Social Media Savvy Cities Report

Civic Engagement and
Local E-Government: Social

Networking Comes of Age
University of Illinois at Chicago
College of Urban Planning and Public Affairs
Karen Mossberger, Ph.D., mossberg@uic.edu
Department of Public Adminstration
Yonghong Wu, Ph.D., yonghong@uic.edu
Department of Public Administration
This study examined features on local government websites
that could contribute to civic engagement, through 1)
information about government and community, and 2)
through interactive or participatory opportunities online. The
research is based on content analysis of government websites
in the 75 largest U.S. cities and 20 largest Illinois cities
between March and the beginning of May 2011. Cities were
ranked using a composite score with 94 criteria for council
manager governments, and 90 for governments without city
mangers. In an earlier 2009 study, cities were scored on 78
items if they had a city manager and on 74 otherwise. We
discuss the main results for the 2011 study (with cities ranked
on 90-94 measures), and then assess changes between 2009
and 2011. To accurately describe these changes over the two-
year period, we compare city scores and rankings only on the
original 74-78 criteria for 2009 and 2011. This comparison
demonstrates that there has been some change overall in the
two years, mostly because cities that were further behind
have moved up in the ranking. While social networking
was the category with the most change, local government
websites have improved slightly in a few other areas, such as
information on government organization nationally, and in
policy and neighborhood information in Illinois.
Civic Engagement and
Local E-Government: Social
Networking Comes of Age
With Assistance from:
Kamna Lal Mantode
Meng-Hao Li
Mona Noriega
Yu Shi
Department of Public
Administration
Research supported by
the Institute for Policy and
Civic Engagement
February 13, 2012

"CIVIC ENGAGEMENT AND LOCAL E-GOVERNMENT: SOCIAL NETWORKING COMES OF AGE" 1

Pow has local e-governmenL changed ln Lhe pasL few years? 1he unequlvocal answer ls soclal
neLworks, on a large scale. Cur sLudy of local governmenL webslLes ln 2011 showed LhaL soclal neLwork
adopLlon lncreased several Llmes over slnce 2009, wlLh boLh lacebook and 1wlLLer used by nearly 9 ouL
of 10 of Lhe largesL u.S. clLles. A less prevalenL buL also poLenLlally lmporLanL change ls Lhe emergence
aL Lhe local level of open daLa porLals, anoLher new Lool assoclaLed wlLh Web 2.0, or Lhe lnLeracLlve
web." As of yeL, however, Lhe presence of open daLa porLals ls sLlll qulLe llmlLed, found onllne for only
12 of Lhe 73 largesL u.S. clLles (16), and ln only one llllnols clLy (Chlcago).
1

ln 2011, soclal neLworks were much more common across local governmenL webslLes Lhan ln
2009. Among Lhe 73 largesL u.S. clLles, 87 used 1wlLLer, ln comparlson wlLh 23 Lwo years before.
lacebook was also used by 87 of Lhe u.S. clLles, wlLh an even larger lncrease from 13 ln 2009.
?ou1ube llnks appeared for 73 of ma[or u.S. clLles, up from 16 ln 2009. 1hls ls a rapld [ump for all of
Lhese slLes, whlch lncreased by 230 Lo over 600 durlng Lhls Lwo-year perlod.
Llkewlse, each of Lhese Lhree popular soclal neLworks was used by 33 of Lhe 20 largesL llllnols
clLles on Lhelr webslLes, compared Lo 13 for 1wlLLer, and 10 for lacebook and ?ou1ube ln 2009. 1he
llllnols clLles are mosLly smaller (wlLh Lhe excepLlon of Chlcago, whlch appears on boLh llsLs). A
somewhaL smaller percenLage of llllnols webslLes lncluded soclal neLworks, buL Lhe magnlLude of
lncrease was slmllar.
1hls sLudy examlned feaLures on local governmenL webslLes LhaL could conLrlbuLe Lo clvlc
engagemenL, Lhrough 1) lnformaLlon abouL governmenL and communlLy, and 2) Lhrough lnLeracLlve or
parLlclpaLory opporLunlLles onllne. L-governmenL has a varleLy of purposes, lncludlng servlce dellvery.
8uL, lL also has Lhe capaclLy Lo make governmenL lnformaLlon more easlly accesslble Lo clLlzens, as well
as Lo provlde opporLunlLles Lo communlcaLe wlLh or lnLeracL wlLh governmenL. lnformaLlon ls crlLlcal for
LransparenL and accounLable governmenL, as well as for provldlng Lhe knowledge necessary for clvlc
engagemenL. CommunlcaLlon wlLh clLlzens, Lhrough a varleLy of onllne Lools, can poLenLlally fosLer
more responslve governmenL.
1he research ls based on conLenL analysls of governmenL webslLes ln Lhe 73 largesL u.S. clLles
and 20 largesL llllnols clLles, conducLed beLween March and Lhe beglnnlng of May 2011. A number of
sLudles have lndlcaLed LhaL larger local governmenLs are more llkely Lo be flrsL adopLers of dlglLal
governmenL lnnovaLlons and Lo have more sophlsLlcaLed webslLes (e.g. Po 2002, Moon 2002). 8y
selecLlng Lhe largesL clLles, we are Laklng Lhe pulse of Lhose LhaL could be expecLed Lo be aL Lhe forefronL
of new developmenLs.
1he 2011 sLudy lncluded 94 crlLerla for councll-manager governmenLs (90 for governmenLs
wlLhouL a clLy manager). ln 2009, clLles were scored on 78 lLems lf Lhey had a clLy manager, and on 74
oLherwlse. 1he lncreased number of crlLerla for 2011 parLly reflecLs new developmenLs, such as open
daLa porLals. AddlLlonally, Lhe 2011 sLudy Lracked wheLher local governmenLs allowed commenLs Lo be

1
ln addlLlon Lo Chlcago, Lhe oLher 11 clLles wlLh open daLa porLals avallable are 8alLlmore, 8osLon, Ponolulu,
Loulsvllle, Mllwaukee, new ?ork, hlladelphla, orLland, SeaLLle, WashlngLon uC, and San lranclsco.
posLed on varlous plaLforms, and wheLher Lhe conLenL posLed was relaLed Lo publlc pollcy lssues (ln
conLrasL wlLh servlce dellvery).
ln Lhls reporL, we dlscuss Lhe maln resulLs for Lhe 2011 sLudy (wlLh clLles ranked on 90-94
measures), and Lhen assess changes beLween 2009 and 2011. 1o accuraLely descrlbe Lhese changes
over Lhe Lwo-year perlod, we compare clLy scores and ranklngs only on Lhe orlglnal 74-78 crlLerla for
2009 and 2011. 8ecause Lhe full 2011 lnsLrumenL has more caLegorles assoclaLed wlLh lnLeracLlve Web
2.0 feaLures, lL places more welghL on Lhese measures, and Lhe clLy ranklngs are somewhaL dlfferenL for
Lhe compleLe 2011 resulLs Lhan for Lhe 2009-2011 flndlngs. Comparlng clLles on Lhe same crlLerla
beLween 2009 and 2011 demonsLraLes LhaL Lhere has been some change overall ln Lhe Lwo years, mosLly
because clLles LhaL were furLher behlnd have moved up ln Lhe ranklng. Whlle soclal neLworklng was Lhe
caLegory wlLh Lhe mosL change, local governmenL webslLes have lmproved sllghLly ln a few oLher areas,
such as lnformaLlon on governmenL organlzaLlon naLlonally, and ln pollcy and nelghborhood lnformaLlon
ln llllnols.
8oLh of Lhese changes - Lhe rapld dlffuslon of soclal neLwork use among local governmenLs, and
Lhe emergence of open daLa porLals - presenL new !"##$%$&$'$(#)for Lransformlng relaLlonshlps beLween
governmenL and clLlzens. 1he open daLa porLals make more lnformaLlon avallable Lo clLlzens, and lnvlLe
Lhe developmenL of appllcaLlons Lo lmprove Lhe use of Lhe daLa. Soclal neLworks open a new venue for
onllne parLlclpaLlon. ulLlmaLely, Lhe lmpacL of Lhese new Lools depends upon many facLors oLher Lhan
Lechnology - Lhe quallLy of Lhe lnformaLlon, local governmenL lnsLlLuLlons and pracLlces, and clLlzen
response.
SCCIAL NL1WCkkS AND WL8 2.0 8L1WLLN 2009 AND 2011
8apld growLh ln local governmenL use of soclal medla reflecLs Lhe lncreased parLlclpaLlon of Lhe
populaLlon on slLes llke lacebook, 1wlLLer, ?ou1ube, and lllckr. A recenL survey by Lhe ew lnLerneL and
Amerlcan Llfe ro[ecL (PampLon eL al. 2011) found LhaL 39 percenL of Amerlcan adulLs used aL leasL one
soclal neLworklng slLe. 1hls percenLage has more Lhan doubled slnce 2008. MosL recenL growLh has
occurred among adulLs over age 33, who now accounL for over half of soclal neLwork users. rlor Lo
2008, soclal medla were mosL popular ln Lhe under-23 age group. Soclal neLworks have come of age,
and so has Lhelr presence ln local governmenL webslLes.
Soclal neLworklng slLes are deflned by several characLerlsLlcs, whlch lnclude creaLlon of a publlc
proflle wlLhln a deflned sysLem, and Lhe ablllLy Lo connecL wlLh oLhers (8oyd and Llllson 2008). 1hey
lnvolve user-generaLed conLenL and are parL of a larger caLegory of Lechnologles known as Web 2.0
(kaplan and Paenleln 2010). 1lm C'8ellly colned Lhe Lerm ln 2003 Lo dlsLlngulsh newer lnLerneL
Lechnologles LhaL feaLure generaLlon of conLenL by Lhe user, parLlclpaLlon-enabllng web sLrucLures,
collecLlve lnLelllgence, and scalablllLy (C'8ellly 2003).

