The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.
By Tanya Settles
May 22, 2026
Local governments across the country are navigating a difficult reality: Communities continue to expect high-quality public services while municipalities face staffing shortages, fiscal uncertainty, political polarization and shifting federal priorities. The question is no longer whether local governments must “do more with less.†They already are. The more important question may be whether local governments are investing in the right tools to manage growing community conflict before it becomes expensive.
Often viewed as a niche social service or an optional “feel good†program, community-based alternative dispute resolution (ADR) may be one of the most underutilized tools available to local governments today. While these programs are rarely discussed in budget hearings or strategic plans, they can quietly help municipalities conserve resources, reduce escalation, improve community trust and strengthen institutional legitimacy. In other words, community-based conflict resolution has a hidden return on investment.
The Cost of Unresolved Conflict
Local governments experience recurring conflicts that consume time and resources. Neighbor disputes generate repeated calls for service. Landlord-tenant tensions escalate into code enforcement complaints. Community disagreements spill into contentious public meetings. Conflict between individuals, neighborhoods and, in some cases, government agencies themselves can become entrenched because there are few mechanisms for structured dialogue before formal enforcement systems are activated.
When these situations escalate, local governments pay for them repeatedly. Most of these costs never appear under a single line item labeled “unresolved conflict,†but they are real nonetheless. Every avoided enforcement action, repeated call for service, prolonged neighborhood dispute or preventable legal conflict represents staff time and public resources that could otherwise be directed toward community priorities.
Rather than relying exclusively on enforcement-driven approaches that can be coercive, adversarial or dependent on judicial and quasi-judicial systems, ADR strategies create a structured process for community members to communicate with each other and their government, identify shared interests and develop mutually acceptable solutions before conflicts intensify.
Importantly, ADR does not replace formal enforcement systems. Instead, it helps governments reserve those systems for situations that genuinely require them. This distinction matters. Not every conflict requires a citation, court filing or law enforcement response. Many disputes are fundamentally relational problems that enter government systems because local governments are often the only institutions residents know to call.
This is where community-based ADR demonstrates operational value. Effective community ADR programs can reduce repeated calls for service, improve voluntary compliance with agreements, decrease administrative burdens and create more durable resolutions than purely punitive approaches. They can also improve perceptions of procedural fairness because participants are given voice, agency and an opportunity to participate directly in problem-solving. At a time when many public institutions are struggling with declining trust, that outcome should not be underestimated.
Intergovernmental and Policy-Level Collaboration
Governments increasingly recognize the importance of collaborative governance, upstream problem-solving and community-centered service delivery. ADR supports each of these goals while often requiring far fewer resources than prolonged enforcement actions or litigation.
Critically, mediation is not only about encouraging people to resolve differences and promote healing. It is also about government effectiveness. Research on collaborative governance suggests that when local governments convene stakeholders to solve problems collectively, communities are often better able to build consensus and create public value through shared decision-making. Community-based conflict resolution and mediation help facilitate this process.
ADR also provides an underutilized opportunity to strengthen government performance. Mediation and adjacent ADR strategies are often appropriate for addressing the wicked problems governments face: issues that are complex, contradictory and difficult to solve through traditional administrative approaches alone. ADR aligns with this framework because it provides a confidential space for people to work collaboratively toward creative consensus and practical problem resolution.
Within this environment, participants can identify underlying issues that more traditional legal systems may overlook. ADR strategies are effective not only in resolving community disputes, but also in addressing intergovernmental and policy conflicts. Local governments regularly use mediation and related approaches to navigate collective bargaining negotiations and financial settlements.
These strategies work across contexts for the same reason: ADR processes are structured, collaborative, confidential and non-adversarial. When stakeholders are given space to speak openly, understand competing interests and participate directly in problem-solving, they are often better able to reach durable results. And when people can talk, they can find solutions.
For local governments operating under financial strain, effectiveness and cost efficiency are inseparable. Programs that prevent escalation, reduce system involvement and preserve staff capacity are not peripheral to government operations. They are central to organizational resilience.
The communities that navigate the next decade most successfully may not be the ones with the largest enforcement systems. They may be the ones that develop the strongest capacity to resolve conflict early, constructively and collaboratively. In an era defined by fiscal pressure and social fragmentation, community-based conflict resolution should be viewed not as an optional community service, but as essential civic infrastructure.
 Author: Tanya Settles is the CEO of Paradigm Public Affairs, LLC. Tanya's areas of work include relationship building between local governments and communities, restorative justice, and policy and program strategy and evaluation. Tanya can be reached at [email protected]. The opinions in this column and any mistakes are hers alone.Â
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading…
