Local officials are looking for ways to keep political polarization at bay
Just under a third of local government leaders who took part in the survey, which was commissioned by the Carnegie Corporation of New York and released Tuesday, said political polarization negatively affects their communities "a great deal" or "a lot" — matching the 31% who said the same in an earlier survey by the nonprofit groups before the 2024 election.
While their perceptions have held steady, local officials are seeking new ways to prevent what 83% of them called the substantial harmful impact of polarization on the nation from seeping into their communities.
The survey of nearly 1,300 community leaders from around the country, conducted from January through March, is the second in a three-part series on the local impact of political polarization. The results, drawn from municipalities of a few thousand people to tens of thousands, again suggest local governments — especially in smaller communities — are more insulated from the negative effects of polarization than state and national ones.
Still, the responses showed that local leaders believe the negative community impact hasn't subsided even after the conclusion of last year's heated election, driving a variety of mitigation efforts.
They include focusing on hyperlocal policy areas that the public, regardless of party affiliation, can agree on; emphasizing neutral language, evidence and community benefits in communications; hosting community events to raise awareness of what local government is doing; and introducing volunteering opportunities and civics education.
'The finding that perceptions of political polarization are slow to change confirms the need for sustained commitments,' Louise Richardson, president of the Carnegie Corporation, said in a statement. 'Evidently local government leaders are looking for ways to foster more cohesive environments, and in so doing are providing examples for other communities.'
Just under half of respondents, or 48%, said they choose to devote their time to policy topics that universally affect the community, like infrastructure, housing and public safety, to avoid potential politicization. Local leaders said that when opinions on topics could fall along national party lines, they try to reframe the issues to lessen any divisiveness, with 57% reporting they considered the challenges of polarization in deciding how to communicate about their work.
James Hely, a Town Council member in Westfield, New Jersey, provided one example. He said that he and the mayor favor building affordable housing in their community but that the term can be politically charged.
"You have to be very liberal to say I want the town to have a lot of affordable housing," said Hely, a Democrat.
Instead, he reframes the issue to focus on local control of zoning. That's because New Jersey enacted a law, known as the "builder's remedy," that allows developers to sue municipalities to build affordable housing when such accommodations are lacking, sometimes overriding local zoning restrictions and the community's wishes.
"Rather than say we want to make sure we have affordable housing, you turn that around to say, one, we want to stop the builder's remedy; we want to prevent builders from coming in and crashing our zoning code," he said.
In addition to reframing potentially polarizing topics, council members typically stick to an agenda that focuses on hyperlocal issues, Hely said.
'I counted up the votes that are put before the Town Council,' he said. 'About 98% to 99% [of the votes] there's 100% unanimity, because it just involves how much do you pay the police and how many traffic lights we need — things have nothing to do with ideology.'
Hely, whose Town Council consists of five Democrats and four Republicans, said partisan political rhetoric is seen as counterproductive on the council and is considered off-limits when community issues are discussed.
'On the formal Town Council meetings, if anyone were to say, you know, 'Trump is evil' or anything critical on the national level, you'd be seen as out of bounds,' he said. 'You know — why are you talking about that? We're here to solve local problems.'
Zoe Warner, a member of the Malvern Borough Council in Pennsylvania, echoed Hely. She said it's easier for council members to do their work when their constituents understand 'we don't have control over those larger issues' that plague discussions of national politics, such as immigration or cuts to federal agencies.
'So [we're] trying to work together to find solutions for things that we really do have control over, like a building going up,' despite potential disagreements over things like the potential impact on traffic congestion, said Warner, a Democrat.
The things that help enlist community support are 'being transparent about it, providing as much information, having the developer meet with these people, trying to find as much common ground as we can," she said.
Forty-four percent of the survey respondents also cited long-term volunteering opportunities as a way to fight polarization in local communities, while 38% of the school board officials surveyed described civics education as helpful. Still others said staying connected with residents is key.
Forty-six percent of local leaders said hosting community events 'strongly' or 'somewhat' decreased the negative effects of polarization. A high proportion also pointed to other methods of engagement as effective, such as hosting open meetings, holding informal office and coffee hours (where residents meet with leaders in informal settings) and inviting people to participate in things like budget planning by joining special commissions.
'It's really quite simple,' said Jon Keeney, the mayor of Taylor Lake Village, Texas. 'I am and my council are 100% transparent. There's not anything that's done behind closed doors in the city.'
Keeney said that while he has been active in the Texas Republican Party for a long time, he has never let those political beliefs affect his agenda for the city.
'I have both Democrats, Republicans and actually independents on my council, and I could care less what their ideology is,' he said. He added: 'I never tried to influence any of my council members on what I put on the agenda in terms of how they would vote. So there's no backroom stuff going on in that respect.'
Carleigh Beriont, a Democratic town selectwoman in Hampton, New Hampshire, agreed with the survey's findings that community engagement is critical.
'Listening is just really key," Beriont said. "Like, the more I've listened to residents, the more I've come to understand that their views are not really represented by partisan ideology, right?