8ox 1. ClLy of Chlcago: Soclal Medla
1he clLy of Chlcago uses several dlfferenL Lypes of soclal medla Lechnology Lo connecL wlLh clLlzens. 1he
clLy llsLs Lhe soclal medla cenLer on lLs maln webpage and currenLly has an offlclal presence on seven
dlfferenL soclal medla webslLes. 1hese lnclude popular slLes llke lacebook, 1wlLLer and ?ou1ube, whlch
have accounLs by Lhe mayor and clLy clerk as well as emergency managemenL and speclal evenLs
deparLmenLs. Along wlLh popular soclal medla slLes, Lhe clLy has accounLs on lesser-known slLes, for
lnsLance foursquare whlch ls used ln Lhe reLall lndusLry Lo Lrack cusLomer preferences. 1he clLy of
Chlcago uses foursquare Lo encourage Lourlsm and coheslveness among clLlzens. 1he slLe's unlque
feaLures allow clLlzens Lo record Lhe number of vlslLs Lo dlfferenL locaLlons wlLhln Lhe clLy, as a resulL
promoLlng Lhem and encouraglng groups of clLlzens Lo meeL ln varlous locaLlons. CLher lesser-known
soclal medla slLes llke nlxle make lL posslble for Lhe Chlcago ollce deparLmenL Lo send up-Lo-Lhe-mlnuLe
alerLs Lo clLlzens by phone and emall. Slmllarly, Lumblr ls a slLe used by Lhe Chlcago ubllc llbrary Lo
connecL wlLh lLs audlence. Cur comparaLlve analysls of clLy webslLes was concluded early ln May, [usL
before Mayor Lmanuel Look offlce. Slnce LhaL Llme, Lhe Lmanuel admlnlsLraLlon has held Lown hall
meeLlngs on lacebook and sollclLed budgeL ldeas on 1wlLLer.
vlslL Lhe soclal medla cenLer of Lhe ClLy of Chlcago aL
hLLp://www.clLyofchlcago.org/clLy/en/narr/mlsc/soclal_medla.hLml

AnoLher onllne feaLure LhaL flLs under Lhe Web 2.0 deflnlLlon ls open daLa. 1hls lnvolves Lhe
posLlng of daLa collecLed by governmenLs. Cpen daLa ls assoclaLed wlLh Web 2.0 Lhrough Lhe ldea of
uLlllzlng collecLlve lnLelllgence or Lhe wlsdom of crowds" (noveck 2009). CfLen clLles (or oLher
governmenLs) posL raw daLa, and encourage users Lo develop appllcaLlons LhaL make Lhe lnformaLlon
more usable. Chlcago, new ?ork, WashlngLon, u.C. and oLhers have held conLesLs for Lhe developmenL
of appllcaLlons LhaL help clLlzens Lo use Lhe daLa. Chlcago ls one of Lhe clLles wlLh an open daLa porLal,
whlch wenL onllne ln !anuary 2011. 1he mosL accessed daLaseLs over 2011, accordlng Lo Lhe webslLe,
have been lnformaLlon on pollce and flre sLaLlons, Lax lncremenL flnanclng, employee names and
salarles, and bulldlng permlLs.
2
1he slLe also has nelghborhood-level crlme daLa, budgeL daLa, and
freedom of lnformaLlon acL requesLs, among many oLher Lypes of lnformaLlon. Whlle Lhe open daLa
porLals can promoLe Lransparency, Lhelr slgnlflcance over Llme wlll depend on whaL daLa are made
avallable, and Lhe exLenL Lo whlch lL ls usable for lnLended audlences. lor example, clLles ofLen posL ClS
flles LhaL requlre speclal sofLware, and budgeL daLa can be dlfflculL for clLlzens Lo undersLand wlLhouL
clear explanaLlons. orLland and San lranclsco were local governmenL ploneers ln Lhls area aL Lhe end
of 2009, and we counLed one dozen clLles among Lhe 73 largesL by summer 2011. lL wlll be lnLeresLlng
Lo waLch wheLher Lhls spreads ln Lhe fuLure, and how local governmenLs or lndependenLly-developed
appllcaLlons provlde new ways for clLlzens Lo use Lhe daLa.

2
hLLp://daLa.clLyofchlcago.org/, accessed uecember 31, 2011, slLes sorLed by mosL accessed" and Lhls year."

San lranclsco, CA: uaLaSl WebslLe
1he uaLaSl webslLe ls a clearlnghouse of sLrucLured and machlne-readable daLa, made avallable Lo Lhe
publlc wlLh a frlendly lnLerface. 1he ClLy and CounLy of San lranclsco was one of Lhe flrsL u.S. local
governmenLs Lo hosL an open daLa porLal. 1he webslLe provldes approxlmaLely 200 daLaseLs, ln dlverse
caLegorles such as AdmlnlsLraLlon & llnance, LnvlronmenL, Ceography, Pouslng, Puman Servlces, ubllc
SafeLy, ubllc Works, and 1ransporLaLlon. 1he webslLe has Lwo remarkable feaLures: esLabllshlng a
repuLaLlon sysLem on Lhe governmenL webslLe and comblnlng daLaseLs wlLh moblle phone appllcaLlons.
WlLh respecL Lo Lhe repuLaLlon sysLem, resldenLs are allowed Lo commenL and score daLaseLs for
lmprovlng access processes and Lhe quallLy of Lhe daLa. lor moblle phone users, Lhe webslLe provldes
varlous appllcaLlons needed by resldenLs Lo search avallablllLy and prlces of real-Llme parklng spaces,
recycllng places, crlme reporLs, parks, playgrounds, resLauranLs, museums, lndoor play areas, and even
Lhe exacL locaLlon of dlfferenL Lypes of Lrees. Moreover, Lhe webslLe encourages resldenLs Lo esLabllsh
Lhelr own moblle phone appllcaLlons wlLh Lhe avallable daLaseLs.
vlslL hLLp://daLasf.org/

