Political polarization is having a substantially negative impact on the nation, according to 87% of local government leaders recently surveyed by CivicPulse and Carnegie Corporation of New York. However, only 31% of those same city and county leaders felt that polarization was seriously impacting their local communities.

In a politically divisive time nationwide, the limited negative impact of political polarization on local governments was a “surprising” discovery, according to Nathan Lee, founder and managing director of CivicPulse, a nonprofit research organization.

“We find compelling evidence that the majority of local governments remain a haven for cooperative politics,” Lee said in a statement.

The survey, conducted between August and September 2024 and published Oct. 23, polled 727 local civil service leaders and 685 local elected policymakers.

“We are encouraged to see that in many respects, local government is navigating political polarization much better than federal government,” added Louise Richardson, head of Carnegie Corporation of New York, a philanthropic foundation. “Clearly there is much to learn from local leaders about how to make government work for all of us.”

The smaller the local, the less the divide

Population played a large role in polarization’s negative impact, according to the survey results. In communities of 50,000 or more, 46% of respondents viewed “substantial” negative impacts of polarization. In communities with populations between 10,000 and 50,000, 29% of respondents reported negative impacts from polarization. Where populations ranged between 1,000 to 10,000, only 28% of respondents cited significant impacts.

Effect on relationships ‘limited’

Among city and county leaders surveyed, 16% said polarization was negatively affecting relationships between local government staff and constituents. Only 15% said relationships between elected officials and staff was negatively impacted by political polarization, and among government staff members, 11% said polarization negatively affected relationships.

Party affiliation also plays less of a role in local government polarization than one might expect, according to the report.

“In fact, the limited impact of polarization on elected officials’ relationships is consistent across Republican-majority communities, Democratic- majority communities, and communities that have a similar number of Republicans and Democrats,” the report stated.

Divisive national rhetoric leads to ‘mistrust’

Despite less negative impacts, divisive state and federal rhetoric still trickles down to local governments and can cause tension in communities, particularly during elections, according to many surveyed.

“Polarizing statements lead to a lot of mistrust between constituents and county election offices,” a local elected official surveyed stated.

Even if a local government “finds unity” across the table locally, polarization in state government can hamper a county’s funding and projects.

“Our county is mostly Democrat and our state is Republican,” the head of economic development in a small Texas municipality stated in the survey. “We are constantly encountering hurdles whereby there is hesitation to promote and support projects in our county.”

Heated national debates also “create flashpoints” of polarization in smaller communities. The head of communications for a municipality in Wisconsin found that conversations concerning LGBTQ+ programming have “become more of an inflection point” over the past four years. “Conversations about immigration and diversity initiatives have also taken a more polarized tone,” the respondent added.

News deserts and misinformation

Poor quality reporting and a lack of local news outlets altogether have also heightened misperceptions about local government, according to survey respondents.

“People just don’t exactly know what the facts are,” one elected New Jersey official stated. “Our local reporting is very poor, we [barely have] a newspaper, and it does not really ever give you a full picture. Even when you do try to stay up to date, stay informed, it’s just not always the clearest picture.”

The turn to social media has also contributed to the spread of misinformation and polarized views about local government.

“In person, it’s much more difficult to say the things that ‘Keyboard Warriors’ do via social media channels and outlets,” stated one head of economic development for a mid-sized city in Ohio. “I hope that we don’t devolve into a society where that in-person filter disappears.”

How localities combat polarization

The survey also pinpointed three ways local governments have found success tackling the challenge of political polarization, which have helped lead to a lessening of polarization’s impact within their communities:

1. Participating in local activities: “Both scheduled and unscheduled interactions among local government officials and staff create opportunities to identify commonalities and build mutual respect that foster effective policymaking,” according to the survey.
2. Focusing on local issues that improve the community: The survey noted that local officials “believe that their ability to focus on issues where the connection to community well-being is clear is a powerful force in reducing polarization.”
3. Reducing emphasis on political affiliation: “Several survey respondents expressed beliefs that, whether during local elections or day-to- day proceedings of government, deemphasis on party affiliations helps foster an environment where practical problem-solving and community-focused decision-making take precedence over partisan politics,” the survey stated.

The full results of the survey can be found at this link.