'I really do think that listening and being humble and organizing people in the community can be a great way to get things done,' she added. 'I'm not making decisions that I think will benefit my Democratic neighbors or my Republican neighbors. I try to make decisions that I know will benefit as many people as possible and be as transparent and accountable and open to exchange as I can be.'
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Washington Post
2 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Live updates: Trump to hold morning news conference on plans to address D.C. crime
President Donald Trump plans to hold a news conference at the White House on Monday regarding his plans to address crime in Washington. Already, the FBI has begun dispatching agents in overnight shifts to help local law enforcement, and a decision to call up the National Guard could come as soon as Monday. Police data shows a drop in violent crime in the nation's capital. He is scheduled to address the press from the White House briefing room at 10 a.m. Eastern. Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) was the first Democrat in Congress to call on President Joe Biden to step down from the 2024 presidential race. It opened the door for other Democratic lawmakers to urge the president to pass the torch to a younger generation. The 78-year-old Austinite now faces calls from some Democrats to do the same. The FBI has begun dispatching agents in overnight shifts to help local law enforcement prevent carjackings and violent crime in Washington, according to two people familiar with the matter, as President Donald Trump threatens a federal takeover of the nation's capital and considers calling up the National Guard. Vice President JD Vance said Sunday that it would be up to President Donald Trump to bring Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky together to broker a peace deal to end the war in Ukraine. The fight over Texas's congressional map 'could literally last years,' Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) said Sunday, while defending his call to arrest Texas Democrats who fled the state to stall the GOP's redistricting efforts.


The Hill
31 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump and California: Court to decide legality of National Guard deployment to Los Angeles
A three-day bench trial will begin Monday over whether President Trump's National Guard deployment to Los Angeles violated a general prohibition on using federal troops as civilian law enforcement. U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer will hear testimony from three military and immigration officials as the judge weighs whether sending in troops to combat immigration protests violated the Posse Comitatus Act. It marks a major legal confrontation between Trump and California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), who has condemned the deployment as political theater and broadly framed himself as the face of resistance against the president's agenda. Only 300 of the nearly 5,000 guardsmen sent to Los Angeles in June remain, but the trial is moving ahead as Newsom urges Trump to send the remaining troops home. Marines were also deployed but were released last month. 'It reinforces the litigation strategy,' Newsom told reporters last week. 'Those things are not coincidental,' the governor continued. 'Had we not positioned ourselves, had we not postured with that litigation approach, we would not be in this position with that withdrawal.' Trial to focus on troops' operations Newsom sued Trump in June as he federalized the California National Guard to combat immigration protests in Los Angeles that sometimes turned violent. The California Democrat has emerged unsuccessful so far. Breyer ruled Trump illegally federalized the National Guard and ordered he hand back control to Newsom, but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals quickly lifted the ruling until it resolves the administration's appeal. That decision is likely still months away. As the appeal over Trump's authority proceeds, it does not address what activities the guardsmen may engage in while on the ground. That's the subject of this week's trial. Newsom asserts the deployment violates the Posse Comitatus Act, an 1878 federal law that generally bars federal troops from participating in civilian law enforcement. Some of the troops have been stationed at several federal buildings in downtown Los Angeles, which is not at issue. But the state has taken aim at troops who've went elsewhere to accompany immigration agents, including during a violent raid at a cannabis farm last month that left one dead. The administration argues the Posse Comitatus Act provides no pathway for California to sue. Even if it did, the administration contends the law is superseded by another statute it argues expressly authorizes the guardsmen's efforts. 'Accompanying federal law enforcement officials for their protection as those officials enforce federal immigration laws does not mean that the troops are themselves engaging in law enforcement,' the administration wrote in court filings. But California warned that the position would give Trump unchecked power. 'It simply is not the law that Defendants may deploy standing armies to the streets of California while California is powerless to do anything about that clear violation of the most fundamental principles of our Nation's founding,' California wrote in court filings last week. ICE, military officials to testify The parties are expected to summon a total of three witnesses, court records show. Newsom plans to call Ernesto Santacruz, who leads Immigrations and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Los Angeles field office. The state also intends to call William Harrington and Major General Scott Sherman, leaders of an Army task force that has tactical control over the deployed federalized guardsmen. The Trump administration also will call Sherman but did not list any other witness. The parties estimated the combined testimony will last upwards of eight hours, not including cross examination. Breyer has indicated he expects the witnesses to conclude by Tuesday. Then, the judge will then hear legal arguments from both sides. The Justice Department insists the trial is unnecessary. It asked Breyer to forego the proceedings and immediately toss Newsom's claims, but the judge declined to do so. 'Next week's trial is not cancelled. The Court expects to hear evidence beginning on Monday,' Breyer ruled last week. Among first trials challenging Trump policies This week's proceeding is one of the first full-fledged trials challenging one of Trump's actions since returning to the White House. His administration faces more than 300 lawsuits challenging major policies in total. But most plaintiffs have pressed their claims in truncated, emergency proceedings. Several judges have converted those emergency rulings into final judgments, sending the case to the appeals courts without going through an actual trial. Breyer's trial follows two others held this summer. Last month, a Boston-based federal judge conducted a bench trial challenging the Trump administration's arrests of pro-Palestinian activists on college campuses. He has not yet ruled. The same judge in June held a bench trial on Democratic states and health groups' bid to reinstate nearly $800 million in health grants the administration cancelled over links to diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. The judge ruled for the plaintiffs, and the Justice Department has filed an emergency appeal at the Supreme Court, which could rule at any time. This week's trial will unfold in Breyer's courtroom in San Francisco. The Justice Department has criticized California for filing its lawsuit there 'hundreds of miles from the scene.' Breyer was appointed by former President Clinton and is the younger brother of retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. The trial marks a major moment for California Attorney General Rob Bonta's (D) office, which is suing alongside Newsom. Bonta has taken pride in the barrage of litigation he has brought against Trump. Last week, Bonta touted that he is a plaintiff in 37 lawsuits against the administration and has restored over $168 billion in funding to California. 'The moment the Trump administration stops breaking the law and violating the Constitution, we'll stop suing. Simple,' Bonta told reporters last week.