1he parLlclpaLory dlmenslon of Web 2.0 ralses Lhe posslblllLy of more clvlc engagemenL onllne,
and lmproved communlcaLlons beLween governmenL and clLlzens. 1hls ls especlally promlslng ln Lhe
case of soclal neLworks, whlch may provlde a plaLform for clLlzen parLlclpaLlon ln Lhe fuLure. 1heorles of
democraLlc parLlclpaLlon, lncludlng dellberaLlve democracy, emphaslze dlalogue beLween clLlzens (as
well as beLween governmenL and clLlzens) (CuLmann and 1hompson 2004, lung 2006, llshkln 2009,
Pabermas 1991). As shown ln 1able 1 below, ln 2009, Lhere was llLLle dlscusslon vlslble on governmenL
webslLes. ClLlzens could respond Lo onllne surveys, flll ouL commenL forms, or send emall Lo offlclals,
and Lhls cerLalnly lncreased opporLunlLles for governmenL Lo recelve feedback from consLlLuenLs. 8uL,
soclal neLworks have made posslble dlscusslons where clLlzens can lnLeracL wlLh each oLher, and can see
responses from governmenL offlclals. ln 2009, only one clLy webslLe examlned ln Lhe sLudy (SeaLLle) had
a dlscusslon board, and a mlnorlLy of clLles llnked Lo soclal neLworks. ln 2011, mosL governmenLs offer
Lhe opporLunlLy for dlscusslon Lhrough soclal neLworklng slLes. lnLeresLlngly enough, 6 clLy webslLes had
hosLed Lown hall meeLlngs ln Lhe 2011 analysls, whereas none had done so ln 2009. Whlle Lhe number
of Lown hall meeLlngs ls sLlll very small, LogeLher wlLh Lhe adopLlon of soclal neLworks, Lhls may lndlcaLe
a more general wllllngness among local governmenLs Lo experlmenL wlLh Lechnology for dlalogue wlLh
clLlzens.
Interact|v|ty |n U.S. and I|||no|s C|t|es
ln our sLudy, we measured a number of lnLeracLlve Lools on webslLes LhaL allow users Lo
cusLomlze lnformaLlon or communlcaLe wlLh governmenL. Some of Lhese, such as dlscusslon boards, are
feaLures LhaL pre-daLe Web 2.0. Lxamples of Web 2.0 LhaL we examlned ln Lhls sLudy lncluded soclal
neLworklng slLes, blogs, open daLa porLals, and cusLomlzaLlon of lnformaLlon Lhrough 8SS feeds or e-mall
alerLs.

1A8LL 1. lnLeracLlve Lools uLlllzed ln webslLes of 73 largesL u.S. clLles - Comparlson of 2009 and 2011
1oo|s Status
2009 2011
lrequency ercenL lrequency ercenL
Cn-llne newsleLLer subscrlpLlons or
e-mall updaLes
?es 39 78.7 68 90.7
uownloadable lnformaLlon
maLerlals
?es 73 100 73 100
Searchable daLabases ?es 73 97.3 73 97.3
CommenL or message box ?es 60 80 36 74.7
8SS feed ?es 42 36 33 73.3
1wlLLer ?es 19 23.3 63 86.7
ulscusslon boards ?es 1 1.3 2 2.7
vlrLual Lownhall meeLlngs ?es 0 0 6 8
lacebook llnk ?es 10 13.3 63 86.7
?ou1ube llnk ?es 12 16 36 74.7
8log for clLy ln general ?es n/A n/A 8 10.7
8log for elecLed offlclal ?es n/A n/A 17 22.7
lllckr llnk ?es n/A n/A 28 37.3
Cpen daLa porLals ?es n/A n/A 12 16

ln Lhe largesL u.S. clLles, some of Lhese Lools were very common, lncludlng downloadable
lnformaLlon maLerlals (100 ln boLh years), searchable daLabases (97.3 boLh years), and onllne
newsleLLer subscrlpLlons or e-mall updaLes (from 78.7 ln 2009 Lo 90.7 ln 2011). All soclal medla slLes
experlenced manlfold growLh. lllckr was added for Lhe flrsL Llme Lo our llsL ln 2011, and aL 37 lL was
less common Lhan Lhe oLher soclal medla we Lracked. 8logs were less common, as only 22.7 of clLles
had Lhem for any elecLed offlclals (and only abouL 11 had general clLy blogs). Whlle sLlll rare, a few
vlrLual Lown hall meeLlngs appeared Lhls Llme, Lhere were none ln Lhe prevlous sLudy, buL 8 of clLles
had Lhem ln 2011. 1here was a sllghL dlp ln Lhe percenLage of clLles wlLh commenL or message boxes -
from 80 of clLles ln 2009 Lo 74.7 ln 2011. lL ls dlfflculL Lo Lell from Lhls small change durlng a shorL
perlod of Llme wheLher Lhls ls a Lrend, for example, because clLles are uslng soclal medla lnsLead.
1A8LL 2. lnLeracLlve Lools uLlllzed ln webslLes of 20 largesL llllnols clLles - Comparlson of 2009 and 2011
1oo|s Status
2009 2011
lrequency ercenL lrequency ercenL
Cn-llne newsleLLer subscrlpLlons
or e-mall updaLes
?es 13 73 17 83
uownloadable lnformaLlon
maLerlals
?es 20 100 20 100
Searchable daLabases ?es 11 33 13 63
CommenL or message box ?es 11 33 16 80
8SS feed ?es 9 43 13 63
1wlLLer ?es 3 13 11 33
ulscusslon boards ?es 1 3 0 0
vlrLual Lownhall meeLlngs ?es 0 0 0 0
lacebook llnk ?es 2 10 11 33
?ou1ube llnk ?es 2 10 11 33
8log for clLy ln general ?es n/A n/A 3 13
8log for elecLed offlclal ?es n/A n/A 0 0
lllckr llnk ?es n/A n/A 2 10
Cpen daLa porLals ?es n/A n/A 1 3

ln llllnols, Lhe Lrends were much Lhe same, alLhough Lhese (mosLly) smaller clLles adopLed Lhese
lnLeracLlve Lools aL somewhaL lower raLes. SLlll, ln mosL caLegorles Lhere was growLh slnce 2009 (excepL
for Lhe downloadable lnformaLlon maLerlals, whlch were aL 100 already). lnLeresLlngly, commenL or
message boxes ln llllnols clLles lncreased from 33 Lo 80 durlng Lhe same perlod LhaL Lhey decllned
sllghLly naLlonally. 1here were 3 clLy blogs (ln 13 of llllnols clLles), buL none for elecLed offlclals. 1here
were no dlscusslon boards or vlrLual Lown hall meeLlngs ln llllnols when we compleLed Lhe conLenL
analysls ln early May 2011. Slnce Lhe compleLlon of Lhls sLudy, however, Lhe Lmanuel admlnlsLraLlon
has held Lown hall meeLlngs on lacebook, and so Lhls may be changlng ln Lhe fuLure. Cenerally,
lnLeracLlvlLy has lncreased ln llllnols clLles beLween 2009 and 2011, buL ls lower Lhan ln Lhe larger u.S.
clLles.

CVLkALL kANkINGS ICk 2011
As menLloned above, ln 2011 we coded for new caLegorles, lncludlng: blog for Lhe clLy ln
general, blog for an elecLed offlclal, lllckr llnk, and open daLa. AddlLlonally, we added subcaLegorles for
soclal medla and blogs for allows for commenLs" and pollcy conLenL". lor boLh Lhe large u.S. and
llllnols clLles, all 1wlLLer and lacebook slLes we examlned allow user commenLs. lor ?ou1ube, 90 percenL
of Lhe u.S. clLles and 72.7 of Lhe llllnols clLles wlLh Lhese slLes allowed commenLs on Lhem. Moreover,
almosL all of Lhese 1wlLLer, lacebook, and ?ou1ube slLes have pollcy relevanL conLenL (100 percenL of
Lhe lacebook slLes, and 98 percenL of Lhe 1wlLLer and ?ou1ube slLes). (lllckr slLes are less pollcy-
orlenLed, whlch mlghL be expecLed from a phoLo-sharlng slLe. Cnly 71.4 percenL had pollcy conLenL.) ln
llllnols, all of Lhe lacebook and 1wlLLer slLes had pollcy-relaLed maLerlal, as well as mosL of Lhe ?ou1ube
slLes (72.7).

