Slides for a presentation to New York City civic leaders on ways of strengthening local democracy at the neighborhood and city level.

1. New York City
Civic Engagement
Thought Leaders Forum
New York City Fund for Public Advocacy
New York, NY
November 27, 2012

2. Which engagement strategies have you
personally experienced in New York City?
a. Large town hall meetings with community
residents
b. Smaller meetings with government and
community leaders
c. Issue-based task forces with government,
community leaders and residents
d. Online/social media community-based
interactions

3. Describe your personal experiences with
civic engagement in New York City
a. Frustrating
b. Uplifting
c. Productive
d. All of the above

4. How strongly do you believe that civic
engagement strategies can positively impact
economic and social issues in New York City?
a. Low
b. Medium
c. High

5. The Deliberative Democracy Consortium

6. Slides available at:
www.slideshare.net/mattleighninger
Guides:
http://bit.ly/M1pvMp
http://bit.ly/iwjgqn

7. The context:
How have citizens* changed?
 More educated
 More skeptical – different
attitudes toward authority
 Have less time to spare
 Better able to find
resources, allies, informatio
n
* “citizens” =
residents, people

8. The context:
Families with young children
 Have the most at stake in community success
 More motivation to engage, but even less time
 Want to engage in community, not just politics

9. The context: Increased use of the Internet

10. Three minutes at the microphone
Retrieved from Cincinnati.com, July 27, 2012

11. “What drove me to try planned,
structured public engagement
was my awful experience with
unplanned, unstructured public
engagement.”
─ John Nalbandian,
former mayor,
Lawrence, KS

12. Successful tactic: Proactive recruitment
 Map community networks;
 Involve leaders of those networks;
 „Who is least
likely to
participate?‟
 Use online as
well as f2f
connections;
 Follow up!

13. Successful tactic: Small-group processes
 No more than 12 people per group;
 Facilitator who is impartial (doesn‟t give
opinions);
 Start with people
describing their
experiences;
 Lay out options;
 Help people plan
for action.

14. Successful tactic: Framing an issue
 Give people the information they need, in ways
they can use it
 Lays out several options or views (including
ones you don‟t agree with)
 Trust them
to make good
decisions

15. Successful tactic: Many levels of action

18. Successful tactic: Online tools
Particularly good for:
 Providing background information
 Data gathering by citizens
 Generating and
ranking ideas
 Helping people
visualize options
 Maintaining
connections
over time

19. Questions or comments?

20. In other (fewer) words, the key
success factors are:
 Diverse critical mass
 Structured
 Deliberative
 Action-oriented
 Online and f2f

21. Strengths of quality public engagement
Good for: Making policy decisions, plans
Catalyzing citizen action
Building trust
Fostering new leadership

22. Limitations of quality public engagement
(as we practice it today)
 Lots of work for temporary gain
 Inefficient – every organization on its own
 Community moves back to „politics as usual‟
 „Engagers‟ set the agenda, not the „engaged‟
 Limited impact on equity
 Trust, relationships fade
 Laws on participation out
of step with practices

23. What is civic infrastructure?
The regular
opportunities, activities, and arenas
that allow people to connect with
each other, solve problems, make
decisions, and be part of a
community.

25. What is your vision for civic infrastructure?

26. New model ordinance on public
participation
Available at www.deliberative-democracy.net
Developed as a collaboration of:

27. Building blocks for civic infrastructure:

28. Building block:
Helping
neighborhood and
school groups
become more
- effective
- inclusive
- participatory

29. Building block: Hyperlocal online forums
 More sustained
 Larger, more diverse numbers of
people
 Easier for „engagers‟ – recruitment
doesn‟t have to start from scratch
 More open to ideas from the
„engaged‟

30. Digital divides (plural)
 Overall, Internet access growing
 “Access” – to Internet, to government –
has never been enough
 Different people use different hardware
 Different people go to different places on
the Internet
 Communities just as complex online as off
– recruitment must be proactive

31. Building block: Youth leadership

32. Don’t forget: Fun
“Sometimes you need a
meeting that is also a party.
Sometimes you need a party
that is also a meeting.”
─ Gloria Rubio-Cortès,
National Civic League

33. Questions or comments?

35. “Portsmouth Listens”
Portsmouth, NH
 Ongoing process since 2000
 Several hundred participants each time
 Addressed a number of major policy
decisions: bullying in schools, school
redistricting, city‟s master plan,
balancing city budget, whether to build
new middle school

36. Jane Addams School for Democracy
West Side of St. Paul, MN
 50-200 people in “neighborhood learning circles” every
month since 1998
 Involves recent Hmong, Latino, Somali immigrants
 Young people involved in circles and other activities
 Cultural exchanges - food, crafts, storytelling
 Has resulted in new
projects, initiatives,
festivals, and a change
in INS policy

37. Participatory Budgeting in Brazilian cities
 Commitment from gov‟t to adopt budget;
 Wide range of ways to be involved;
 A carnival
atmosphere;
 Started small,
now huge –
60,000+ people

38. “Kuna Alliance for a Cohesive
Community Team” Kuna, ID
 Recurring input-gathering process, used on
all major decisions
 Organized by Kuna Alliance for a Cohesive
Team (Kuna ACT), in collaboration with local
government
 Issues include: school funding, downtown
development, planning and growth
 500 participants annually (city of 6,000)

39. “Kuna Alliance for a Cohesive
Community Team” Kuna, ID
Outcomes:
 New comprehensive plan
 Passage of school bond issue
 Improvements
made to
downtown
 New strategy to
market community
as hub for “Birds
of Prey” area

40. Building civic infrastructure:
 Is relatively inexpensive (mainly political, not
financial capital)
 Is a cross-sector job
(not just
government)
 Has other
economic benefits

42. Resources
• www.participedia.net
• www.deliberative-democracy.net
• www.soulofthecommunity.org
• www.everydaydemocracy.org
• www.publicagenda.org
• www.kettering.org
• On Facebook: “Deliberative
Democracy Consortium” group page
• The Next Form of Democracy

43. Slides available at:
www.slideshare.net/mattleighninger
Guides:
http://bit.ly/M1pvMp
http://bit.ly/iwjgqn

44. Why build stronger civic
infrastructure?
1. Make engagement easier, more efficient
2. Build trust
3. Give residents more control of the agenda
4. Better address inequities
5. Increase community attachment and
economic growth
6. Increase residents‟ sense of legitimacy and
“public happiness”