to C. Figure 5.2. Just-identified Model with Path Coefficients and Residual Effects E 8 Km 11 .IQ OPRT > ..1 9 SMTC 132 For the just-identified model, dependent variables. tionship, however, Because the there are many of total the indirect paths relatively modest indirect effects on direct any to the rela­ individual dependent variable are less than .10 and, therefore, not considered to have a significant causal effect. The variables satisfaction residency, the that indicators vary depending relationships on the relationship opportunity to the related small to the important to underscore indicator; home or cultural has indicator; ties Length a strong and age is indicator. that the coefficients of determination, 2 R of relate modestly to ownership town characteristics ethnic to the community indicator. and to some extent service evaluations, community moderately show the strongest measurements for all of the several relationships are small. It is i.e., CHAPTER VI CONCLUSIONS Restatement of Study Purpose Difficulties in conceptual design and measurement have hindered social science research on small towns. some of these problems by: the classification and the pattern of fying measures and of This study has attempted to address 1) suggesting a typological framework for small external towns through primary institutional determining factors economic relationships; for community function 2) identi­ satisfaction among residents of a specific type of small town for which data were available the for specific empirical small town analysis; and 3) selected and the displaying the fit between framework for classifying small towns. y ■ The typological framework was developed to assist and generalizing from the case studies prevalent in in both small comparing town re­ 134 search. The analysis of community satisfaction for one type of small town was aimed at clarifying expressed by local the residents indicators of toward their individual well-being locale and testing for possible determining factors. Theoretical Contributions The Typological Framework The concept of a typology for communities has a long history in the It social sciences. nities differ Tonnies through among local people. the (1887), for example, pattern of human suggested that commu­ relationships displayed Zimmerman (1938) and Merton (1957) built upon the typological traditions to formulate other ways to differentiate among various communities. A typology of small studies that becomes difficult, communities focus that Cross-sectional towns on is particularly communities if not share the studies on use impossible, the other single to distinction useful today because case compare of hand, a small often data the wide many sets. range population implicitly It of size. assume common attributes or structural elements without empirical justifica­ tion. 135 The typological framework developed here suggests that it is possible to distinguish among various small towns by identifying two important characteristics — primary economic function relationships with external institutions. and Blakely (1981), distinctions and critical Swanson to their et al. small and Schroeder (1979) town have the pattern of (1981), Bradshaw considered analyses. By these creating a matrix based on these characteristics it becomes possible to compare, contrast, and generalize from previous research and to improve the design of future investigations, involving small towns. Frankenmuth economy and institutions. displays a the characteristics self-reliant These pattern characteristics of of a recreation/leisure relationships suggest a strong to external fit to the typological framework indicated by the intersection of the recreation and leisure categories to the self-reliant category indicated by the matrix in Figure 3.1 on page 55. Determinants of Community Satisfaction Since the pioneering work of Thorndike (1939), efforts to measure and determine facets of community well-being have interested researchers. Community satisfaction, as a research technique aimed at assessing 136 human well-being, reasons. has received increasing attention for a variety of Policy decisions based on objective indicators, for example, do not necessarily reflect the attitudes of the persons policies are relevant (Marans and Rogers, 1975). for whom the Yet questions as to the definition, measurement and determinants of community satisfaction prevail. The literature has been inadequate and sometimes contradic­ tory regarding these issues (Ladewig and McCann, This study suggests that there are multiple 1980). indicators of community satisfaction that have specific relevance to certain individuals based upon their fore, socio-economic characteristics. provide an important reference point community satisfaction levels if the These indicators there­ in tracking or predicting sociodemographic profile of the community is available. In addition, by clarifying the meaning of community satisfaction, and by determining relevant factors responsible for community satisfaction it becomes possible to design elements of the ideal or "good communi­ ty" (Warren, 1963) that has gained rists and planners over the years. the attention of community theo­ 137 Case Study Findings and Conclusions Profile Data and Research Model Over two-thirds of the more than ten years. of age. of respondents in the community for Half of the respondents were older than 46 years a home. Nearly half household income of over $30,000. less. lived A large percentage of respondents own or are in the process purchasing used have to be called traditional, Of managers, the 61 percent proprietors, who of the respondents indicated a Family patterns appear to fit what i.e., two adults with were employed technical workers or two children or full-time, half professionals. were Only 30 percent of the respondents were retired. As expected, age and length of residence displayed a strong positive correlation while education level had a moderately negative tion with both age and length of residence. correlation to the opportunity indicator correla­ Age had a slight positive of community satisfaction. Length of residence displayed a stronger, positive correlation to the indicator small town characteristics. level was positively correlated to Again, as expected, educational income level. The evaluation of public services had a strong and positive correlation to the evalua­ 138 tion of private services. Both public and private service evaluations were moderately correlated in a positive direction to spending priori­ ties. These three community service variables were positively all the satisfaction the correlation was modest, change had a strong, change, but faction showed from positive only indicators. indicators, to although .35. correlation slight The .13 the strength Attitudes to attitudes correlations satisfaction correlated with to the indicators about of past about future community satis­ themselves were moderately correlated in a positive direction to each other. Findings As is evident from the large plained only a small amount variables of findings. tively Among strong ethnic ties. moderate Length the closed the of individual to effects, the determining system, relationship yet there community path factors were characteristics, the the for some age model the ex­ test interesting showed satisfaction a rela­ indicator Length of residency, on the other hand, displayed a more relationship of residual residency to was the indicator related to for community private opportunities. service evaluations. Income level was related to home ownership and showed a slightly nega­ tive relationship to spending. Although the evaluations of private 139 services were strongly related to the evaluations for public services, they displayed very small relationships to the community satisfaction indicators. Although the attitudes toward past related to the attitudes toward future change, appear to be system. related For the or predictive community of any satisfaction ables accounted for the largest amount ethnic ties, for an R 2 with a total R 2 of .20; change were strongly these variables did not of the variables indicators, of variance in the the system vari­ for the indicator the system variables accounted of .11 for the opportunity indicator of satisfaction. Conclusions Small towns in the United States continue to attract the attention of social scientists. reasons 1981) for a population have been migration frequently barriers. used less to Community experimentally attention has been many to but empirical analysis has been methodological erably There claims smaller to communities variables 1984). for (Beale, limited by both conceptual and satisfaction examine devoted to analysis the small the issues validity and utility of community satisfaction research Fliegel, understanding town. has been Consid­ regarding the (Sofranko and There has been no agreement on the number of central measuring community satisfaction in small towns and 140 scant attention to the replication of previous approaches. This study research reviews and central identified opportunities; cultural the 2) ties. small three town dimensions of important community measures: characteristics; Although predictive and satisfaction 1) 3) levels, ethnic factors were modest, of residence and home ownership displayed a relationship satisfaction substantiating some of community age, and length to community the previous research in this area. The typological examining framework community suggested specific research here and now provides relating the a basis results for to a common set of community characteristics. Implications from the Case Study Findings The Typological Framework The development concerns of involving a typological the reliability framework of small addresses some town research. of the Economic function and pattern of relationship to external environments describe important factors that distinguish the nature of small towns and may 141 distinguish their citizens' Frankenmuth, Michigan, attitudes as well. is one type of small town characterized by its tourist-based economy and a self-reliant pattern of relationships with its surrounding case based institutional environment. upon community satisfaction This study offers a research that permits test a more sensible and systematic comparison of other communities. Community Satisfaction Research Many of the specific measures used in this study were straightforward, such as age, education level and home ownership. Other measures were attitudinal in nature and subject to interpretation. measures were questionnaire constructed by combining to form an index. separate Even in these Several of these responses instances, from an the effort was made to utilize the approaches and definitions embodied in previ­ ous research literature on community satisfaction. public services separate (EVPU) public information is is service lost, such one such variable assessments. an index made Although can increase The evaluation of up of a number specific validity of service of the instrument by providing multiple samples for the same general attitude (Henderson et al. 1978) and increase the precision of measurement. 