1A8LL 3. 2011 ranklngs - 8ased on 90/94 crlLerla (new lnsLrumenL)
U.S. CI1ILS IILLINCIS CI1ILS
*$'+) ,-./) 01"2()) *$'+) ,-./) 01"2())
new ?ork 1 93.33 napervllle 1 80.83
SeaLLle 1 93.33 Chlcago 2 78.89
vlrglnla 8each 2 90.43 Llgln 3 77.66
orLland 3 90.00 LvansLon 4 73.40
San lranclsco 4 89.36 Aurora 3 72.22
kansas ClLy, MC 3 87.23 Schaumburg 6 71.28
uenver 6 86.67 eorla 7 68.09
Mesa, AZ 7 83.11 uecaLur 8 67.02
Loulsvllle 8 84.44 Champalgn 9 63.83
hlladelphla 9 84.04 ArllngLon PLs. 9 63.83
Long 8each, CA 9 84.04 Skokle 9 63.83
SacramenLo 9 84.04 8ockford 10 63.33
San !ose 10 82.98

Addlng Lhese caLegorles and subcaLegorles places more emphasls on Web 2.0 feaLures. 1hls
reflnemenL reflecLs Lhe growLh of soclal medla, and also Lhelr poLenLlal Lo conLrlbuLe Lo clvlc
engagemenL. 1he subcaLegorles provlde more deLall on Lhe lnLeracLlon permlLLed by local governmenLs
and wheLher dlscusslons are relaLed Lo collecLlve pollcy lssues raLher Lhan servlce alerLs or lndlvldual
servlce requesLs. CLherwlse, Lhe quesLlons and meLhods used were Lhe same as ln Lhe 2009 sLudy (See
meLhods Appendlx L aL Lhe end of Lhls reporL). All clLles were coded lndependenLly by Lwo coders, and
Lhe resulLs were reconclled by a Lhlrd coder. lf lnLercoder rellablllLy dropped under 73 (whlch
happened only ln a few cases), a fourLh coder checked Lhe resulLs.
1he full resulLs for 2011 for Lhe u.S. and llllnols clLles are aLLached ln Appendlx A and Appendlx
C. lor a qulck vlew, Lhe Lop 10 clLles for Lhe naLlon and for llllnols are shown above. uslng Lhe new
measures, Lhe largesL u.S. clLles varled from 31.11 (1oledo) Lo 93.33 (new ?ork and SeaLLle), and Lhe
mean score was 73.72. 1he 20 largesL llllnols clLles ranged from 30 (8ollngbrook) Lo 80.83
(napervllle), wlLh a mean of 63.14.

SeaLLle, WA-CommunlLy LngagemenL WebslLe
1he offlclal webslLe of Lhe ClLy of SeaLLle encourages communlLles and groups Lo parLlclpaLe ln boLh
onllne and offllne governmenLal and communlLy affalrs by offerlng varlous communlLy Lechnologles (e.g.
soclal medla), servlces, and Lralnlng programs. lor lnsLance, Lhe clLy webslLe asslsLs reglsLered
communlLy webslLes Lo be connecLed wlLh Lhe uaLa.SeaLLle.Cov webslLe ln whlch Lhe communlLles are
allowed Lo updaLe Lhelr lnformaLlon, so LhaL lL can be easlly accessed by resldenLs. 1he clLy webslLe also
publlshes a monLhly communlLy Lechnology e-zlne, 32-$.#'"24, Lo publlclze opporLunlLles and resources
for communlLy-based Lechnology, wlLh an emphasls on programs for youLh and resldenLs over 30. lor
resldenLs lnLeresLed ln governmenLal affalrs, Lhe webslLe provldes a clLlzen gulde on local governmenL
processes, as well as offllne parLlclpaLlon opporLunlLles for donaLlng and volunLeerlng, servlng on clLy
boards and commlsslons, and aLLendlng clLy councll hearlngs and nelghborhood evenLs.
hLLp://www.seaLLle.gov/hLml/clLlzen/communlLy.hLm

CCMAkISCN 2009-2011: LCWLk CI1ILS MCVL U
lf we use Lhe same measures as ln 2009 Lo score and rank Lhe clLles on 74-78 crlLerla, Lhere are
slmllar, buL noL ldenLlcal resulLs for 2011. 1he Lables below show Lhe scores for Lhe Lop u.S. and llllnols
clLles ln 2011 uslng Lhe 2009 crlLerla, as well as Lhe resulLs for 2009. lL ls apparenL LhaL Lhere has been
some movemenL, especlally wlLh 2009 lower-ranked clLles movlng up. A glance aL Lhe full resulLs ln Lhe
appendlx shows LhaL whlle a number of clLles dropped ln Lhelr ranklng, LhaL Lhelr scores usually fell
sllghLly, lf aL all. 8aLher, lL was Lhe relaLlve mlx LhaL changed, wlLh oLher clLles caLchlng up and aL Llmes
surpasslng Lhe clLles LhaL had been leaders ln Lhe pasL.
1hls ls clearesL even wlLhln Lhe Lop 3 ln Lhe naLlonal ranklngs. 1he scores for Lhe 73 largesL clLles
ranged beLween 60.81 (1oledo) and 94.87 (San lranclsco). Whlle Lhe ranklngs showed some shlfLs
wlLhln Lhe Lop 3 and overall, Lhere was a general Lrend upward, whlch can be seen beLLer ln Lhe changes
ln Lhe mean score (below). 1he overall llllnols scores ranged beLween 34.03 (Clcero) and 89.74
(napervllle).
We dlsplay Lhe Lop 3 below, buL Lhe full seL ls avallable ln Appendlx 8.
1A8LL 4. 2011 ranklngs of u.S. clLles - 8ased on 74/78 crlLerla (2009 lnsLrumenL)
*$'+) 5677),-./) 5677)01"2()) 5668),-./) 5668)01"2()
San lranclsco 1 94.87 3 93.39
vlrglnla 8each 1 94.87 7 87.17
SeaLLle 2 94.39 1 93.93
new ?ork 3 93.24 3 91.89
kansas ClLy, MC 4 92.31 23 76.92
uenver 3 91.89 20 78.38

1A8LL 3. 2011 ranklngs of lLLlnClS clLles - 8ased on 74/78 crlLerla (2009 lnsLrumenL)

*$'+) 5677),-./) 5677)01"2()) 5668),-./) 5668)01"2()
napervllle 1 89.74 1 87.18
Aurora 2 83.14 3 82.43
Llgln 3 83.33 3 78.21
Chlcago 4 82.43 2 86.49
eorla 3 82.03 6 73.64

1he overall Lrends ln Lhe daLa can be more clearly seen by examlnlng Lhe mean scores for clLles ln 2009
and 2011, uslng Lhe orlglnal 2009 Clvlc LngagemenL lndex.


