The Landscape of Local Power: A Comparative of Neighborhood Governance in St. Louis and Philadelphia

• In Event: Community and Urban Sociology Section Roundtables
  In Refereed Roundtable (60 minute): Table 11: Governance

Abstract

Neighborhood Associations (NAs) have become increasingly important actors in urban governance, yet their political roles and implications for neighborhoods remain understudied. This paper examines how neighborhood governance structures shape the distribution of local power across a racially and economically unequal urban landscapes. Drawing on a comparative qualitative study of St. Louis, Missouri, and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, I analyze how differing institutional arrangements, specifically city-implemented neighborhood governance systems shape NAs’ power. Here, power is understood through associations’ access to resources, communication with government actors, and perceived organizational legitimacy.
The study contrasts two neighborhood governance regimes: Philadelphia’s formalized Registered Community Organization (RCO) system, which institutionalizes neighborhood participation in planning and zoning processes, and St. Louis’s decentralized and largely informal neighborhood governance structure. The analysis draws on semi-structured interviews with NA leaders, field observations, and geospatial analysis linking associations to neighborhood racial composition and median income to examine how race, class, and place interact with governance design to shape neighborhood-level political influence.
Preliminary findings suggest that, first, NA priorities are stratified across neighborhoods regardless of governance structure. Affluent, predominantly White resident associations focus on social infrastructure and neighborhood desirability, while lower-income, predominantly Black resident associations balance these goals with efforts to address basic infrastructure needs, environmental concerns, and displacement pressures. Second, communication with city governments and developers remains uneven, particularly in informal systems where access to information depends heavily on organizational networks and capacity. Third, while Philadelphia’s formal governance system expands access to decision-making, NAs influence in unequal, where perceptions of legitimacy and responsiveness remain patterned by race and class, with resource-rich organizations more likely to have their recommendations adopted.
These findings suggest that formalization alone does not resolve embedded inequality, but instead operates within a historically segregated urban contexts that shape whose voices carry authority in local decision-making.

Author

• Anne Kaye Brown, Washington University in St. Louis