142 A causal model was developed to empirically test local determinants of community satisfaction for one small town. Factor analysis was used to Identify and develop the measures for community satisfaction based upon previous research (cf. Bivarlate and multi-variate Jesser, 1967; statistical John procedures were for relationships among the model variables. vidual characteristics of age and predictive of community satisfaction. and length As of Knop, used expected, residency 1970). to test the indi­ were most The large residual effects were a bit larger than previous studies, suggesting that factors outside of the system play an important predictive role in community satisfaction or that the ultimate reordering when dependent conducting variables future community require reformulation satisfaction research or on small towns. Recommendations Policy Citizens of their jobs, public small towns are in daily their local services, opinion survey can reveal lead to community satisfaction. contact with their neighbors, and the civic issues of the day. the attitudes and preferences A that The sample size and return rate of 93 143 percent were large enough for the expressed attitudes to be represen­ tative of the whole community. These attitudes may provide a context for decision making particularly among budgetary items such as public services. Effective community development efforts are due in part to an informed understanding of the community. Local actions, plans for action, or planning for the future are enhanced by an accurate and timely survey of citizen attributes 1983). attitudes preferences. of a community In an officials and era of affect limited How residents their desire resources, it feel to live is about there Important the (Weitz, for public to plan and prioritize with the general public's essential needs in mind. In this study, the variable of ethnic or cultural significant indicator of community satisfaction, residents. Because respondents were cultural the elderly, activities survey noted local deserve a policies attention. the most especially for older relatively that ties was large enhance Service the portion of ethnic or evaluations and spending were also slightly related to community satisfaction and may have implications for services. for local decisions relating to budget allocations 144 Subjective evaluations being important are factors noted (e.g., to be considered Marans and Rogers, 1975) in policy decisions. as Atti­ tudes at the local level play a critical role in determining program effectiveness. When community satisfaction data are related to policy decisions they can be highly predictive of the success or failure of community efforts (Ladewig and McCann, 1980). The attitudes expressed here may be representative of similar communi­ ties as described by the typological matrix. future research decision makers to validate in small this towns Although it is left for conclusion, it may be useful to note how attitudes are for similar or dissimilar when the local economy or pattern of external relationship with institutions "coopted" either change. communities small town would One might display characteristics or expect attitudes ethnic that that ties "absorbed" do as not or include indicators of community satisfaction. Research This study had three objectives: 1) to provide a typological frame­ work for classifying small towns by primary economic function and the extent of penetration by external institutions; 2) to propose a path 145 model for testing independent and dependent variables community satisfaction; and 3) to show a fit that influence between the specific small town selected and the framework developed for classifying small towns. The theory and methodology advanced in this study of community satisfaction has been tested here with data from one small town. framework- needs further examination and testing, using other The case examples of small towns. Refinement of the research model is suggested. It is possible that a number of intervening factors have been left out of the model that may influence local community issues not satisfaction. These examined here but effects relevant may be related to a community like to the case example. The importance of subjective indicators will undoubtedly force social scientists that to assess serve as the the role of values, intervening individuals's evaluation clarify compare and of these understanding of small towns. attitudes, filters between the community. Indicators will the and expectations community Research greatly that and helps advance the to the 146 Limitations of the Study Although the satisfaction, study clearly those concepts. 1981. is oriented it is toward limited the by the The case study data were Though somewhat dated, concepts data of community available collected to in the spring of the data do provide a valid snapshot of the conditions and relationships present at that point in time. data also variables provide a and measurement the factual purpose of this study, 1981 is useful. test basis of for approaching association among the These selection them. For the City and Township survey information It is, however, somewhat dated and should be of the from recog­ nized. The questions selected in 1981 for the Frankenmuth Community Opinion Survey were not necessarily evaluated to determine if those questions would or solicit subjective, Information i.e., based that was on objective, attitudinal i.e., factually based, assessments. To have the best test data, the researcher must be able to distinguish if the data are objective independent variables or subjective, intervening and dependent variables. This limitation becomes particularly important regarding the questions 147 pertaining to community factually-based satisfaction information. A that community may include objective characteristic as or a satis­ faction indicator that contains objective information is logically an independent and characteristic Survey exogenous that questions variable is subjective that yield become problematic since in a system model. A community is logically a dependent variable. a mixture the results of these two characteristics in the study model may mask the true relationships between the actual independent and actual dependent conditions. As pointed out earlier, elderly more respondents. often than other the survey profile indicated a large number of Retirees age and groups senior and may citizens tend over-represent to be the home actual community demography in that age cohort. The research model was based upon theoretically derived relationships. The specific variables and their causal ordering were identified from the literature to the extent possible. The causal ordering of vari­ ables such as education, income and home ownership are consistent with previous research. The position of the intervening variables, such as public service evaluation, are less certain. Other studies have used 148 these variables variables in different (e.g., Weitz, The variance sequences — 1983). explained by the model as designed and data available is very modest. may be explained by even as ultimate dependent factors tested with the A considerable portion of the variance outside the model. Although it is ac­ knowledged that only a limited amount of variables are workable in any given test system, existing variables other factors might have been included while were excluded. Even with the some existing variables intact, it is conceivable that the order of variables in the system is erroneous. Revision of the model and further testing may increase the explanation of variance in the system. It was decided that further revisions and validations of the model and further recommendations and analyses of data are best left for subsequent research. In the measurement of variables, a question is always raised whether the approach used accurately measures what is intended to be measured. As noted earlier, the combination of several questions produced index variables that increased the validity of attitudinal information. The many reliability variables of some of necessarily these measures results in a may be suspect; loss of combining information. In 149 addition, by employing factor analytic procedures, larger sets of data were effectively reduced to a smaller number of underlying "factors." Whether these "factors accurately explain them is a matter for further examination. the labels attributed to APPENDIX A THE QUESTIONNAIRE 150 APPENDIX A THE QUESTIONNAIRE DIRECTIONS FOR FILLING OUT THE QUESTIONNAIRE: * The accompanying letter states whether the survey should be filled out by an adult male or adult female In your household. (This ensures representation by both men and women in the community.) * Please follow instructions and answer each section as best you can. * Some questions are designed specifically for township residents, others are designed for city residents. The majority of the questions are to be answered by both city and township residents. * Complete the questionnaire by yourself without help from another person. * Do not write your name on the questionnaire. This will ensure that your response will remain anonymous and confidential. SEAL THE COMPLETED SURVEY IN THE ATTACHED ENVELOPE. THE COMPLETED SURVEY WILL BE COLLECTED BY A COMMUNITY VOLUNTEER AT A TIME CONVENIENT TO YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION! 151 Do you live in the (circle one number) 1 TOWNSHIP PLEASE GO 2 CITY TO PAGE 3 Your opinions about local services are important. We would like you to share your feelings about local services in Frankenmuth. A. In the near future, the CITY will be updating its "Master Plan" for city planning. Your opinions about PUBLIC SERVICES will help city officials design that "Master Plan". Extent of Use (Circle ONE Number) Evaluation of Quality (Circle ONE number) B C D E F G H 1. Ambulance Services........... 