1able 6. Clvlc LngagemenL lndex - Comparlson beLween 2009 and 2011
Category
# of Items |n
Category
7S U.S. C|t|es 20 I|||no|s C|t|es
Mean |n 2009 Mean |n 2011 Mean |n 2009 Mean |n 2011
Cverall Score 74, 78* 78 83 66 74
ConLacL lnformaLlon 12, 16* 93 93 90 93
CrganlzaLlonal
lnformaLlon
3 63 76 63 60
rocesses and
8egulaLlons
11 73 80 64 73
nelghborhood
lnformaLlon
2 99 99 83 93
ollcy and erformance
lnformaLlon
8 93 91 66 74
Cffllne arLlclpaLlon
lnformaLlon
12 86 86 78 73
Cnllne lnLeracLlvlLy and
arLlclpaLlon
13 33 73 46 64
1ransparency and
AccesslblllLy
13 67 71 32 61
* no clLy manager - 74 polnLs posslble raLher Lhan 78 for overall score, and 12 polnLs posslble raLher
Lhan 16 for conLacL lnformaLlon score

Average overall scores lncreased by 3 percenLage polnLs naLlonally and 8 percenLage polnLs ln
llllnols. 1he noLlceably lncreased average scores (20 percenLage polnLs for Lhe u.S. and 18 for llllnols)
for Lhe Cnllne lnLeracLlvlLy and arLlclpaLlon" caLegory lncluded soclal neLworklng. naLlonally,
organlzaLlonal lnformaLlon lmproved by 13 percenLage polnLs over Lhe Lwo years. ln llllnols,
nelghborhood lnformaLlon lncreased by 10 percenLage polnLs on average, and pollcy and performance
lnformaLlon lncreased by 8 percenLage polnLs. ln mosL caLegorles (oLher Lhan conLacL lnformaLlon,
where boLh have an average of 93), naLlonal averages are hlgher Lhan Lhose for Lhe generally smaller
llllnols clLles.
1he flnal way ln whlch we compare change ls by llsLlng Lhe common feaLures on local
governmenL webslLes (ln 1able 7), and Lhose LhaL were leasL common, for boLh seLs of clLles across
years. ln 1able 7, caLegorles wlLh an x" were presenL on all (or all buL one) of Lhe webslLes for elLher
Lhe u.S. or llllnols.

1able 7. MosL common web feaLures
Item
2009 2011 2009 2011
ConLacL lnformaLlon
Mayor, departments, agencies
x x x x
City council
x x x
CovernmenL processes
Information on current government policies or regulations
x x x x
Texts or links for the municipal code
x x x x
City council agendas
x x x x
nelghborhood orlenLaLlons
Information on neighborhood characteristics
x x x x
Information on community or neighborhood issues
x x
ollcles and performance
Press releases
x x x
City budget
x x x
Financial audit reports
x x
Agency annual report
x
arLlclpaLory opporLunlLles offllne
Information on offline events or opportunities for participation
x x x x
Time and place of council sessions or hearings
x x x x
Time and place of administrative hearings
x
Offline civic participation opportunities
x
Information on grants, training or technical assistance
x

ConvenlenL lnformaLlon access
Downloadable forms
x x x x
Online transactions
x x
Downloadable information materials
x x x x
No charge for downloadable information or printed materials
x x x x
Search engine
x x
Site template uniform
x x
Web page updates in past 30 days
x x x
SecurlLy and prlvacy
Use security access method
x
noLe: A check means LhaL Lhe web feaLure ls presenL on all (or all buL one) of Lhe 73 u.S. (20 llllnols) clLy
webslLes.
Across boLh Lhe naLlonal and llllnols clLles, Lhe number of almosL unlversal feaLures lncreased
somewhaL. Cn Lhe naLlonal level ln 2011, almosL all clLles had agency annual reporLs, lnformaLlon on
offllne clvlc parLlclpaLlon opporLunlLles, onllne LransacLlons, slLe LemplaLe unlformlLy, and recenL
updaLes.
llllnols slLes lacked some of Lhe feaLures of Lhe large u.S. clLy slLes, buL caughL up ln Lhe pasL Lwo
years regardlng clLy councll conLacL lnformaLlon, press releases, clLy budgeLs, and unlformlLy of slLe
LemplaLes. Local webslLes ln Lhe sLaLe were acLually more llkely Lo have some feaLures, such as:
lnformaLlon on Llme and place of admlnlsLraLlve hearlngs, lnformaLlon on granLs, Lralnlng or Lechnlcal
asslsLance, and securlLy access. ln addlLlon Lo Lhe dramaLlc changes ln Web 2.0, Lhere were oLher
smaller lmprovemenLs, mosLly ln beLLer lnformaLlon or Lransparency and accesslblllLy of Lhe webslLes.


1able 8. LeasL common web feaLures
Item
2009 2011 2009 2011
Podcasts on council meetings
x x x
Highlights or summaries rather than full council meeting minutes
x
Published date on main page
x
Accessibility statement
x
Foreign language translation
x
Icons to indicate availability for foreign language translation
x x x x
Audio or visual enhancement for people with disabilities
x
Twitter
x
YouTube link
x x
Facebook link
x x
Discussion boards
x x x x
Virtual town hall meetings
x x x x
Open data
n/A x n/A x
noLe: A check means LhaL Lhe web feaLure ls presenL on less Lhan 20 percenL of Lhe 73 u.S. (20 llllnols)
clLy webslLes.

Conversely, Lhe number of lLems LhaL were avallable on less Lhan 20 percenL of webslLes
decreased, especlally on Lhe naLlonal level. MosL noLlceable for feaLures LhaL were sLlll uncommon were
dlscusslon boards, vlrLual Lown hall meeLlngs, and open daLa, whlch appear on few clLy webslLes ln
elLher Lhe u.S. or llllnols. ulsplay of forelgn language lcons slgnallng LranslaLlon for non-Lngllsh speakers
was uncommon, alLhough forelgn language LranslaLlon was more avallable ln 2011. ln llllnols, podcasLs
of councll meeLlngs, accesslblllLy sLaLemenLs, and publlshed daLes on Lhe maln page were relaLlvely
scarce.
CCNCLUSICN: kCGkLSS AND kCSLC1S
ln Lhe pasL few years, clLles ln Lhe u.S. and llllnols have lmproved Lhelr scores on Lhe L-
CovernmenL Clvlc LngagemenL lndex on average by 3 and 8 percenLage polnLs, respecLlvely. 1hese are
falrly modesL lncreases, due Lo some galns ln Lhe amounL of lnformaLlon avallable onllne, some beLLer
pracLlces for Lhe usablllLy of webslLes, and Lhe use of soclal medla. WhaL Lhe overall averages mask ls
Lhe exLenL Lo whlch some of Lhe lagglng clLles have now moved up.
Local webslLes play an lmporLanL role ln maklng baslc lnformaLlon abouL clLles avallable,
lncludlng conLacL lnformaLlon, governmenL pollcles and processes, governmenL organlzaLlon,
lnformaLlon abouL councll meeLlngs, and lmporLanL pollcy documenLs, such as budgeLs. 1hls lmproves
Lransparency and offers clLlzens lnformaLlon LhaL could help Lhem Lo lnLervene on lssues lf Lhey so
choose. As ln 2009, however, local governmenLs generally have noL used Lhelr webslLes as a venue for
clLlzen parLlclpaLlon. Soclal neLworks pose some poLenLlal for Lhls, buL a scan of acLlvlLy on Lhe webslLes
doesn'L lndlcaLe much acLlve dlscusslon. A small percenLage of Lhe clLles have had onllne Lown hall
meeLlngs, ln conLrasL Lo Lwo years ago, when Lhere were none. 1he new 2011 Clvlc LngagemenL lndex
lncludes quesLlons on wheLher clLles allow commenLs onllne and Lhe exLenL Lo whlch Lhey use Lhese
feaLures for pollcy lssues. lor boLh Lhe u.S. and llllnols clLles, mosL do allow commenLs and conLaln
some pollcy-relaLed lnformaLlon. Whlle noL much dlscusslon was vlslble ln 2011, soclal neLworks may
open more opporLunlLles for dlalogue ln Lhe fuLure.
1he change ln soclal medla adopLlon ls remarkable - lncreaslng from Lwo Lo flve Llmes over Lhe
levels observed Lwo years ago. AL Lhe same Llme, however, Lhere ls much more Lo be learned abouL
how local governmenLs are uslng Lechnology. 1o whaL exLenL are dlscusslons acLually occurrlng onllne?
WhaL ls Lhe conLenL of Lhe dlscusslons, and whaL lnfluence do Lhey have on pollcy? use of soclal medla,
as Lhls sLudy shows, ls relaLlvely new for local governmenLs. Whlle Lhe prlor sLudy showed LhaL Lhere
are many opporLunlLles onllne for clLlzen feedback, such as surveys and commenL forms, clLy webslLes
have ln Lhe pasL provlded llLLle for Lwo-way lnLeracLlon. 1hls ls Lhe poLenLlal LhaL soclal medla offer.
8uL, Lwo-way lnLeracLlon wlll requlre Llme and managemenL by clLy employees. ClLlzens expecL a
response Lo ldeas and argumenLs LhaL Lhey puL forward. Some local governmenLs fear lssues of
censorshlp regardlng lnclvlllLy onllne from clLlzens, as well as Lhe posslble consequences of casual,
unauLhorlzed commenLs from governmenL employees or elecLed offlclals. 1he way ln whlch clLles wlll
navlgaLe Lhls new Lerraln wlll cerLalnly lnfluence Lhe chances for fosLerlng clvlc engagemenL ln new
ways.


