Guest Post: A Look at Why Small Towns Grow

Today I’m doing something different. Instead of featuring a small town story and providing my own little commentary, I’m publishing a guest post from Father John Bauer. It’s a look at why small towns grow. This piece caught my attention because it’s not so much about the economics and infrastructure of small towns as it is about the dynamics of the people who live there—the townsfolk who shape the future of their place in the world. 

Father John Bauer is the pastor of the Basilica of Saint Mary in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Besides administering to the 6,400 households in his parish, Father John writes the blog, Weekly Musings from the Basilica of Saint Mary. He kindly gave permission to reprint his article here. Hope you enjoy . . . 

A while back, while I was looking for something else in my files, I came across an article I had saved from many years ago. It was entitled "Applying Research to Why Towns Grow."

The author, a former Kansas State University professor, had done extensive research on small towns. Her work has focused on why some small towns grow while others fail. In looking at her research it occurred to me that her findings could easily be applied to every community. I also think her findings could be applied to parishes. A summary of the article is below.

1. Research reveals that in growing communities, controversy was considered normal. It was expected and regarded as necessary for participatory government. Just the opposite was revealed in dying towns. People avoided controversy and refused to address issues, regulations and the people who made them.

2. People in growing towns held an objective view of politics. They did not take sides on an issue because of friendship alone, nor did they oppose someone simply because that person was an educator, a business person or a farmer. On the other hand, dying communities had a "my side of the street vs. your side" mentality. People personalized their politics. They did not separate the person from the job. They gave loyalty to people rather than issues, an attitude that prevailed right up to the end.

3. In prosperous small towns the emphasis in schools was on academics, rather than sports. In dying towns schools tried to hold people's interest by promoting loyalty to sports. However, when academic programs deteriorated, people moved their children to better schools.

4. In growing towns, there was a willingness to risk for the good of the town. After all, if we don't risk, we will stagnate. There is also a side feature to this characteristic: growing towns had enough success to want to risk and they had success because they did risk. Dying towns had neither.

5. In the same vein as risk, growing towns had a willingness to tax themselves. They moved beyond "want" to "action." Dying towns accurately identified needs, but that's where everyone stopped. They thought someone else should pay the bill for their gain, and weren't willing to tax themselves.

6. Growing towns had the ability to expand. They made a place for more people - including those who were new to the community. This was not true of dying towns. The townspeople would not share their power and small groups held all the leadership.

7. Growing towns also had the ability to network horizontally as well as vertically. Therefore they could learn from anyone.

8. Growing towns were flexible. They disbursed community leadership. Many people were involved in the work and mission of the community in leadership roles. Therefore, if someone dropped out, another took his or her place. In dying towns, leadership was often in the hands of one person. When that person died, the community stopped and died with him or her.

Even many years later I still find this article fascinating. More importantly, when I looked at our community here at the Basilica, I thought we compared very favorably with those towns that were growing. This article gave me something to think about. I hope it does the same for you.