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 2. City P a r k s .................... 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 3. City Recreation ............. 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 A ITEM IUMBER 4. Community Education ......... . 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5. Community Parking ........... . 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 6. Wickson Library ............. . 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 2 3 4 2 3 4 10. City M a n a g e r .................. 2 3 4 1L. City Streets.................. 2 3 4 12. Elementary Schools........... 2 3 4 13. Middle Schools................ 2 3 4 14. High Schools .................. 2 3 4 15. Fire Department ............. 2 3 4 16. Planning and Zoning ......... 2 3 4 17. Historic District Commission. 2 3 4 7. Building Inspection ......... 8. City Council.................. 9. City Department, Staff. . . . A = NEVER, B = SELDOM, C = MODERATE, D = FREQUENT E = POOR, F « FAIR, G - GOOD, H = EXCELLENT . 1 152 CITY RESIDENTS ONLY PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Evaluation of Quality (Circle ONE number) B. ITEM NUMBER E F G H 18. Police D e p a r t m e n t 1 2 3 A 19. Sewer System 1 2 3 A 20. Snow Removal.............................................. 1 2 3 A 21. Street L i g h t i n g ......................................... 1 2 3 A 22. Street Tree M a i n t e n a n c e ................................ 1 2 3 A 23. Trash Collection......................................... 1 2 3 A 2A. Water System.............................................. 1 2 3 A Of the PUBLIC SERVICES LISTED in Section A, which one would you MOST like to see improved? FILL IN THE BOX WITH THE ITEM NUMBER: Why would you like to see this service improved? C. Are there any PUBLIC SERVICES not on this list that you would like to see offered in the CITY? 153 CITY RESIDENTS ----------------- PLEASE GO TO PAGE 5 TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS START HERE D. Your opinions about PUBLIC SERVICES will help officials plan for the future. Extent of Use Evaluation of Quality (Circle ONE Number) (Circle ONE number) A B C D E F G H . 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 3. City Recreation ........... 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 4. Community Education . . . . 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5. Parking in Frankenmuth. . . 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 6. Saginaw Public Library. . . 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 7. WIckson Library ........... 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 8. Municipal Water System. 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 10. Ditch Maintenance ......... 1 2 3 4 11. Elementary Schools......... 1 2 3 4 12. Middle Schools............. 1 2 3 4 13. High Schools................ 1 2 3 4 14. Fire Department ........... I 2 3 4 15. Planning and Zoning . . . . 1 2 3 4 16. Police Department ......... 1 2 3 4 17. Roads ...................... 1 2 3 4 18. Snow Removal................ 1 2 3 '4 19. Street Lights ............. 1 2 3 4 20. Township B o ard ............. 1 2 3 4 21. Township Offices........... 1 2 3 4 22. Township Supervisor . . . . 1 2 3 4 ITEM NUMBER 1. Ambulance Services......... 2. City Parks . ................ . . 1 . . . . 1 9. Building Inspection . . . . 154 TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS ONLY PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE E. Of the PUHLIC SERVICES listed in. Section D, which one would you MOST like to see improved? FILL IN THE BOX WITH THE ITEM NUMBER: Why would you like to see this service improved? F. Are there any PUBLIC SERVICES not on this list that you would like to see offered in Frankenmuth TOWNSHIP? EVERYONE (CITY AND TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS) FILL OUT SECTION G - S (PAGES 5 - 30) 155 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE G. Now, we would like to know your feelings about the PRIVATE SERVICES available in the City and Township of Frankenmuth. Extent of Use Evaluation of Quality (Circle ONE Number) (Circle ONE number) B C D E F G H 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 3. Automotive Sales................1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 4. Automotive Service Stations . . 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5. Bakeries.........................1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 6. Banking Services................1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 7. Barber Shops.................... 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 8. Bars and Taverns................1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 9. Beauty S h ops.................... 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 10. Book S t o r e s .................... 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 14. Cable T V .........................1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 15. Car H a s h .........................1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 ITEM DUMBER A 1. Appliance Stores............. . 1 2. Automotive Repair Shops . . . . 11. Bowling Lanes .................. 1 1 12. Building Contractors........... 1 13. Building Supplies ............. 1 16. Carpeting and Floor Covering Stores ................ 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 17. Chamber of Commerce ........... 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 18. Clothing Stores ................ 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 19. Dental Services ................ 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 21. Eye Care S e r v i c e s ............. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 22. Fabric and Craft Store......... 1 O* 4 3 4 1 2 3 4 23. Family Restaurants............. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 20. Dry Cleaners.................... 1 t 156 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Extent of Use Evaluation of Quality (Circle ONE Number) (Circle ONE number) ITEM NUMBER H D B 24. Farm Implement Sales and Services................ 2 3 4 2 3 4 25. Fast Food Restaurants . . . 2 3 4 2 3 4 26. Feed and Supply Store . . . 2 3 4 2 3 4 27. Financial Counseling. . . . 2 3 4 2 3 4 28. Florist S hop ................ 2 3 4 2 3 4 29. Frankenrauth N e w s ........... 2 3 4 2 3 4 30. Frankenmuth Historical M u s e u m ...................... 2 3 4 2 3 4 31. Funeral H o m e ................ 2 3 4 2 3 4 32. Furniture Store ........... 2 3 4 2 3 4 33. Grocery Stores............. 2 3 4 2 3 4 34. Hardware Stores ........... 2 3 4 2 3 4 35. Insurance Agencies......... 2 3 4 2 3 4 36. Landscaping and Nursery S tores...................... 2 3 4 2 3 4 37. Laundromat.................. 2 3 4 2 3 4 38. Legal Services............. 2 3 4 2 3 4 39. Meat Processing and Sales . 2 3 4 2 3 4 40. Mo t els ...................... 2 3 4 2 3 4 41. Natural Gas and Electrical Services.................... 2 3 4 2 3 4 . 42. Novelty and Souvenir Shops. 2 3 4 2 3 4 43. Nursing Homes ............. 2 3 4 2 3 4 44. Nursery Schools ........... 2 3 4 2 3 4 45. Party Stores................ 2 3 4 2 3 4 46. Pharmacies.................. 2 3 4 2 3 4 157 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Extent of Use Evaluation of Quality (Circle ONE Number) (Circle ONE number) ITEM JUMBER A B C D E F G H 47. Photography Studio......... 2 3 4 1 2 3~ 4 48. Physician Services During the W e e k .................... 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 50. Plumbing/Heating Supplies and Services................ 2 3 4 \ 2 3 4 51. Printing Services ......... 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 52. Private School............. 2 3 4 I 2 3 4 53. Real Estate Agencies. 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 55. Trash Collection........... 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 56. Travel Service............. 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 57. Veterinary Services . . . . 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 58. W ineries .................... 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 49. Physician Services During the Week-end................ . . 1 . . . 54. Telephone Service ......... 59. Yard and Garden Equipment, Supplies, and Repair. . . . . . . . 1 1 Of the PRIVATE SERVICES listed in Section G, which one would you MOST LIKI to see improved? FILL IN THE BOX WITH THE ITEM NUMBER: Why would you like to see this service improved? 158 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE I. Are there any PUBLIC SERVICES not on this list that you would like to see offered in the City and Township of Frankenmuth? J. Please indicate where you usually PURCHASE the following goods and services Where You Usually Purchase Goods/Services (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B C D E . 1 2 3 4 5 2. Automobile Sales . . 2 3 4 5 3. Banking Services . . 2 3 4 5 4. Clothing ........... 2 3 4 5 5. Dental ............. 2 3 4 5 6. Farm Implement Repair and Maintenance...................... 1 2 3 4 5 7. Farm Implement Sales 2 3 4 5 8. Feed and Agricultural Supplies . 1 2 3 4 5 9. Groceries............. 2 3 4 5 10. Home Maintenance . . 2 3 4 5 11. Insurance Agencies . 2 3 4 5 12. Major Appliance Sales (e -g*. refrigerator, washer). 