This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 69-4841 BARLOW, Henry Mikel, 1935- COMMUNITY POWER STRUCTURE AND DECISION MAKING IN AN URBAN COMMUNITY. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1968 Sociology, general University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan Henry Mikel Barlow 1969 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED COMMUNITY POWER STRUCTURE AND DECISION MAKING IN AN URBAN COMMUNITY DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Henry Mikel Barlow, A.B., M.A. ****** The Ohio State University 1968 / AdYisor - partmpm of Sociology and Anthropology ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This study is indebted to many people including my professors, former colleagues, the persons who gave their time for the interviews and others who were most helpful in the final stages of preparing the manuscript. First of all, appreciation must be expressed to Dr. John F. Cuber whose advice and counsel has been an invaluable part of my graduate education and whose assistance has been above and beyond that required of an adviser. A special measure of appreciation must also be expressed to Dr. Alfred C . Clarke and Dr. Russell R. Dynes for their reading of the manuscript and contributions to my educational experience. A deep measure of gratitude is expressed to former colleagues and leaders of the community who consented to be interviewed for the study. Without their assistance the study would not have been possible. Special measures of appreciation must also go to my wife Susan for her encouragement and assistance in typing the original draft and to Mrs. Linda Holt whose patience and skills greatly aided in preparing the final copy of the dissertation. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................... ii LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................................. v C hapter I . THE SOCIOLOGY OF POWER: AN OVERVIEW OF THE LITERATURE AND STATEMENT OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM ........................ 1 Introduction The Research Problem H ypotheses II. ISSUES IN THE STUDY OF P O W E R ............................................... 16 Conceptual and Theoretical Issues Methodological Procedural Substantive Issues III. RESEARCH PRO C ED U RES................................................................. 56 Selection of Community and Issues Data Collection Procedures IV. THE COMMUNITY SETTING ............................................................ 68 Early History and Economic Development Population and Ecology The Present Economic Structure Local Government and Politics Communications Media The Educational System V . DECISIONS FOR HOSPITAL DEVELOPMENT................................. 88 Introduction Creation and Development of the Planning Agency An Idea Becomes a Law The First Building Program The Second Building Program Page VI. LOCAL LEADERSHIP AND THE STRUCTURE OF INFLUENCE . 139 Identification of Local Leaders Top Leadership Based Upon Reputation The Ten Top Leaders The Basic Structures of Influence The Orientation of Some Leaders VII. THE FLOOD CONTROL ISSUE: SEREDIPITY IN POWER . 164 VIII. SUMMARY AND C O N C LU SIO N S.......................................................... 181 APPENDIXES............................................................................................................ 192 BIBLIOGRAPHY........................... 205 iv LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Nominations of Top Leaders ................................................................. 152 2. Orientation of Planning Agency Board Members to Federal A s s i s ta n c e ....................................................................................................162 3. Board Member Preference for an Ideal Type Planning Agency Director.......................................................................................... 163 v CHAPTER I THE SOCIOLOGY OF POWER: AN OVERVIEW OF THE LITERATURE AND STATEMENT OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM I. Introduction Following the publication of Floyd Hunter's Community Power Structure in 1953 and C. Wright M ills' The Power Elite in 1956, American sociology experienced a major revival of interest in the issue of power and especially community power. Both of these studies have become classics in contem­ porary sociology and have contributed to a new tradition of sociological research. Their impact within the discipline and upon a much wider audience has recently been judged to be phenomenal by the late Arnold 1 Rose, who was one of the more prominent critics of their findings. Some evidence of the impact of Hunter's study may also be judged by the extent of criticism, debate and subsequent studies initiated by other researchers. In a recent review of the literature, Walton has reported the findings of 2 thirty-three studies dealing with fifty-five communities. It may be noted * Arnold Rose, The Power Structure: Political Processes in American Society, New York: Oxford University Press, 1967, p. xiii. 2 John Walton, "Substance and Artifact: The Current Status of Research on Community Power Structure," American Toumal of Sociology. 71 (January, 1966), pp. 430-438. 1 that this list of studies was incomplete and that other studies have been 3 conducted since the date of the review. In spite of the extensive controversy and research which followed Hunter and M ills' studies, there are still many gaps in the research literature and a need for studies oriented toward some neglected issues. Especially urgent is the need for systematic studies of metropolitan areas which focus upon the community as a whole and carefully delineate the research findings in a manner which facilitates theoretical synthesis. The need for additional research is strongly supported by Walton's research which revealed the very limited ability to offer firm generali­ zations about community power and decision making based upon the empirical research. It is the purpose of this chapter to present a brief overview of issues in the study of power, to describe the research problem and present the hypotheses to be tested in the investigation. Perhaps the most basic issue in the study of community power is the theoretical perspective which guides the investigation. According to Cuber three theoretical positions are widely expressed in the power structure literature. These are the elitest, pluralist, and mass theories of power structure. The elitest theory holds "...that definitive power is held by a relatively small group of individuals who exercise control See Edward C. Banfield, Political Influence: A New Theory of Urban Politics. New York, Free Press, 1961, and Ritchie P. Lowrey, Who's Running This Town?. New York: Harper and Row, 1965. 3 upon the established institutions." In sharp contrast to this conception of the power structure is the pluralist position which views the power structure as dispersed rather than centralized. Thus, "Pluralistic theories, as the name implies, hold that contemporary community power and national power as well, is fragmentized among a considerable number of "veto groups," each of which hold . "countervailing power" over 4 each other and the society. " The mass theories are similar to the elitest theories in that they emphasize the powerless character of most people in the society. Research from this point of view tends to concentrate upon "alienation, apathy, and other forms of disassociative behavior. " It may be immediately recognized that the elitest and mass theories are complementary. In each case the masses are relatively powerless and in the final analysis the crucial decisions are made by a very small number of persons. There is , however, one critical difference. In the mass society theories, "the masses are presumed to be powerless because of the nature of the society and not so 5 much because elitest groups usurp definitive power." While these theories are widely represented in the power structure literature, the greatest disagreements have occurred in relation to the elitest and pluralist conceptions of power. Mills and Hunter have John F. Cuber, Sociology: A Synopsis of Principles. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1968, p. 549. ^ Ib id . represented the elitest views while a majority of their critics appear to represent the pluralist view in that they see the power structure as more dispersed. Since the work of these scholars has exerted such a profound influence on the recent study of power in American society, a brief summary of their positions and some of the criticisms directed to their work will be presented. In his study of Regional City, a dynamic metropolitan community of approximately one half million population, Hunter found that the key decisions were dominated by a small economic elite which consisted of about forty persons who held the top positions in the economic institutions of the community. These persons were said to control the effective decision making processes for all major decisions in the community. Almost all were holders of top positions in economic organizations although a few were professionals. Other persons exercised some leader­ ship in the community but for the most part, they were utilized in carry­ ing out rather than making policy. Included in the community was a relatively large Negro subgrouping with a distinct leadership group, but none of these leaders were in the top leadership sector. Religious leaders were considered as relatively uninfluential, professionals were utilized