8LlL8LnCLS
8oyd, u.M. and n.8. Llllson. 2008. Soclal neLwork SlLes: ueflnlLlon, PlsLory and Scholarshlp. 9":2.-&)";)
*"4!:'(2<=(>$-'(>)*"44:.$1-'$". 13: 210-230.
llshkln, !. 2009. ?@(.)'@()A("!&()0!(-/B))C(&$%(2-'$D()C(4"12-1+)-.>)A:%&$1)*".#:&'-'$".E))new ?ork:
Cxford unlverslLy ress. )))
lung, A. 2006. varleLles of arLlclpaLlon ln Complex Covernance. A:%&$1)F>4$.$#'2-'$".),(D$(G)66: 66-
73E)))
CuLmann, A. and u. 1hompson, 2004. ?@+)C(&$%(2-'$D()C(4"12-1+H))rlnceLon, n!: rlnceLon unlverslLy
ress.
Pabermas, !. 1991. I@()0'2:1':2-&)I2-.#;"24-'$".)";)'@()A:%&$1)0!@(2(E))Cambrldge, MA: Ml1 ress.
PampLon, k. 2011. PampLon, k., L. C. Sesslons, L. 8alnle, and k. urcell. 2011. Soclal neLworklng SlLes
and Cur Llves. ew lnLerneL and Amerlcan Llfe ro[ecL. ew 8esearch CenLer. WashlngLon uC.
Po, A. 1aL-kel. 2002. 8elnvenLlng Local CovernmenLs and Lhe L-CovernmenL lnlLlaLlve. A:%&$1)
F>4$.$#'2-'$".),(D$(G)62(4): 434-444.
kaplan, A.M. and M. Paenleln. (2010). users of Lhe World, unlLe! 1he Challenges and CpporLunlLles of
Soclal Medla. 3:#$.(##)J"2$K".#. 33: 39-68.
Moon, M.!. 2002. 1he LvoluLlon of L-CovernmenL Among MunlclpallLles: 8heLorlc or 8eallLy? A:%&$1)
F>4$.$#'2-'$".),(D$(G)62(4): 424-433.
Musso, !.A., Weare, C. and Pale, M.C. 2000. ueslgnlng Web 1echnologles for Local Covernance 8eform:
Cood ManagemenL or Cood uemocracy? A"&$'$1-&)*"44:.$1-'$". 17(1): 1 - 19.
noveck, 8. S. 2009. ?$/$)L"D(2.4(.'B))J"G)I(1@."&"M+)*-.)=-/()L"D(2.4(.')3(''(2N)C(4"12-1+)
0'2".M(2N)-.>)*$'$K(.#)="2()A"G(2;:&E))WashlngLon, u.C.: 8rooklngs lnsLlLuLlon ress.
C'8ellly, 1. 2003. WhaL ls Web 2.0: ueslgn aLLerns and 8uslness Models for Lhe nexL CeneraLlon of
SofLware. Accessed on !une 16, 2011 from hLLp://orellly.com/web2/archlve/whaL-ls-web-20.hLml
Weare, C. and Lln, W.?. 2000. ConLenL Analysls of Lhe World Wlde Web: CpporLunlLles and Challenges.
0"1$-&)01$(.1()*"4!:'(2),(D$(G 18(3): 272-92.


ALnulx A. Cverall ranklng for 73 largesL u.S. clLles - 8ased on 2011 lnsLrumenL
C|ty State opu|at|on
kank by
popu|at|on
kaw
score
n|ghest
poss|b|e score
We|ghted
score
kank by
we|ghted score
new ?ork new ?ork 8173133 1 84 90 93.33 1
SeaLLle WashlngLon 608660 24 84 90 93.33 1
vlrglnla 8each vlrglnla 437994 40 83 94 90.43 2
orLland Cregon 383776 30 81 90 90.00 3
San lranclsco Callfornla 803233 14 84 94 89.36 4
kansas ClLy Mlssourl 439787 38 82 94 87.23 3
uenver Colorado 600138 27 78 90 86.67 6
hlladelphla ennsylvanla 1326006 3 80 94 83.11 7
Mesa Arlzona 439041 39 80 94 83.11 7
Loulsvllle kenLucky 397337 28 76 90 84.44 8
SacramenLo Callfornla 466488 36 79 94 84.04 9
Long 8each Callfornla 462237 37 79 94 84.04 9
San !ose Callfornla 943942 11 78 94 82.98 10
PousLon 1exas 2099431 4 74 90 82.22 11
Los Angeles Callfornla 3792621 2 77 94 81.91 12
hoenlx Arlzona 1443632 6 77 94 81.91 12
WashlngLon uC n/A 601723 23 77 94 81.91 12
Albuquerque new Mexlco 343832 33 73 90 81.11 13
SL. aul MlnnesoLa 283068 66 73 90 81.11 13
ArllngLon 1exas 363438 31 76 94 80.83 14
Creensboro norLh Carollna 269666 68 76 94 80.83 14
8osLon MassachuseLLs 617394 23 72 90 80.00 13
8alelgh norLh Carollna 403892 44 73 94 79.79 16
Chlcago llllnols 2693398 3 71 90 78.89 17
San ulego Callfornla 1307402 8 71 90 78.89 17
Mlnneapolls MlnnesoLa 382378 49 71 90 78.89 17
Las vegas nevada 383736 31 74 94 78.72 18
Cklahoma ClLy Cklahoma 379999 32 74 94 78.72 18
!acksonvllle llorlda 821784 12 70 90 77.78 19
San AnLonlo 1exas 1327407 7 73 94 77.66 20
lresno Callfornla 494663 33 73 94 77.66 20
Colorado Sprlngs Colorado 416427 42 73 94 77.66 20
ClnclnnaLl Chlo 296943 61 73 94 77.66 20
1ucson Arlzona 320116 34 72 94 76.60 21
Aurora Colorado 323078 33 72 94 76.60 21
lano 1exas 239841 70 72 94 76.60 21
SL. eLersburg llorlda 244769 74 72 94 76.60 21
Clendale Arlzona 226721 73 72 94 76.60 21
8alLlmore Maryland 620961 22 68 90 73.36 22
1ulsa Cklahoma 391906 47 68 90 73.36 22
Anchorage Alaska 291826 63 68 90 73.36 22
LexlngLon-layeLLe kenLucky 293803 62 71 94 73.33 23
Ponolulu Pawall 933207 10 70 94 74.47 24
AusLln 1exas 790390 13 70 94 74.47 24
lorL WorLh 1exas 741206 17 70 94 74.47 24
WlchlLa kansas 382368 30 70 94 74.47 24
Columbus Chlo 787033 16 67 90 74.44 23
Mllwaukee Wlsconsln 394833 29 67 90 74.44 23
lndlanapolls lndlana 820443 13 66 90 73.33 26
Memphls 1ennessee 646889 21 66 90 73.33 26
Llncoln nebraska 238379 71 66 90 73.33 26
Cakland Callfornla 390724 48 68 94 72.34 27
ueLrolL Mlchlgan 713777 19 63 90 72.22 28
Cmaha nebraska 408938 43 63 90 72.22 28
1ampa llorlda 333709 34 63 90 72.22 28
lorL Wayne lndlana 233691 73 63 90 72.22 28
Corpus ChrlsLl 1exas 303213 39 67 94 71.28 29
SL. Louls Mlssourl 319294 37 64 90 71.11 30
CharloLLe norLh Carollna 731424 18 66 94 70.21 31
Ll aso 1exas 649121 20 66 94 70.21 31
Anahelm Callfornla 336263 33 66 94 70.21 31
8lverslde Callfornla 303871 60 66 94 70.21 31
lLLsburgh ennsylvanla 303704 38 63 90 70.00 32
Mlaml llorlda 399437 43 63 94 69.13 33
Penderson nevada 237729 72 63 94 69.13 33
ALlanLa Ceorgla 420003 41 64 94 68.09 34
uallas 1exas 1197816 9 62 94 63.96 33
nashvllle-uavldson 1ennessee 601222 26 39 90 63.36 36
8uffalo new ?ork 261310 69 36 90 62.22 37
Cleveland Chlo 396813 46 33 90 38.89 38
newark new !ersey 277140 67 33 90 38.89 38
SLockLon Callfornla 291707 64 33 94 38.31 39
8akersfleld Callfornla 347483 32 34 94 37.43 40
SanLa Ana Callfornla 324328 36 34 94 37.43 40
1oledo Chlo 287208 63 46 90 31.11 41
MLAn SCC8L 73.72
MLulAn SCC8L 76.60