2 3 4 5 13. M e d i cal............... 2 3 4 5 14. Movie Theatres . , . 2 3 4 5 15. Restaurants........... 2 3 4 5 1. Automobile Repair and Service. ■ A = DON'T USE GOODS OR SERVICES, B = FRANKENMUTH CITY, C = FRANKENMUTH TOWNSHIP, D = ELSEWHERE IN SAGINAW COUNTY, E = OUTSIDE THE COUNTY 159 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Where You Usually Purchase Goo'ds/Services (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B C D 'E 1 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 16. Small Household Appliances (e.g., blender, toaster) . . . . 17. Yard and Garden Equipment, Supplies, and R e p a i r 1 Next, we would like your opinion about a number of problems that have been identified by some Frankenmuth area residents. K. Your input will help local leaders determine whether or not action needs to be taken on each of these situations. Please express an opinion on all situations that you are familiar with. Where do you stand? Assessment of the Situation (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B C D E 1. Loss of farmland in the township ...................... 2 3 4 5 2. City annexation of township l a n d ........................... 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 LAND USE AND GROWTH 3. Increase of residential sub­ divisions in the township, . . 4. Increase of commercial development in agricultural a r eas........................... . 1 A « NOT A PROBLEM, B =» SLIGHT PROBLEM, C =* MODERATE PROBLEM, D = SERIOUS PROBLEM, E - NO OPINION 160 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Assessment of the Situation (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A 5. Increase of residential development along township road f r o n t a g e s ................. I B . C D E 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 8. Commercially-zoned farmlands taxed at the higher commercial rates............................ 1 2 3 4 5 9. Commercial property in residential areas of the city, . 1 2 3 4 5 10. Too much land industrially zoned in the city............... 1 2 3 4 5 11. Rapid population growth of the Frankenmuth a r e a ............... I 2 3 4 5 12. Lack of adequate industrial b a s e ............................ 1 2 3 4 5 13. Lack of adequate commercial b a s e ............................ 1 2 3 4 3 6. Division of farmland into multiple ten-acre parcels. . . . 7. Trend to larger farms......... 1 1 EMPLOYMENT/ECONOMICS 14. Job opportunities for: a. Adults 1 2 3 4 5 b. Young People 1 2 3 4 5 c. Women 1 2 3 4 5 d. Minorities 1 2 3 4 5 161 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Assessment of the Situation (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER B TOURISM 15. Summer Festivals: a. Admission Prices 2 3 4 5 b. Noise ......... 2 3 4 5 c. Traffic . . . . 2 3 4 5 d. Parking . . . . 2 3 4 5 e. Bus Tours . . . 2 3 4 5 f. Crowds......... 2 3 4 5 . 2 3 4 5 16. Quality of Bavarian Festival 2 3 4 5 17. Quality of Summer Festival . 2 3 4 5 a. Overemphasis on tourism . 2 3 4 5 b . Parking .................. 2 3 4 5 c. Traffic .................. 2 3 4 5 d. Bus Tours ................ 2 3 4 5 g Interference with daily lives of residents. , . . h. Undesirable people attracted by festivals. 18. Non-Festival Tourism 19. Farm tours during busy farming seasons....................1 162 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Assessment of the Situation (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B C D E RECREATION 20. Limited recreational oppor­ tunities In the: a. C i t y .................... 2 3 4 5 b . T o wnship................ 2 3 4 5 21. Access to city recreational facilities by township residents.................. 2 3 4 5 22. Access to school recreational facilities . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 3 4 5 23. Lack of: a. Neighborhood parks in city. . b. Township park ................ c. Community recreation program 1 2 163 ' EVERYONE PLEASE FILL "OUT THIS PAGE Assessment of the Situation (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER B EDUCATION 24. Quality of basic, educational programs (reading, writing and arithmetic) in: a. Public elementary school. 2 3 4 5 b. Middle school ........... 2 3 4 5 c. High school ............. 2 3 4 5 a. Public elementary school. 2 3 4 5 b. Middle school . . . . . . 2 3 4 5 c. High school ............. 2 3 4 5 d. Community education program .................. 2 3 4 5 26. Availability of community education programs ......... 2 3 4 5 a. Public elementary school. 2 3 4 5 b. Middle school ........... 2 3 4 5 c. High school ............. 2 3 4 5 25. Quality of teachers in: 27. Discipline in the: 28. Access to school facilities for community groups . . . . 164 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Assessment of the Situation (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER B HEALTH 29. Lack of a medical oue-patlent clinic ........................ 30. Access Co medical services; a. On weekends ........... 2 3 4 5 b. During the week . . . . 2 3 4 5 31. Distance from emergency facilities ............. 2 3 4 5 32. Number of dentists 2 3 4 5 33. Number of doctors. 2 3 4 5 a. Single-family housing 2 3 4 5 b . Apartments........... 2 3 4 5 a. Single-family housing 2 3 4 5 b. Apartment rents . . . 2 3 4 5 37. Access to sewer facilities . . 2 3 4 5 38. Capacity of city sewer system. 2 3 4 5 HOUSING 34. Availability of; c. Housing for Senior Citizens........... 35. Cost of: 36. Increasing number of multiple dwellings...................... SERVICES 165 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Assessment of the Situation (Circle ONE Number) B ITEM NUMBER 39. Location of city sewage treatment pla n t .................. 40. Capacity of storm sewer facilities ...................... 41. Width of shoulders on rural roads............................. 42. Ditch cleaning along rural roads............................. 2 3 4 5 43. Rural road maintenance ......... 2 3 4 5 44. City street repair ............. 2 3 4 5 45. Access to water supplies . . . . 2 3 4 5 46. Heavy traffic volume on Main Street...................... 2 3 4 5 47. Speed limit on Main Street . . . 2 3 4 5 48. Truck traffic in town........... 2 3 4 5 49. Vandalism........................ 2 3 4 5 50. Alcohol abuse. .................. 2 3 4 5 51. Non-alcohol drug abuse ......... 2 3 4 5 54. Criminal activity by non­ residents......................... 2 3 4 5 55. Juvenile delinquency ........... 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 PUBLIC SAFETY 52. Limited sheriff patrols in township ........................ 53. Limited State Police patrols in township...................... 56. Level of training for firemen. . 166 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Assessment of the Situation (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B C D E 57. Lack of mandatory retirement age for firemen. ............. 1 2 3 4 5 58. Enforcement of: a. Junk car ordinance 1 2 3 4 5 b. Construction codes........... 1 2 3 4 5 59. Quality of city/township relations.......................... 1 2 3 4 5 60. Procedures for negotiating city/township contracts 1 2 3 4 5 61. City residents' understanding of township p r o b l e m s L 2 3 4 5 62. Township residents' understand­ ing of city p r o b l e m s 1 2 3 4 5 63. City residents' understanding of township tax contribution to s c h o o l s 1 2 3 4 5 64. Township residents' understand­ ing of city tax contribution to recreational facilities 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 a. Too f e w 1 2 3 4 5 b. Wealthy r e s i d e n t s 1 2 3 4 5 c. Long-time r e s i d e n t s 1 2 3 4 5 CITY/TOWNSHIP RELATIONS CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 65. Opportunities for newcomers to participate in community decision-making 66. Community decision-making con­ trolled by: 167 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Assessment of the Situation (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B D OTHER COMMUNITY SITUATIONS 67. Li.mi.Ced number of religious denominations...................... 1 L. 68. Limited financial support for the Frankenmuth Historical M useum ...................... 2 3 4 5 69. Pollution of Cass River. 2 3 4 5 70. Lack of public transportation 2 3 4 5 71. Bus service to nearby metro a r e a s ...................... 2 3 4 5 72. Door-to-door solicitations 2 3 4 5 73. Pet control................ 2 3 4 5 74. Dilapidated farm buildings 2 3 4 5 . . Of the problems listed in Section K, which one do you see as MOST significant? FILL IN THE BOX WITH THE ITEM NUMBER: Why is this problem most significant to you? 168 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE How IMPORTANT is the Characteristic (Circle ONE Number) A B C D 1. Small population size . . . 1 2 3 4 2. Closeness to large cities . 1 2 3 4 3. Local government........... 1 2 3 4 4. School system ............. 1 2 3 4 5. School athletics........... 1 2 3 4 6. Religious opportunities . . 1 2 3 4 7. Job opportunities . . . . . 1 2 3 4 8. Opportunities for community involvement ................ 1 2 3 4 9. Entertainment opportunities 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 11. Recreational opportunities for adu l t s .................. 1 2 3 4 12. Recreational opportunities for youth .................. 1 2 3 4 13. Cost-of-living............. 1 2 3 4 14. Shopping facilities . . . . 1 2 3 4 15. Quality of health care. 1 2 3 4 16. Quality of civic organiza­ tions ...................... 1 2 3 4 17. Pride taken by residents In their community ........... 1 2 3 4 18. Relationship between neighbors .................. 1 2 3 4 19. Small-town atmosphere , . . 1 2 3 4 20. Limited amount of crime . . 1 2 3 4 ITEM DUMBER 10. Cultural opportunities. . . . . A - NOT IMPORTANT, B - SLIGHTLY IMPORTANT, C - MODERATELY IMPORTANT, D * VERY IMPORTANT 169 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE How IMPORTANT is the Characteristic (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER N. B 21. Family ties ........... 2 3 4" 22. German influence in the community ............. 2 3 4 23. Bavarian architectural theme .................. 2 3 4 24. Clean appearance of community ......... 