A Model for Trust, Participation, and Durable Democracy
The Problem: When Cities Vote Less, Democracy Suffers
According to U.S. Census data, nearly one in six Americans lives in one of the country’s 100 largest cities. Yet despite representing a significant share of the population, cities consistently experience lower voter turnout than their states overall, particularly outside of presidential elections. As a result, millions of urban residents participate at lower rates, and city voices carry less weight in electoral outcomes. This imbalance means that the priorities of city residents, such as housing affordability, public transit, access to services, and neighborhood investment, are often underrepresented in statewide and national decision-making, weakening the influence of city residents across states and the federal government.
Diminished Trust
This participation gap is compounded by a broader decline in trust in institutions across all levels of society. Together, lower turnout and diminishing trust have weakened confidence that civic engagement leads to meaningful results. Cities remain the bedrock of the United States, with the nation’s 100 largest cities home to roughly 55 million people, or about 17 percent of the population, and serving as economic engines, cultural centers, and hubs of civic life. Yet many urban residents disengage because they believe the system is stacked against them. For those who do participate, engagement is often driven by frustration or obligation rather than confidence that institutions will listen or respond.
“many urban residents disengage because they believe the system is stacked against them.”
The deterioration of civic infrastructure, combined with the rapid expansion of digital technologies, has further widened the distance between people and institutions. As traditional points of connection have weakened, residents are increasingly left to navigate complex systems on their own. In that gap, bad actors have positioned themselves as sources of help, exploiting fragmented systems and unmet needs while undermining trust.
“residents are increasingly left to navigate complex systems on their own.”
Research consistently shows that people who trust local institutions and feel their voices matter are far more likely to vote and remain civically engaged. Too often, urban residents do not experience a clear connection between participation and impact. The result is uneven participation, lower turnout, and diminished democratic representation in the very places where effective engagement is most essential.
This city–state turnout gap is the result of three interconnected problems:
enduring turnout disparities that weaken urban influence on state & federal policy;¹
1.
uneven participation across election cycles;²
2.
and weak civic infrastructure, marked by low trust, limited institutional connection, and underused civic networks.³
3.
Raising turnout, therefore, is not simply a matter of additional registration drives or messaging campaigns. It requires rebuilding the underlying civic infrastructure that sustains participation over time.
Pew Research Center, Behind Trump’s 2024 Victory, a More Racially and Ethnically Diverse Voter Coalition, by Hannah Hartig, Scott Keeter, Andrew Daniller and Ted Van Green, June 26 2025, p. 8.
Daniel J. Hopkins, “Declining Turnout in Big-City Elections: A Growing Problem for Democratic Accountability,” Manhattan Institute, May 18, 2021, https://manhattan.institute/article/declining-turnout-in-big-city-elections-a-growing-problem-for-democratic-accountability
“NEW DATA: After Years of Election Denial, Decreased Voter Confidence in Elections Impacted 2024 Turnout Across Parties,” States United Democracy Center, July 14, 2025, https://statesunited.org/when-americans-trust-elections
The Goal: Equal Turnout Between Cities and States
Cities Forward exists to close the gap between city and statewide voter turnout by 2028.
Starting in 2022, through grantmaking and in-kind assistance to cities, as well as partnerships with nonprofits and experts in the elections field, Cities Forward supported nonpartisan strategies in Atlanta, Detroit, Milwaukee, Minneapolis and Philadelphia including door-to-door canvass programs, direct mail, voter engagement campaigns supported by paid and earned media efforts, and integration of voting reminders by city agencies.
But our goal is not simply higher participation at the ballot box, and our work in 2022 taught us that there is no one-size-fits all strategy for city engagement. We believe turnout is the outcome of a healthy civic ecosystem, one in which residents trust local government, feel connected to one another, and experience civic participation as a natural extension of belonging and shared purpose.
Imagine living in a city…
where the organizations and institutions shaping daily life are not operating in silos, but working toward shared goals. Where city agencies, libraries, service providers, and community-based organizations are aligned around improving residents’ quality of life, rather than competing for attention or resources. In this environment, residents are not asked to navigate disconnected systems on their own. Instead, they encounter a city that feels coordinated, responsive, and invested in their success.
It was with this vision that, in 2024, Cities Forward deepened our engagement in Detroit, Milwaukee and Philadelphia, working with these cities to begin implementing their own unique civic engagement plans. Rather than leading with voting, cities first connected residents to services, public events, and opportunities that were relevant to their everyday lives. With this approach, cities further cultivated real, rather than transactional, relationships with residents. Through this work, Cities Forward also began building nonpartisan coalitions of partners and saw the power of working closely with the community institutions residents already know and trust.
“cities first connected residents to services, public events, and opportunities that were relevant to their everyday lives.”
By bringing together the groups already working to serve residents and creating the conditions for sustained collaboration, Cities Forward strengthens the connective tissue of civic life. As coordination improves and trust is rebuilt, residents begin to see that people in government and community institutions care about them and are accountable to their needs. Over time, participation shifts from something residents do out of frustration or obligation to something they do because it feels worthwhile.
By strengthening civic health in this way, Cities Forward aims to rebuild the conditions that make democracy resilient. When cities are trusted, connected, and responsive, turnout rises, collaboration deepens, and public confidence grows.