ALnulx 8. Cverall ranklng for 73 largesL u.S. clLles - Comparlson beLween 2009 and 2011
C|ty State opu|at|on
kank by
popu|at|on
kaw
score
n|ghest
poss|b|e
score
We|ghted
score
kank by
we|ghted
score
We|ghted
score |n 2009
kank by
we|ghted score
|n 2009
San lranclsco Callfornla 803233 14 74 78 94.87 1 93.39 3
vlrglnla 8each vlrglnla 437994 40 74 78 94.87 1 87.18 7
SeaLLle WashlngLon 608660 24 70 74 94.39 2 93.93 1
new ?ork new ?ork 8173133 1 69 74 93.24 3 91.89 3
kansas ClLy Mlssourl 439787 38 72 78 92.31 4 76.92 23
uenver Colorado 600138 27 68 74 91.89 3 78.38 20
San !ose Callfornla 943942 11 71 78 91.03 6 83.90 9
orLland Cregon 383776 30 67 74 90.34 7 77.03 22
hlladelphla ennsylvanla 1326006 3 70 78 89.74 8 81.08 16
hoenlx Arlzona 1443632 6 70 78 89.74 8 94.87 2
Mesa Arlzona 439041 39 70 78 89.74 8 84.62 11
San ulego Callfornla 1307402 8 66 74 89.19 9 82.43 14
WashlngLon uC n/A 601723 23 69 78 88.46 10 82.43 14
SacramenLo Callfornla 466488 36 69 78 88.46 10 79.49 19
PousLon 1exas 2099431 4 63 74 87.84 11 79.73 18
Las vegas nevada 383736 31 68 78 87.18 12 78.21 21
Long 8each Callfornla 462237 37 68 78 87.18 12 80.77 17
8osLon MassachuseLLs 617394 23 64 74 86.49 13 87.84 6
Loulsvllle kenLucky 397337 28 64 74 86.49 13 93.24 4
Albuquerque new Mexlco 343832 33 64 74 86.49 13 79.73 18
SL. aul MlnnesoLa 283068 66 64 74 86.49 13 79.73 18
San AnLonlo 1exas 1327407 7 67 78 83.90 14 82.03 13
Colorado Sprlngs Colorado 416427 42 67 78 83.90 14 73.64 23
ArllngLon 1exas 363438 31 67 78 83.90 14 76.92 23
Creensboro norLh Carollna 269666 68 67 78 83.90 14 82.03 13
Mlnneapolls MlnnesoLa 382378 49 63 74 83.14 13 80.77 17
Los Angeles Callfornla 3792621 2 66 78 84.62 16 82.43 14
1ucson Arlzona 320116 34 66 78 84.62 16 70.31 31
lresno Callfornla 494663 33 66 78 84.62 16 78.21 21
Aurora Colorado 323078 33 66 78 84.62 16 78.21 21
SL. eLersburg llorlda 244769 74 66 78 84.62 16 80.77 17
Anchorage Alaska 291826 63 62 74 83.78 17 71.79 29
Ponolulu Pawall 933207 10 63 78 83.33 18 73.08 28
Cklahoma ClLy Cklahoma 379999 32 63 78 83.33 18 82.03 13
LexlngLon-layeLLe kenLucky 293803 62 63 78 83.33 18 71.62 30
Clendale Arlzona 226721 73 63 78 83.33 18 79.49 19
Chlcago llllnols 2693398 3 61 74 82.43 19 86.49 8
Columbus Chlo 787033 16 61 74 82.43 19 83.14 10
Memphls 1ennessee 646889 21 61 74 82.43 19 79.73 18
8alLlmore Maryland 620961 22 61 74 82.43 19 82.43 14
Mllwaukee Wlsconsln 394833 29 61 74 82.43 19 73.68 24
SL. Louls Mlssourl 319294 37 61 74 82.43 19 83.78 12
!acksonvllle llorlda 821784 12 61 74 82.43 19 73.68 24
Ll aso 1exas 649121 20 64 78 82.03 20 82.03 13
ALlanLa Ceorgla 420003 41 64 78 82.03 20 73.68 24
ClnclnnaLl Chlo 296943 61 64 78 82.03 20 73.64 23
lano 1exas 239841 70 64 78 82.03 20 83.33 13
lndlanapolls lndlana 820443 13 60 74 81.08 21 68.92 33
1ulsa Cklahoma 391906 47 60 74 81.08 21 78.38 20
Llncoln nebraska 238379 71 60 74 81.08 21 66.22 37
AusLln 1exas 790390 13 63 78 80.77 22 83.33 13
8alelgh norLh Carollna 403892 44 63 78 80.77 22 61.34 40
Corpus ChrlsLl 1exas 303213 39 63 78 80.77 22 74.36 26
1ampa llorlda 333709 34 39 74 79.73 23 82.43 14
lLLsburgh ennsylvanla 303704 38 39 74 79.73 23 74.32 27
lorL Wayne lndlana 233691 73 39 74 79.73 23 73.68 24
uallas 1exas 1197816 9 62 78 79.49 24 79.49 19
lorL WorLh 1exas 741206 17 62 78 79.49 24 71.79 29
CharloLLe norLh Carollna 731424 18 62 78 79.49 24 76.92 23
Cakland Callfornla 390724 48 62 78 79.49 24 71.79 29
WlchlLa kansas 382368 30 62 78 79.49 24 80.77 17
ueLrolL Mlchlgan 713777 19 38 74 78.38 23 71.62 30
Cmaha nebraska 408938 43 38 74 78.38 23 70.27 32
Anahelm Callfornla 336263 33 61 78 78.21 26 73.64 23
nashvllle-uavldson 1ennessee 601222 26 37 74 77.03 27 83.78 12
8lverslde Callfornla 303871 60 60 78 76.92 28 73.64 23
Penderson nevada 237729 72 39 78 73.64 29 78.21 21
Mlaml llorlda 399437 43 38 78 74.36 30 74.36 26
Cleveland Chlo 396813 46 33 74 71.62 31 70.27 32
8uffalo new ?ork 261310 69 33 74 71.62 31 67.37 33
SLockLon Callfornla 291707 64 33 78 70.31 32 67.93 34
8akersfleld Callfornla 347483 32 34 78 69.23 33 64.10 39
SanLa Ana Callfornla 324328 36 32 78 66.67 34 66.67 36
newark new !ersey 277140 67 49 74 66.22 33 32.70 41
1oledo Chlo 287208 63 43 74 60.81 36 64.86 38
MLAn SCC8L 82.63 78.02
MLulAn SCC8L 82.43 78.38