2 3 4 25. Community decorations 2 3 4 Of the characteristics listed in Seciton M, which one is the MOST IMPORTANT to you? FILL IN THE BOX WITH THE ITEM NUMBER: Why is it important to you? 170 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Your community leaders Initiated this survey to help them plan more effective c hange. 0. How do you feel about the changes that have taken place in Frankenmuth SINCE YOU'VE LIVED HERE? Your Feelings About Change (Circle ONE Number for Each Line) Stayed the SAME SINCE I'VE LIVED H E R E : Become a BETTER Place to Live Become a WORSE Place to Live The TOWNSHIP h a s ........................... 1 2 3 The CITY h a s ............................... 1 2 3 The Frankenmuth COMMUNITY (City and Township h a s ............................... 1 2 3 Comments: P. What do you think will happen in Frankenmuth in the NEXT FIVE YEARS? Your Feelings About Change (Circle ONE Number for Each Line) IN THE NEXT FIVE Y E A R S : Stay the SAME Become a BETTER Place to Live Become a WORSE Place to Live The TOWNSHIP w i l l ...................., 1 2 3 The CITY w i l l ...................... . 1 2 3 The Frankenmuth COMMUNITY (City and Township w i l l ........... .. 17L EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Comments: Q. As you think about the future of the Frankenmuth community, there are probably a number of changes that you would like to see happen. On the other hand, there are other changes that you would probably not like to see happen. Listed below are a series of possible changes that were identified by some Frankenmuth residents. Please indicate the extent to which you agree-disagree with each proposed change. Your Feeling (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B I 2 LAND USE AND GROWTH 1. More emphasis should be placed on m a i n ­ taining the rural nature of the community. . . . .............. . . . . . . . . 2. Township officials should actively promote farmers' participation in the Open Land and Space Preservation Act (PA 1 1 6 ) ............................................ 1 2 3. The A-l single family residential lot size in agricultural areas of the Township should be reduced from the present 330' x 243'. . . . . . .................. 2 A - STRONGLY DISAGREE, B » DISAGREE, C = NEUTRAL, D = AGREE, E » STRONGLY DISAGREE 1 172 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Your Feeling (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER S C D E 4. The City should annex Township lands in order to accommodate g r o w t h ............................. .......... 2 3 4 5 5. Because prime agricultural land is located to the north of town, it is preferable that City expansion be directed to the south......................... 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 a. Light industry............................. 2 3 4 5 b . Heavy industry............................. 2. 3 4 5 c. Agriculture ............................... 2 3 4 5 d. Agriculture related business............. 2 3 4 5 e. Office-type business ...................... 2 3 4 5 f. Tourism-related business.................. 2 3 4 5 11. The Chamber of Commerce should do more to attract jobs to te Frankenmuth a rea ......... 2 3 4 5- 2 3 4 5 6. Serious consideration should be given to limiting the boundaries of the City . . . A . 1 7. The City should continue to restrict growth by limiting housing starts........... 8. A joint City-Township land use Master plan should be developed for Frankenmuth.................................... . 1 9. A greenbelt of agricultural land should be maintained around the C i t y ................ EMPLOYMENT/ECONOMICS 10. The community should encourage more; 12. City tax dollars should be used to recruit business and industry to the community . . . . 1 173 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Your Feeling (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER 13. Township tax dollars should be used to recruit business and industry to the community............................... A B C D E 1 2 3 4 5 TOURISM 14. The Bavarian Festival should be: a. Mostly for local residents. . 2 3 4 5 b. Mostly to attract tourists. . 2 3 4 5 c. Of equal importance to local residents and tourists............................. 2 3 4 5 d. Less than one week in length........... 2 3 4 5 e. One week in length...................... 2 3 4 5 f. More than one week in length........... 2 3 4 5 g. Held every other year .................. 2 3 4 5 h. Centralized at Heritage Park . . . . . . 2 3 4 5 i. Centralized but not at Heritage Park. 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 a. Increase its promotion of tourism 2 3 4 5 b. Decrease its promotion of tourism 2 3 4 5 c. Have more tourist facilities. . . 2 3 4 5 . . 2 3 4 5' b. During the Summer Polkafest . . . 2 3 4 5 c. All summer long .................. 2 3 4 5 d. All year long .................... 2 3 4 5 . j . Decentralized throughout the community. 15. Horses and buggies on Main Street would be a nice addition to the City. . ........... 16. The Frankenmuth Community should: 17 Farm tours should be held: a. During the Bavarian Festibal. 174 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Your Feeling (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B C D E a. Children...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 b . Adults ........................................ 1 2 3 4 5 c. Teenagers .................................... 1 2 3 4 5 d. Senior Citizens ............................. 1 2 3 4 5 There should be a community recreation center in Frankenmuth........................... 1 2 3 4 5 a. Indoor swimming p o o l ......................... 1 2 3 4 5 b. Racquetball courts........................... 1 2 3 4 5 c. Weight lifting room ......................... 1 2 3 4 5 d. Basketball courts ........................... 1 2 3 4 5 e. Volleyball courts ........................... I 2 3 4 5 f. Bowling facilities........................... 1 2 3 4 5 g. Meeting rooms ............................... 1 2 3 4 5 h. Whirlpool b a t h ............................... 1 2 3 4 5 1. Arcade game r oom............................. 1 2 3 4 5 j . Indoor track.................................. 1 2 3 4 5 k. Sauna ........................................ 1 2 3 4 5 1. Kitchen ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 RECREATION 18. Present recreational facilities should be improved for: If a community recreation center is built, it should include: 175 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Your Feeling (Circle ONE Number) ITEM DUMBER A B C D E a. An addition to an existing school building.................................... 2 3 4 5 b. A new separate structure.................. 2 3 4 5 a. Millage .................................... 2 3 4 5 b. Private sources o n l y ...................... 2 3 4 5 c. Both millage and private sources......... 2 3 4 5 fees or memberships................ 2 3 4 5 b. Regular millage ........................... 2 3 4 5 c. Millage/users1 fee combination........... 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 a. City residents............................. 2 3 4 5 b. Township residents......................... 2 3 4 5 c. Both City and Township residents......... 2 3 4 5 d. School district residents ................ 2 3 4 5 a. The City.................................... 2 3 4 5 b . The Township............................... 2 3 4 5 21. If a community recreation center is built, it should be: 22. If a community recreation center is built, Initial construction funds should come from: 23. If a community recreation center is built, after completion operating funds should include: a. Users' d. Periodic solicitation of private funds. . .1 24. If a community recreation center is built, it should be paid for by: 25. Additional outdoor recreational facilities are needed in: 176 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Your Feeling (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B a. Swimming p o o l ................................. 1 2 b. Ball f i e l d ......................................1 c. Tennis c o u r t s C D E 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 d. P l a y g r o u n d s ................................... L 2 3 4 5 e. A jogging and exercise trail...................L 2 3 4 5 f. Bicycle p a t h s 1 2 3 4 5 g. A Cass River m a r i n a .......................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 28. The community should concentrate on larger parks in its future p l a n n i n g .................... 1 2 3 4 5 26. If additional outdoor recreational facilities are built, they should include: 27. It should be required that small neighbor­ hood park sites be set aside in new sub­ divisions 29. Rental privileges for use of Heritage Park should be extended to: a. City residents o n l y .......................... 1 2 3 4 5 b. City and Township residents o n l y ........ 1 2 3 4 5 c. School district r e s i d e n t s 1 2 3 4 3 d. General p u b l i c ................................. 1 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 3 30. More recreational facilities should be developed at Memorial P a r k 1 177 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Your Feeling (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B C D E EDUCATION 31. There should be more community education programs for: a. Children b . Teenagers 1 2 3 4 5 ................................... 1 2 3 4 5 c. Adults 1 2 3 4 5 d. Senior C i t i z e n s .............................. 1 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 32. If needed, additional school days should be added: a. Before Labor Day. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 b. After Memorial Day. c. By shortening Christmas vacation 1 2 3 4 5 d. By shortening Easter v a c a t i o n 1 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 ................. 1 33. School sessions should be conducted y e a r - r o u n d ........................................1 34. Community groups who use school facilities should pay for the use of those facilities . . 