Reid Wodicka, MPA, Elkton Town Manager

1. Taking the Classroom to Town Hall: The Experiences of a Partnership between James Madison University’s Public Policy and Administration Program and the Town of Elkton, VA Reid Wodicka, MPA,Elkton Town Manager Dr. Nicholas Swartz, Assistant Professor, MPA Director, James Madison University

2. Presentation Outline • Introduction to Elkton and Partnership • Literature Review • Project • Economic Development • Police Department • Community Center • Evaluation of Projects

3. Elkton, VA • Located in Northwestern VA in the Shenandoah Valley—nestled between Blue Ridge and Allegheny Mountains • Population 2,800 • Closest neighbor is Harrisonburg (population 48,000) • Long history of political distress and mismanagement

4. Partnership • Develop a mutually beneficial partnership between JMU and Elkton (started in summer of 2009 with support of JMU President) • Town Manager: “Improve public trust in local government by providing highest quality citizen-focused services in efficient and effective manner” • Provide Elkton with research and manpower resources to solve problems • Provide faculty and students the opportunity to use Elkton as a laboratory to get “real-world” experience

5. Literature Review • Partnership described reflective of growing trend in colleges and universities • Why? • To better connect campuses with their communities through community service and civic engagement

6. Boyer: “Higher education has more intellectual talent that any other institution in our culture. Today’s colleges and universities surely must respond to the challenges that confront our children, our schools, and out cities…just as the land-grant colleges responded to the needs of agriculture and industry a century ago.”

7. How to Strengthen Town-Gown Relationships U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of University Partnerships • 1) Student volunteerism (usually non-credit) • 2) Service provisionby faculty and students targeted to a specific community • 3) Service learning(activities a part of coursework) • 4) Faculty involvementin community projects • 5) Community in the Classroom(non-degree, noncredit courses for local residents designed to strengthen community building and community capacity) • 6) Applied Research (needs assessments, program development, and program evaluations) • 7) Major Institutional Change initiatives (may alter “the mission, promotion and tenure criteria, awards, and course offerings of colleges and universities”. ie: Carnegie Foundation classification as “Community Engaged University)

8. Our partnership: • Class-based consulting model that combines service learning with applied research • What constitutes as “research” has changed within Political Science Dept as result of this work

9. What is Service Learning? Jacoby (2003) • “A form of experiential education in which students engage in activities that address human and community needs together with structured opportunities intentionally designed to promote student learning and development. Reflection and reciprocity are key concepts of service learning”

10. Service Learning vs. Community Service/Involvement Service Learning • COMMUNITY: • Student provides meaningful service that meets need or goal • CAMPUS: • Service provided by student flows from and into course objectives • Integrated into course by way of assignments • Assignments are evaluated

11. Benefits • Hollis (2002, 2004) • Service learning enables students to BETTER link abstract principles to real-world circumstances than internships or community service • Reinke (2003) • Help MPA students: • Master course material • Promote team work • “Deeper understanding of community issues and problems” • Peters (2004) • Students who are “better-prepared for responsible public leadership”

12. Benefits Cont’d. • Consider economic downturn--- • Squeezed state and local government revenue sources • Collaboration is even greater in small towns

13. JMU • University founded in 1908 Mission • “A community committed to preparing students to be educated and enlightened citizens who lead productive and meaningful lives.”

14. MPA Program • Proposed to State Council of Higher Education (SCHEV) in 1979 • Began accepting students in 1982. • Currently consists of 20 full-time and 30 part-time students. • Mission Statement: • “The MPA Program promotes engaged citizenship and responsible public service. The curriculum cultivates effective and ethical analysts, managers, and leaders for work in local, national, and global contexts.”

15. Description of the Projects

16. Economic Development • 1990s and early 2000s: Elkton Downtown Revitalization Corp. became tied to political figures and eventually lost funding when opponents gained power • “PRESENT STATE” at time of project—downtown in dire need of total revitalization • Many dilapidated buildings and empty storefronts • Located near Massanutten Resort, but concierge would tell you not to go to Elkton

17. Economic Development Plan PUAD 483/583: Urban Policy and Regionalism GROUP 1: Examination of local/regional economy GROUP 2: Survey to all residents/business owners • What types of investment needed • Actions to create jobs and foster economic development • Types of commercial/industrial development, types of businesses/services • Changes to attract customers and visitors • Challenges over next 20 years • What makes Elkton unique GROUP 3: SWOT analysis with community residents and businesses owners GROUP 4: Focus groups with community residents and business owners GROUP 5: Grant opportunities GROUP 6: Downtown vacant property identification and recommendations

18. Elkton Police Department • Issue of mistrust in town police prior to current chief • Allegations of murder and misappropriation of funds • Officers report that former Council members pressured them to overlook illegal activity • Reputation building • Issue of officer morale

19. Police Department Program Evaluation PUAD 641: Program Evaluation • GOALS: • Measure department’s reputation • Understand impacts on officer retention • Determine if staffing is similar to other communities • Survey to all households and business owners • Regard for officers • Responsiveness to issues (drugs, traffic, crime prevention, safety, etc.) • Informed of Police Department activities/services • Response time • Equal treatment • Officer interviews and questionnaire • Survey to similar police departments across the state to examine staffing and funding arrangements

20. Community Center Program Evaluation • Founded on October 23, 2006 • Joint project between town and county • 27,000 sf—offers wide array of recreational activities, programs, and events • 3 large community rooms • High tech community meeting room • But…what about the future—especially with little funding

21. Community Center Program Evaluation PUAD 641: Program Evaluation • Goals: • Help administrator find out types of programs, services and events members want • What would attract non-members to join • Should center become 501 C3 non-profit? • Mailed surveys to all residents • Use of Center • New program areas • On-site surveys to non-residents • Center comparison (hours, funding, etc) • Examination of tax codes

22. Most Notable Implementation Strategies • Increase in volunteer activities • Internships for MPA students • Fellowship for MPA Student • Office of Economic Development created • Budget for officer training increased by approx 3 times • Expansion of Senior Citizen Checking Service • Public Information campaigns

23. Evaluation of Projects • Surveys of stakeholders/participants on both sides of partnership • Students • Elected officials • Department heads • Measure: Partnership’s effectiveness • Examine how future partnerships can be improved Problem: • Short term outlook—impact may not be realized for years • Do not have manager administer survey

24. Evaluation of Projects Cont’d. Student Responses: • Appreciation of opportunity to work in “real-world” environment • Felt doing work that is “truly needed” • Would help in career (either in-service or pre-service) Staff Members: • Appreciation for opportunity to work with JMU • Felt their efforts were validated by study Council Members: • Members who felt that the concept of the projects did not affirm to their political viewpoints also felt the projects were less effective • Did not have enough input in the design of the partnership