ALnulx C. Cverall ranklng for 20 largesL llllnols clLles - 8ased on 2011 lnsLrumenL
C|ty opu|at|on
kank by
popu|at|on
kaw
score
n|ghest poss|b|e
score
We|ghted
score
kank by we|ghted
score
napervllle 141833 3 76 94 80.83 1
Chlcago 2693398 1 71 90 78.89 2
Llgln 108188 8 73 94 77.66 3
LvansLon 74486 13 69 94 73.40 4
Aurora 197899 2 63 90 72.22 3
Schamburg 74227 16 67 94 71.28 6
eorla 113007 7 64 94 68.09 7
uecaLur 76122 13 63 94 67.02 8
Champalgn 81033 11 60 94 63.83 9
ArllngLon PelghLs 73101 14 60 94 63.83 9
Skokle 64784 19 60 94 63.83 9
8ockford 132871 3 37 90 63.33 10
ues lalnes 38364 20 39 94 62.77 11
Waukegan 89078 9 36 90 62.22 12
Sprlngfleld 116230 6 33 90 61.11 13
8loomlngLon 76610 12 33 94 38.31 14
alaLlne 68337 18 32 94 33.32 13
Clcero 83891 10 49 90 34.44 16
!olleL 147433 4 31 94 34.26 17
8ollngbrook 73366 17 43 90 30.00 18
MLAn SCC8L 63.14
MLulAn SCC8L 63.83


ALnulx u. Cverall ranklng for 20 largesL llllnols clLles - Comparlson beLween 2009 and 2011
C|ty opu|at|on
kank by
popu|at|on
kaw
score
n|ghest
poss|b|e
score
We|ghted
score
kank by
we|ghted
score
We|ghted
score |n 2009
kank by
we|ghted score
|n 2009
napervllle 141833 3 70 78 89.74 1 87.18 1
Aurora 197899 2 63 74 83.14 2 82.43 3
Llgln 108188 8 63 78 83.33 3 78.21 3
Chlcago 2693398 1 61 74 82.43 4 86.49 2
eorla 113007 7 64 78 82.03 3 73.64 6
Schamburg 74227 16 61 78 78.21 6 60.26 10
Champalgn 81033 11 60 78 76.92 7 79.49 4
Skokle 64784 19 60 78 76.92 7 37.69 13
LvansLon 74486 13 39 78 73.64 8 74.36 7
ues lalnes 38364 20 39 78 73.64 8 73.64 6
uecaLur 76122 13 38 78 74.36 9 31.28 17
ArllngLon PelghLs 73101 14 38 78 74.36 9 33.13 14
8ockford 132871 3 33 74 71.62 10 74.32 8
8loomlngLon 76610 12 33 78 70.31 11 38.97 12
Waukegan 89078 9 31 74 68.92 12 48.63 18
alaLlne 68337 18 32 78 66.67 13 63.38 9
Sprlngfleld 116230 6 49 74 66.22 14 39.46 11
!olleL 147433 4 47 78 60.26 13 31.28 17
8ollngbrook 73366 17 43 74 38.11 16 34.03 13
Clcero 83891 10 40 74 34.03 17 32.7 16
MLAn SCC8L 73.36 66.43
MLulAn SCC8L 73.00 62.82


ALnulx L. MeLhods
1hls reporL examlnes Lhe poLenLlal for local e-governmenL Lo faclllLaLe clvlc engagemenL Lhrough
a conLenL analysls of Lhe offlclal webslLes of Lhe 20 largesL llllnols clLles and 73 largesL u.S. clLles (as
measured by populaLlon). Appendlces A and 8 conLaln a llsL of Lhe u.S. clLles ranked by Clvlc
LngagemenL lndex score and populaLlon, and C and u show Lhe same lnformaLlon for llllnols. rlor
sLudles have ldenLlfled large clLles as Lhe leaders ln local e-governmenL, so an assessmenL of Lhe largesL
clLles may be more llkely Lo reveal cuLLlng-edge pracLlces ln clvlc engagemenL.
ConLenL analysls was conducLed from March Lhrough May 2011, assesslng clLles on 90 Lo 94
dlfferenL varlables (or 74 Lo 78 varlables for comparlson wlLh 2009), dependlng on wheLher or noL Lhey
had a clLy manager. 1he coders examlned each webslLe Lo deLermlne how many of Lhe 90-94 feaLures
were presenL, and Lhe Clvlc LngagemenL lndex (welghLed score) ls Lhe percenL of all posslble feaLures. A
deLalled codlng manual wlLh webslLe examples and lnsLrucLlons was used Lo Lraln Lhe 3 coders and Lo
assure rellablllLy.
3
re-LesLs of Lhe webslLe-assessmenL lnsLrumenL were conducLed for boLh Lhe u.S.
and llllnols clLles. lnLercoder rellablllLy ranged beLween 62 and 93 percenL (Lhe mean ls sllghLly over 80
percenL), whlch parallels Lhe resulLs for oLher webslLe codlng (see Musso, Weare and Pale 2000). 1he
greaLesL challenge ls Lhe complexlLy of webslLes and layouL LhaL ofLen makes lL dlfflculL Lo flnd feaLures.
1o lnsure greaLer rellablllLy, each webslLe was coded carefully and lndependenLly by Lwo coders, and
dlfferences were reconclled by a Lhlrd coder.
MeasuremenLs LhaL are dlchoLomous - such as Lhe presence or absence of background
lnformaLlon on an lssue - are more approprlaLe for Lhls meLhod Lhan a [udgmenL abouL Lhe quallLy of
Lhe lnformaLlon. 1he measures show Lhe avallablllLy of some lnformaLlon, buL noL Lhe ease of flndlng lL,
Lhe prevalence of Lhe lnformaLlon, or lLs uLlllLy.
Cne lssue ln webslLe conLenL analysls ls how Lo deflne Lhe webslLe," especlally for governmenLs
LhaL have a varleLy of deparLmenLs and mulLlple llnks (Weare and Lln 2000). ln mosL cases we resLrlcLed
our analysls Lo Lhe maln webslLe and avolded examlnlng separaLe deparLmenLs. ConcepLually, we were
mosL concerned wlLh Lhe pollcles of Lhe clLy leadershlp, especlally Lhe mayor, clLy councll, and clLy
manager (where appllcable). We recorded llnks from Lhe maln webslLe Lo Lhe elecLlon lnformaLlon for
LhaL varlable. Coders dld go Lo Lhe communlLy or nelghborhood page (where lL exlsLed) Lo flnd
descrlpLlve or pollcy lnformaLlon or parLlclpaLory opporLunlLles. lor cerLaln documenLs, such as budgeL
or audlL lnformaLlon, coders were allowed Lo go Lo a separaLe flnance page, lf necessary. lL ls posslble
LhaL Lhls research undersLaLes some parLlclpaLory opporLunlLles or lnformaLlon locaLed only on
deparLmenL webslLes. lor LhaL reason, we emphaslze LhaL we are researchlng Lhe maln clLy web page,
Lhe clLy leadershlp, and ma[or clLy-wlde pollcy documenLs.

3
Avallable from Lhe auLhors upon requesL.

Social Media Savvy Cities Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Social Media Savvy Cities Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Civic Engagement and

Local E-Government: Social

"CIVIC ENGAGEMENT AND LOCAL E-GOVERNMENT: SOCIAL NETWORKING COMES OF AGE" 1

You might also like