1 35. The funding for community education programs should be kept separate from the public funding of e d u c a t i o n 1 HEALTH 36. There should be a medical outpatient clinic in Frankenmuth 1 2 3 4 5 37. There should be additional physician services available in Frankenmuth on w e e k e n d s I 2 3 4 5- 178 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Your Feeling (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B C D E 38. There should be more multiple dwelling units available in the Frankenmuth.area............. 1 2 3 4 5 39. There should be more single family houses built in the Frankenmuth a r e a .................. 1 2 3 4 5 40. Steps should be taken to upgrade the quality of present housing .................... 1 2 3 4 5 41. Subdivision development requirements should be relaxed to accommodate moderately priced ho using.......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 42. The City should continue sidewalk snow­ plowing service.................................. 1 2 3 4 5 43. The Frankenmuth Historical Museum should receive support from a mill levy ............. 1 2 3 4 5 a. Users' fees ................................. 1 2 3 4 5 b . Tax revenues.................................. 1 2 3 4 5 45. The Township should have a new Township Office building.................................. 1 2 3 4 5 46. The Township should take on primary responsi­ bility for garbage collection in the Township. 1 2 3 4 5 47. The City should extend water services to Township residents in the perimeter of the C i t y ............................................. 1 2 3 4 5 48. The local airport should be hard surfaced ........................................ 1 2 3 4 5 49. The Township board should appoint a study committee to investigate future water supply . 1 2 3 4 5 HOUSING SERVICES 44. Township access to City library facilities should be supported by: 179 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Your Feeling (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B C D E 50. The City should relocate the sewage treatment f a c i l i t i e s ............................. 1 2 3 A 5 51. Frankenmuth should promote a Farmer's M a r k e t ............................................. 1 2 3 A 5 52. There should be a buffer planting of shrubs and trees around the sewage treatment plant. 2 3 A 5 53. A recycling collection center (paper, glass, cans) should be established in the Frankenmuth a r e a .................................. 1 2 3 A 5 5A. City services should be financed by an income t a x ......................................... I 2 3 A 5 2 3 A 5 .1 PUBLIC SAFETY 55. The Township should provide its own police p r o t e c t i o n ......................................... 1 56. There should be a fire and tornado siren on the top of the Carling Brewery for the south side of the c i t y 1 2 3 A 5 57. The speed limit on North Main Street should be lowered to 30 m.p.h. north of Genesee Street 1 2 3 A 5 2 3 A 5 58. Truck traffic in the city should be rerouted . 1 59. The City streets should be changed to correct heavy traffic on Main S t r e e t 1 2 3 A 5 60. The Township should have street lights on the corners of Township r o ads 1 2 3 A 5 180 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Your Feeling (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B C D E 60. A City representative should be invited to attend Township m e etings ..................... 1 2 3 4 5 61. A Township representative should be invited to attend City Council m eetings 1 2 3 4 5 62. The City and Township should be combined in a single unit of g o v e r n m e n t 1 2 3 4 5 63. Joint City/Township services should be funded by a common income tax 1 2 3 4 5 CITY/TOWNSHIP RELATIONS CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 64. Better efforts should be made to: a. Encourage community-wide participation in local decision-making. 1 2 3 4 5 b. Involve newcomers in local decision­ making .......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 c. Encourage attendance at public meetings . . 1 2 3 4 5 65. The old Delmel Road bridge should be moved to become a new river crossing at Heritage P a r k ...............................................1 2 3 4 5 66. A bridge at Heritage Park should be limited to bicycle and pedestrian traffic 1 2 3 4 5 67. Residents should be encouraged to preserve historic buildings on their p r o p e r t y 1 2 3 4 5 68. The City should have a stronger sign ordinance 1 2 3 4 5 OTHER COMMUNITY SITUATIONS 181 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Local officials spend your tax dollars on a variety of services and programs. . Your assessment of how these dollars should be spent can help determine future spending priorities. Please use the following system to indicate the level of spending priority that you see as appropriate for each item in the following sections: NO PRIORITY: Should NOT be an Item on which funds are spent. LOW PRIORITY: Not an essential service or program, but one on which some funds COULD BE SPENT. MODERATE PRIORITY: An IMPORTANT service or program, but not an essential one. HIGH PRIORITY: An ESSENTIAL service or program. A « NO PRIORITY, B = LOW PRIORITY, C *= MODERATE PRIORITY, D = HIGH PRIORITY R. How do you think the FRANKENMUTH PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM should spend your tax dollars? 182 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Spending Priority (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B C D 1. Preschool education............... 1 2 3 4 2. Elementary education (Grades K - 4 ) ............................... 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 3. Middle school education (Grades 5 - 8 ) .......................... 1 4. High school education (Grades 9-12) 1 2 3 4 5. Academic disciplines (e.g., math, science, literature) . . . 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 6. The arts (e.g., art, music, d r a m a ) ........................ 1 7. German language instruction. . . 1 2 3 4 8. Foreign language instruction . . 1 2 3 4 I 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 11. Instruction in American History, G o v e r n m e n t .................... 1 2 3 4 12. 9. English language (e.g., reading, grammar, spelling) 10. Business, technical, voca­ tional e d u c a t i o n ............. Computer S c i e n c e ............ 1 2 3 4 13. Libraries and instructional materials...................... 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 2 3 4 14. Extra-curricular activities: a. Sports for boys and girls . . b. Non-sports (e.g., band, d e b a t e ) .................... 1 1 183 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE Spending Priority (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER S. B C 15. Driver Education ............. 16. School lunch program ......... 17. Building and grounds (mainte­ nance/appearance) ............. 2 2 3 3 4 4 2 3 4 18. Community Education........... 2 3 4 19. Special Education (handicapped, learning disabled, etc.) . . . 2 3 4 20. Gifted student programs. 2 3 4 21. Student transportation - school bus service...................... 2 3 4 22. Guidance and counseling services ............... 2 3 4 23. Maintaining school accreditation standards......................... 2 3 4 24. Health services.................. 2 3 4 . . . Do you feel that the SCHOOL TAXES are currently: 1 LESS THAN YOU'D EXPECT TO PAY 2 ABOUT RIGHT 3 TOO HIGH (Circle ONE Number) TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS PLEASE GO TO SECTION V, PAGE 32 CITY RESIDENTS T. How do you think CITY GOVERNMENT should spend your tax dollars? Spending Priority (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B C D 1. Police Protection 1 2 3 4 2. Fire Protection 1 2 3 4 3. Emergency Ambulance Service. 2 3 4 4. Refuse Collection 1 2 3 4 3. Water S y s t e m 1 2 3 4 6. Sanitary S e w e r 1 2 3 4 7. Maintenance of City Streets. 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 a. Add New T r e e s 1 2 3 4 b. Maintenance of existing trees 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 . . . . 8. Street Lighting Electricity Consumption 1 1 9. Street Tree Program 10. Snow Removal from Streets. ... 11. Snow Removal from Sidewalks. , . 12. Community Recreation Center a. With indoor p o o l 1 2 3 4 b. Without indoor p o o l 1 2 3 4 13. Other Recreation Programs. ... 1 2 3 4 14. Maintenance of City Parks. ... 1 2 3 4 15. Additional Softball Field. ... 1 2 3 4 16. Additional Tennis Courts . . . . 1 2 3 4 17. Frankenmuth Historical Museum. . 1 2 3 4 18. WIckson Memorial Library . . . . 2 3 4 1 185 CITY RESIDENTS ONLY Spending Priority (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B C D 19. City Beautification Program . . . 1 2 3 4 20. Downtown Parking Facilities 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 ... 21. Attracting Light Industry to Frankenmuth U. 1 Do you feel that CITY taxes are currently: 1 LESS THAN YOU'D EXPECT TO PAY 2 ABOUT RIGHT 3 TOO HIGH (Circle ONE Number) CITY RESIDENTS ----------------- PLEASE GO TO SECTION X, PAGE 33 TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS V. How do you think FRANKENMUTH TOWNSHIP GOVERNMENT should spend your tax dollars? Spending Priority (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A B C D 1. Police Protection 1 2 3 4 2. Fire Protection 1 2 3 4 3. Refuse Collection 1 2 3 4 4. Building Inspection 1 2 3 4 5. Library S e r v i c e s 1 2 3 4 6. Parks and R e c r e a t i o n 1 2 3 4 186 TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS ONLY Spending Priority (Circle ONE Number) ITEM NUMBER A 7. Ambulance Service 1 2 3 A 8. Ditch C l e a n i n g 1 2 3 A 9. R o ads I 2 3 A 2 3 A 10. W. Frankenmuth Historical Museum. . 