USA Today
31 minutes ago
- USA Today
Got 'range anxiety'? Trump halts massive EV charger project
Many would-be EV purchasers have cited what's known as 'range anxiety' in their reluctance to switch over from a gas car. DENVER ‒ A $7.5 billion Biden-era plan to build a massive network of electric vehicle chargers to address concerns about "range anxiety" has crashed to halt after installing fewer than 400 chargers nationwide. President Donald Trump's administration early this year blocked spending on the project, which aimed to put potentially thousands of chargers at gas stations, rest stops and other sites no more than 50 miles apart. A coalition of Democrat-led states and nonprofits has sued to get the funding restarted but there's been no final decision yet, and the installations remain on hold. "Halting the funding sets us all back, and it's simply wrong," Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, a Democrat, said in a Aug. 6 statement announcing the state was joining the ongoing lawsuit. "Electric and hybrid vehicles are no longer the technology of the future. They're here now, and this technology is only becoming more important to our families and businesses." Funded by the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the plan aimed to make it easier for people to drive EVs on long road trips and reflected the Biden administration's efforts to push people away from gasoline-powered vehicles. Industry experts say a major obstacle to widespread EV adoption is the lack of charging options while away from home. Federal statistics show there are about 3.5 million electric vehicles registered in the United States, out of a total 287 million overall vehicles. The number of EVs on the roads, from Tesla sedans and Cybertrucks to GMC Sierra pickups and electric Hummers has been growing rapidly in part due to a generous federal tax incentive that ends in September. But many would-be purchasers have cited what's known as "range anxiety" in their reluctance to switch over. But federal statistics also show that 92.5% of all trips Americans take ‒ aside from commercial delivery trucks ‒ are less than 25 miles, well within the range of every EV on the market today. Biden's plan focused on installing chargers on interstates and major highways, easing concerns about recharging during road trips. Trump, who has long been hostile toward government mandated-EV purchases, has kept the charger funding on hold for months despite the lawsuit, industry experts said. The pause has no effect on privately funded charging sites, like those built by Tesla. Trump also had a public falling out with Tesla CEO Elon Musk, and in a July social media post said he opposes "ridiculous" efforts to make people drive EVs if they don't want to. The Biden-era emissions standards would have forced manufacturers to shift their offerings to EVs and away from gas powered vehicles. Program faced significant delays A federal General Accounting Office report issued earlier this year raised significant questions about the success of the effort, noting that only 384 charging stations funded by the infrastructure act had been built by April. The report noted that significant delays were caused by the complicated structure of approvals necessary to get charger installations going ‒ from state and federal highway officials to the permission of private property owners and even the time it takes to install new high-capacity overhead power lines to serve rural areas. The report also indicated the process would likely become more efficient over time as state-level administrators learned how to manage the installations better. "It was a federal program administered by 50 different state agencies and they all had different rules for procurement and for who was in charge of it," said Ryan McKinnon, a spokesman for the Charge Ahead Partnership, a coalition of grocers, convenience stores and fuel retailers that lobbies for EV infrastructure. "It became this poster child for a nightmare of government inefficiency." Funding was a 'drop in the bucket' The GAO noted that as of May, there were about 77,000 publicly available charging stations nationwide, but most of them are a slower, older style that takes longer to charge up EV batteries. In comparison, there are about 150,000 gas stations nationwide, according to the National Association of Convenience Stores. The Charge Ahead Partnership lobbies to have private businesses play a significant role in the development of a national charger network. McKinnon said the $7.5 billion in funding is only a "drop in the bucket" of what's actually necessary to build out a network that's convenient for customers. But he said the partnership remains hopeful the federal government will ultimately release the withheld funding alongside new rules to make the money easier to access. "At the end of the day, this is a pro-business startup grant that helps entrepreneurs who want to offer a new service get a foot in the door," he said.