Title: The movement for "good city government"
Description: This dissertation utilizes the movement to restructure American cities, regarded by contemporaries as "experiment stations" for innovations in government, to explore the contested meaning of democracy in Progressive era. Municipal reform brought together a coalition of diverse individuals who shared in the conviction that the creation of more simplified and efficient municipal structures was a necessary prerequisite for a broadening of the scope of local government. In order to demonstrate that this coalition is the key to understanding municipal reform as a national phenomenon, this dissertation combines a wide variety of sources: case studies of five cities (Oakland, CA; Fort Worth, TX; Toledo, OH; Norfolk, VA; Worcester; MA), national data on the adoption of structural innovations, the archival papers and publications of the National Municipal League, and influential works of municipal political science. Adopting an inter-disciplinary approach, it combines political and intellectual history with the insights of institutionalism and American Political Development in the social sciences.

Examining theoretical debates among political scientists, elite reformers, and local political actors in connection with specific structures created to embody their ideals of democracy, this dissertation is both an intellectual and an institutional history of municipal reform. It connects debates concerning the scale of modern democracy with the movement for municipal "home rule"; debates concerning the appropriate role of groups with efforts to replace ward-based with at-large council elections; and debates concerning the need to balance efficiency and democracy with campaigns to adopt commission and city manager charters. In so doing, it draws on municipal reform to understand one of the central paradoxes of Progressivism. In the 1890s, many reformers expressed their faith that democratic ideals and institutions could be remodeled to meet the demands of changing social and economic conditions. By the 1920s, however, many former Progressives had become disillusioned with democracy and turned towards technocratic models of government that relied heavily on trained experts and rejected the notion that ordinary citizens could participate in a meaningful way in the determination of public policy. An exploration of the municipal side of this transformation does much to explain how and why it occurred.