1 B Do you feel that FRANKENMUTH TOWNSHIP taxes are currently: Number) 1 LESS THAN YOU'D EXPECT TO PAY 2 ABOUT RIGHT 3 TOO HIGH C D (Circle ONE CITY AND TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS X. The following questions are asked so that we may better understand the responses to the other survey questions. For example, persons who have lived in the community for a longer period of time may view the quality of local services differently than persons who have recently moved into the area. As with all information in this survey, your answers are confidential. None of your responses will be associated with your name. 1. Your sex: 1 MALE 2 FEMALE (Circle the number of your answer) 2. How many years have you lived in the Frankenmuth area? YEARS 3. What is your present age? YEARS OLD 187 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE 4. How many persons currently live in your household? NUMBER OF ADULTS ____ NUMBER OF CHILDREN ____ ATTENDING THE FRANKENMUTH SCHOOLS PUBLIC PRIVATE 5. Which is the highest level of formal education that you have completed? (Circle the number of your answer) 1 LESS THAN A HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE 2 COMPLETED HIGH SCHOOL (12TH GRADE) 3 SOME COLLEGE OR POST-HIGH SCHOOL TRAINING 4 COMPLETED COLLEGE 5 COLLEGE BEYOND A BACHELOR’S DEGREE 6. Are you currently employed in a FULL-TIME job for which you receive a salary or fee-for-service? (Circle the number of your answer) 1 YES 2 NO Are you currently: (Circle the ONE that BEST FITS your current situation) 1 A FULL-TIME HOMEMAKER 2 PART-TIME EMPLOYED 3 UNEMPLOYED • -'-4 5 RETIRED OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) ____________________ GO TO QUESTION 9 188 EVERYONE PLEASE FILL OUT THIS PAGE 7. How would you classify your primary occupation? your answer) 1 SEMI-SKILLED WORKER OR APPRENTICE CRAFTSMAN 2 SALESWORKER OR CLERICAL/OFFICE WORKER 3 SKILLED WORKER, CRAFTSMAN, OR FOREMEN A (Circle the number of FARMER 5 MANAGER OR PROPRIETOR 6 PROFESSIONAL OR TECHNICAL WORKER 8. At what location do you carry on your primary occupation? one number) 1 FRANKENMUTH CITY 2 FRANKENMUTH TOWNSHIP 3 ELSEWHERE IN SAGINAW COUNTY A OUTSIDE THE COUNTY 5 (Circle only OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) __________________________________________________ 9. Which of the following applies to your household? your answer) 1 RENT/LEASE A HOME OR APARTMENT 2 OWN OR IN PROCESS OF BUYING A HOME (Circle the number of 10. What was the approximate total taxable income for your household in 1981? (Circle the number of your answer) 1 LESS THAN $10,000 2 $10,000 - $19,999 3 $20,000 - $29,999 A $30,000 - $A9,999 5 OVER $50,000 189 We appreciate your willingness to share your opinions about the Frankenmuth community with us. Are there any final comments that you would like to make? below and the back of this page to make your comments. - Thank youI Please use the space LIST OF REFERENCES 190 REFERENCES Aiken, Michael and Robert R. Alford 1981 "America's small town boom." Anderson, Sherwood 1921 Winesburg, O h i o . New York: Newsweek, 26-37. B. W. Huesch. Andrews, Frank M. and Stephen B. Withey 1974 "Developing measures of perceived from several national surveys." search 1:1-26. 1978 (July 6): Social Indicators of Well-Being. life quality: Results Social Indicators R e ­ New York: Plenum Press. Bach, Robert L. and Joel Smith 1977 "Community satisfaction, expectations of moving, gration." Demography 14 (May): 147-67. and mi­ Bauman, Karl E. 1968 "Status inconsistency, satisfactory social interaction, and community satisfaction in an area of rapid growth." Social Forces 47 (September): 45-52. Beale, Calvin L. 1975 "The revival of population grown in nonmetropolitan America." Washington, D.C.: USDA Economic Research Service, ERS-605. 1981 "Rural and small town population change." Washington, D. C.: U. S. Department of Agriculture, ESS-5, February. Bender, Thomas 1978 Community and Social Change in America. Hopkins University Press. Baltimore: Benke, Paul and Christopher Bond 1984 "Meeting rural needs: the role of state governments." The Rural Sociologist Vol. (September): pp. 354-363. John and local 4 No. 5 191 Blakely, Edward J. and Ted K. Bradshaw 1981 "The impact of recent migrants on the economic development of small towns," pp. 30-48 in M. W. Fazio and P. W. Prenshaw (ed.), Order and Image in the American Small Town. Jackson, Mississippi: University Press of Mississippi. Blalock, Hubert M . , Jr. 1964 Causal Inferences in Hill, North Carolina: 1971 Nonexperimental Research. Chapel University of North Carolina Press. An Introduction to Social Research. Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, New Block, John R . , Frank W. Naylor, and Willard Phillips, Jr. 1984 "Rural development and the American farm: a partnership for progress." Washington, D. C.: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Office of Rural Development Policy. Bradshaw, Ted K. and Edward J. Blakely 1979 Rural Communities in Advanced York: Praeger Publishers. Industrial Society. New Brown, Deborah J., Steven Lovejoy, and Janet Ayres 1982 "Satisfaction, length of residence and per capita multi­ plier models." Land Economics 58: 204-216. Burby, Raymond J. and Shirley F. Weiss 1976 New Communities U.S.A. Lexington, Massachusetts: ton Books, D.C. Health and Company. Butler, Edgar W. 1976 Urban Sociology: A Systematic Approach. and Row. Campbell, Angus, and Philip E. Converse 1972 The Human Meaning of Social Sage Foundation. Change. New York: New York: Lexing­ Harper Russell Campbell, Angus, Philip E. Converse, and Willard L. Rodgers 1976 The Quality of American Life: Perceptions, Evaluations, and Satisfactions. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. 192 Cattell, Raymond F. 1965 "Factor analysis: an introduction Biometrics 21: pp 190-215. Christenson, James A. 1976 "Quality of community services: A approach with experiential data." (Winter): 509-525. 1982 to essentials." macro-unidimensional Rural Sociology 41 "Community development," pp. 264-272 in Don A, Dillman and Daryl A. Hobbs (eds.), Rural Society in the U.S.: Issues for the 1980*8. Boulder, Colorado: Westvlew Press. Christenson, James A, and Jerry W. Robinson 1980 Community Development in America. University Press. Ames: Iowa State Clark, Terry N. 1973 "Community social indicators - from analytical models to policy applications." Urban Affairs Quarterly 9 (Septem­ ber): 3-36. D a v i e s , Vernon 1945 "Development of a scale to rate attitudes of community satisfaction." Rural Sociology 10 (September): 246-255. Deseran, Forrest A. 1978 "Community satisfaction as definition of the situation: Some conceptual issues." Rural Sociology 43 (Summer): 235-49. Dillman, Don A. , James A. Christenson, Edwin H. Carpenter, and Ralph M. Brooks 1964 "Increasing mail questionnaire response: A four state comparison." American Sociological Review 39 (October): 744-756. Dillman, Don A. and Daryl J. Hobbs 1982 Rural Society in the U.S.A. Issues for Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, Inc. Duncan, Otis Dudley 1961 "From social systems to ecosystems." 31 (Spring): 140-149. the 1980*5. Sociological Inquiry 193 1966 "Path Analysis: Sociological Examples" of Sociology, Vol. 72, No. 1, July. American Journal Durand, Roger and Dennis R. Eckart 1973 "Social rank, residential effects and community satisfac­ tion." Social Forces 52 (September): 74-85. Durkheim, Emile 1949 The Division of Labor New York: Free Press. in Society. Tr. George Simpson. Eberts, Paul R. 1982 "Social indicators of well-being," pp. 284-293 in Don Dillman and Darrell Hobbs (eds.)» Rural Society in the United States. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press. Fear, Frank 1977 "Exploratory social indicator model building and testing using multiple indicators within a block-recursive system: A study of macrosociological determinants of health status." Iowa State University: Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Fishbein, Martin (ed.) 1967 Readings in Attitude Theory John Wiley and Sons, Inc. and Measurement. New York: Fliegel, Frederick C. and James D. Williams 1980 "Migration and changing household conditions," pp. 68-84. In Andrew J. Sofranko and James D. Williams (eds.), Rebirth of Rural America: Rural Migration in the Midwest. Ames, Iowa: North Central Regional Center for Rural Development. Fried, M . , and P. Gleicher 1961 "Some sources of residential satisfaction in an urban slum." Journal of the American Institute of Planners 27: 305-15. Fuguitt, Glenn V. and James J. Zuiches 1975 "Residential preferences and Demography 12: 491-504. population distribution." 194 Gallager, Davis 1982 "What happens when the population doubles?" Reporter. Washington, D.C.: National Association of Towns and Town­ ships No. 22 (February). Gans, Herbert J. 1962 The Urban Glencoe, Villagers. New York: The Free Press of Glasgow, Nina and Andrew J. Sofranko 1980 "Migrant adjustment and integration in the new residence." In Andrew J. Sofranko and James D. Williams (eds.), Rebirth of Rural America: Rural Migration in the Mid w e s t . Ames, Iowa: North Central Regional Center for Rural Development. Glasgow, Nina 1982 "Antecedents and consequences of community satisfaction among metropolitan to nonmetropolitan migrants in the midwest: A test of alternative explanations." University of Illinois at Champaign - Urbana: Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Goudy, Willis J. 1977 "Evaluation of local attitudes and community satisfaction In small towns." Rural Sociology 42 (Fall): 271-82. Gulick, J., C. Bowerman, and K. Bach 1962 "Newcomer enculturation in the city: Attitudes and par­ ticipation," pp. 102-115 in F. S. Chapin and S. Weiss (eds.), Urban Growth Dynamics. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Guttman, Louis 1944 "A basis for scaling quantitative Sociological Review 9: 139-150. 1954 "Some necessary conditions for Psychometrika 19: pp 149-161. Harmon, Harry H. 1967 Modern Factor Chicago Press. Analysis. common Chicago: data." American factor analysis." The University of 195 Harmston, Floyd K. 1983 The Community as an Economic State University Press. Syst e m . Ames, H a r r i s , Chauncy 1943 "A functional classification of cities in States." The Geographical Rev i e w . 7: 86-89. Iowa: the Iowa United Henderson, Marlene E . , Lynn Lyons Morris and Carol Taylor FItz-Gibbon 1978 How to Measure Attitudes. Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publications. Hersey, Paul and Ken Blanchard 1982 Management of Organizational Behavior. 4th Edition. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Hillary, George A., Jr. 1955 Definitions of Community: Sociology 20 (June). Areas of Agreement. Rural Hynson, L . M . , Jr. 1975 "The loss of community: An empirical test through repli­ cation." Rural Sociology 40 (Spring): 64-6. Jesser, Clinton J. 1967 "Community satisfaction patterns of professionals in rural areas." Rural Sociology 32 (March): 56-69. Johnson, Ronald L . , and Edward Knop 1970 "Rural-urban differentials in Rural Sociology 35 (December): community 544-58. satisfaction." Jones, Victor, Richard L. Forstall and Andrew Collver 1967 "Economic and social characteristics of urban places," pp. 102-159. Municipal Yearbook of the International City Managers Association. Xerlinger, Fred N. and Elayar J. Pehazur 1973 Multiple Regression in Behavioral Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. Research. New York: 196 Kim,Jae-On and Frank J. Kohout 1975 "Special topics in general linear models." In H. Nie, C. H. Hull, J. G, Jenkins, K. Steinbrenner and D. H. Bent (eds.). Standard Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. Second Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill. Kimball, William J. and Joel Lichty 1984 "Analysis of an action research project: a core study and consideration of principles." In F. A. Fear and H. K. Schwazweller (eds.). Research in Rural Sociology and Development Vol. II: Focus on Community. Greenwich, Connecticut: Jai Press. Kasarda, John D . , and Morris Janowitz 1974 "Community attachment in mass logical Review 39: 328-39. society." American Socio­ Kramer, Ralph M. and Harry Specht 1975 Readings in Community Organization P r actice, (2nd Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. ed.) Ladewlg, Howard and Glenn C. McCann 1980 "Community satisfaction: Sociology 45: 110-131. Rural Theory and measurement." Lamanna, R. A. 1964 "Value consensus among urban residents." Journal American Institute of Planners 30: 317-23. Lane, Robert 1962 Political Ideology. of the New York: Free Press. LaPiere, Richard I. 1967 "Attitudes versus actions," pp. 26-31 in Martin Fishbein (ed.), Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc, Lewis, Sinclair 1920 Mainstreet. New York: Harcourt and Brace. Likert, Renis 1932 A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Psychology, No. 140. Archives of 197 Linn, J. Gary 1976 "Residential location, size of place, and community satis­ faction in northwest Wisconsin." Paper presented at the annual meeting, Rural Sociological Society, New “York. Lovejoy, Stephen B., Deborah J. Brown, and Janet S. Ayres 1982 "Immigrants in nonmetropolitan communities: More dissat­ isfied with public services?" West Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University, Department of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural Experiment Station Journal Paper No. 8596. Lynd, Robert S. and Helen Merrell Lynd 1929 Middletown: A Study in American Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc. Maclver, Robert M. 1938 Community: Row. A Sociological Culture. Study. New New York: York: Harper and Marans, Robert W. and Willard Rodgers 1975 "Toward an understanding of community satisfaction," pp. 299-352 in Amos H. Hawley and Vincent P. Rock (eds.), Metropolitan America in Contemporary Perspective. New york: Sage Publications. Marans, Robert W. and John D. Wellman 1978 The Quality of Nonmetropolitan Living. Michigan: Institute for Social Research, Michigan. Masters, Edgar Lee 1962 Spoon River Books. Anthology. (3rd ed.) New Ann Arbor, University of York: Collier McGranahan, David A. and E. A. Wilkening 1981 "Communities structures and community satisfaction in a rural region." Paper presented at the annual meeting, Rural Sociological Society, Guelph, Ontario. McKinney, John C. 1966 Constructive Tupology and Social Appleton, Century and Crofts. Theory. New York: 198 Miller, Michael K. and Kelly W. Crader 1979 "Rural-urban differences in two dimensions of satisfaction," Rural Sociology 44: 489-504. Miller, Delbert C. 1977 Handbook of Research Design and York: Longman, Inc. community Social Measurement. Minar, David W. and Scott Greer 1969 The Concept of Community: Readings with Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. New Interpretations. Molnar, Joseph J . , Sally Purolit, Howard A. Clouts, and V. Wilson Lee 1979 "A longitudinal analysis of satisfaction with selected community services in a nonmetropolitan area." Rural Sociology 44 (Summer): 401-419. Molnar, Joseph J. and John P. Smith 1982 "Satisfaction with rural services: The policy preferences of leaders and community residents." Rural Sociology 47 (Fall): 496-511. Murdock, Steve, and Eldon C. Schriner 1979 "Community service satisfaction and stages of community development: an examination of evidence from impacted communities." Journal of the Community Development Society 10 (Spring): 109-124 Naisbett, John 1982 Megatrends. New York: Warner Books, Inc. Nie,Norman H.» C. Hadlai Hull, Jean G. Jenkins, Karen Steinbrenner, and Dale H. Bent (eds.) 1975 Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. Ogden, Jean 1946 and Jess Small Communities in Brothers. Action. New York: Harper and Patton, Carl V. and Kenneth E. Stabler 1979 "The small town in the urban fringe: Conflicts in atti­ tudes and values." Journal of the Community Development Society 10 (Spring): 83-93. 199 Pollen, T. J. 1980 "History of Frankenmuth." Frankenmuth N e w s . Poplin, Dennis E. 1979a "Community development in action." Journal of the Commu­ nity Development Society 7 (Spring): 5-16. 1979b Communities: A Survey of Theories Reasearch. New York: MacMillan. Prethus, Robert 1964 Man at the T o p . and Methods of New York: Oxford University Press. Rand McNally and Associates 1971 City Rating Guide. New York: Rand McNally and Associates. Rojek, Dean G . , Frank Clemente, and Gene F. Summers 1975 "Community satisfaction: A study of contentment with local services." Rural Sociology 40 (Summer: 177-192. Rossi, Peter H. 1972 "Community social indicators," pp. 87-126 in Angus Campbell and Philip E, Converse (eds.), The Human Meaning of Social Change. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Rummel, R. J. 1967 "Understanding factor analysis." pp. 444-480. Conflict Resolution 11: Sauer, William J., Constance Shehan, and Carl Boymel 1976 "Rural-urban differences in satisfaction among the elder­ ly: A reconsideration." Rural Sociology 41 (Summer(: 269-75. Schmid, A. A., J. D. Shaffer and E. 0. van Ravenswaay 1983 "Community economics: predicting policy consequences." East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University. Schneider, Thomas R. 1984 "Saginaw County (Spring): 14-15. Trends." Planning and Zoning News 200 Schroeder, Fred E. H. 1981 "Types of american small towns and how to read them," pp. 104-135 in M. W, Fazio and P. W.Prenshaw (ed.)* Order and Image in the American Small Town. Jackson, Mississippi: University Press of Mississippi. Smith, Robert T. 1970 "Functional town classification," pp. Ill in Brian J. L. Berry and Frank E. Horton (eds.). Geographic Perspectives on Urban Systems. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: PrenticeHall. Sofranko, Andrew J. and James D. Williams (eds.) 1980 Rebirth of Rural America: Rural Migration in the M i d w e s t . Ames, Iowa: North Central Regional Center for Rural Development. Sofranko, Andrew J. and Frederick C, Fliegel 1984 (Dissatisfaction with satisfaction." (Fall): 353-373. Rural Sociology Sorokin, Pitirim A. „ 1963 "Forward," p. vii in Ferdinand Tonnies1 Community Society, ed. by Charles F. Loomis. New York: Harper. 47 and Sorter, Bruce, Larry Allan and Laurie Lippin 1980 "Council efficiency training: A trainers guide." Bulle­ tin, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Maryland. Speare, Alden, Jr. 1974 "Residential satisfaction as an intervening residential mobility." Demography 11 (May): variable 1973-88. in Staats, C. K. and A. W. Staats 1957 "Meaning established by classical conditioning." of Experimental Psychology 54: pp. 74-80. Journal Stein, Maurice R. 1960 The Eclipse of the Community. Princeton University Press. Jersey: Suttles, Gerald 1968 The Social Order Chicago Press. of the Slum. Princeton, Chicago: New University of 201 Swanson, Bert E . , Richard A. Cohen and Edison P. Swanson 1979 Small Towns and Small Towners: A Framework for Survival and G r o w t h . Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publica­ tions. Thibout, John W. and Harold H. Kelley 1959 The Social Psychology of Gro u p s . and Sons. New York: Thomas, W. I. and F. Znaniecki 1919 The Polish Peasant in Europe and America. Press. Thorndike, E. L. 1939 Your C i t y . New York: Thurstone, L. L. 1959 The Measurement Chicago Press. of John Boston: Wiley Badger Harcourt, Brace and Co. Values. Chicago: University of II Tonnies, Ferdinand 1887 Gemeinschaft and Gessellschaft. 1977 Leipzig: F u e s 1 Verlag. "Gemeinschaft and Gessellchaft," pp. 9-21 in Roland L, Warren (ed.) New Perspectives on the American Community. Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing Co. Tweeten, Luther and George L. Brinkman 1976 Micropolltan Development: Theory and Practice of Greater Rural Economic Development. Ames: Iowa State University Press. Vidich, Arthur J. and Joseph Bensman 1958 Small Town in Mass Society. Princeton University Press. Princeton, Warren, Roland L. 1963 The Community in A m e r i c a . (1st Edition) McNally College Publishing Company. 1970 "The good community - what would it be?" Community Development Society 1: 14-23. New Jersey: Chicago: P.and Journal of the 202 Weitz, Janet Ayres 1983 "A comparative analysis tudes toward change." Ph.D. dissertation. of residents' and leaders' atti­ Purdue University: Unpublished Williams, James D. and Andrew J. Sofranko 1979 "Motivations for the immigration component of population turnaround in nonmetropolitan areas." Demography 16 (May): 239-255. Wirth, Louis „ 1926 "The Sociology of Ferdinand Tonnies." Sociology, 32. 1938 "Urbanism as a way of life." gy 44 (July): 3-24. American Journal of American Journal of Sociolo­ Zehner, Robert 1971 "Neighborhood and community satisfaction in new towns and less planned suburbs." Journal of the American Institute of Planners 37: pp. 108-127. Zellinger, Irene (ed.) 1982 "Frankenmuth: A history of Michigan's little bavaria." booklet published by the City of Frankenmuth. Zimmerman, Carle C. 1938 The Changing Community. New York: Harper and Row. A