HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-12-03 - AGENDA REPORTS - COLLABORATIVE GOVERNANCE (2)CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
I Qu VMWIjW60101 DIUII]3T.WUNIi1T1
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of The, City Council
FROM: George Caravalho, City Manager
DATE: December 3, 1996
SUBJECT: COLLABORATIVE GOVERNANCE - ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES
BACKGROUND
Presented for your review is material on the concept of collaborative governance. This
concept involve the ideal that local governments can no longer merely serve as problem
solvers. Rather they must become an active partner with the community and work as a
facilitator and convener in addressing society's most pressing issues. Collaboration
therefore requires a significant shift in the way local governments order work and approach
the task at hand. It calls on all to reexamine traditional ways on implementing programs,
convening people and performing problem solving. Collaboration forces people out into the
community to facilitate a creative environment where there is a bias for inclusion and all
take responsibility for the resolution of issues.
The attached material discusses many of the concepts inherent to collaboration and
suggests a model to enhance collaborative efforts in our community while simultaneously
enhancing citizen involvement. This is shown in the Neighborhood 2000 model.
In addition, with the goal of utilizing effective collaborative strategies in mind, the issue of
committee formation and enhancement is presented for your review. Specifically two
existing committees, CTAC and the Solid Waste Advisory Committee as well as the
potential formation of a water issues committee is presented.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council review report and provide direction to staff on Neighborhood 2000
block party concept as well as committee formation and enhancement.
TMM/colabgov.tmm
Agenda item: I
Collaborative Governance
Today, our society is becoming increasingly diverse and the societal issues we must
address more complex. Given the complexity of the emerging and current issues, it is
unrealistic to assume that any.one person or agency will have the appropriate tools at their
disposal to successfully devise and implement solutions. We in local government must
be honest with ourselves. Many of the assumptions under which we have operated are
no longer functional and will soon become passe.
How then do we begin to work to determine new and effective mechanisms to address
some of the most pressing issues of our time, while meeting the needs and expectations of
our citizens, an ever changing and demanding clientele?
Many say that the public has become apathetic and that there is substantial mistrust of
institutions, including local government. A recent study by the Kettering Foundation
shows that rather than being apathetic or unconcerned, citizens want to be a part of civic
life. Unfortunately, they are frustrated by politics as usual. Many feel that government is
out of reach of ordinary people and does not respond to the concerns and the needs of the
individuals, neighborhoods and communities. A survey, recently conducted by the
National Civic League, corroborates this line of. thinking. The National League Survey
shows that local government ranks seventh in confidence behind friends, religious
institutions, non profits, schools, local media, and local business leadership. These
results are indicative of the idea that local government cannot solve problems by itself.
Rather it needs to stand side by side with other community stakeholders in a effort to
conduct joint problem solving efforts. When partnerships occur, collaboration or .
"collaborative governance" is achieved. Soon the ideal that local government is an
interested partner committed to facilitating the resolution of community issues will spread
from person to person, neighborhood to neighborhood. Local governments must
therefore move from doing for people to doing with people.
What impact does this revelation have on the way we as local government officials
operate? What will it take for the citizens to give local government another opportunity
to effectively work within communities and become an active partner with the citizenry in
achieving results and healing our social ills?
Collaboration will require a significant shift in the way we, as local government
professionals, order our work and approach our profession. It will call for us to
reexamine our traditional way of implementing programs and performing problem
solving in the context of our organizations, and force us out into the community to
facilitate a creative process in an environment where there is a bias for inclusion.
In a recent article by Robert Putnam of Harvard University, he indicated that researchers
have found that the more a community is civically engaged (that is, the more a person
belongs to a social, civic or church group), the more likely it is that its effort at problem
solving will be successful. Civic engagement is measured by membership and
participation which fosters the building of networks, norms and social trust that facilitates
coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit. The phenomena, as a whole, is known a
"social capital."
The significance in dealing with a collaborative effort is that many issues cross
boundaries. That is, they are not in the purview of any one agency or institution. In order
to address these issues, people must come from all segments of a community or society at
large to effectively address the problem at hand.
If we accept that collaboration is a key to solving our most pressing social issues, what is
the role of the local government professionals?
Many contend that there must be an active an immediate change in City Halls across the
nation. It can no longer be what some term a "hall of good intentions," which presumes
to know what the problems of the community are and how to solve them, to that of the
"Grand facilitator" convener, consensus builder and joint problem -solver. Succinctly
stated, local government professionals must now act in a guiding role, dispense with their
traditional concepts of leadership and find ways to energize groups and stakeholders to a
find a comprehensive and effective resolution to issues.
Many cities throughout California and the nation have recently taken on new or expanded
community outreach programs to initiate collaborative processes._ However, as many
have found there is a great deal of apprehension on the part of citizens to become
involved in a positive way. Therefore, local government must focus on developing new
strategies and new tools to get people, agencies and institutions to agree on a plan and
then work together to achieve it. This forms the essential bonds it takes to make a
community strong. If we do not feel connected to one anotheranddo not find effective
means to restore our social capital, we will soon reach a level where our problems will be
all-encompassing. Citizens must view themselves as responsible for acting in the public
good and having a vested stake in the outcome of their civic actions.
Rebuilding the bonds of a community to the extent that all are involved is a difficult
process. Many cities throughout the State of California have taken active steps to devise
effective outreach programs so that a grassroots efforts will begin. The following model
is an example of an effective community involvement and participation process that is
currently working in several cities throughout California, Florida, Oregon and
Washington.
Santa Clarita's Neighborhood
Improvement Process
This process model readily recognizes the fact that local government does not have a lock
on innovative ideas. Rather, it looks to key stakeholders in the community to step
forward and take an active role in finding solutions that may lead to a change.
As represented in the model there is an initial community outreach program to the
citizenry, as a whole, to provide them with a formal invitation and encouragement to be
part of their community. Cities need to successfully re-engage or reconnect people to the
work of local government by stimulating their interest in community issues and joint
problem solving. This, however, is not as easy as it appears. It often involves hitting the
streets and going door to door to connect with people on their turf. A visit to a local
soccer or little league field by a council member or department head might be the catalyst
a citizen needs to become part of the solution and providing the type of commitment
needed to be a stakeholder in the process. These individuals will then catalyze other
impacted members of their neighborhoods or associations to come together as a group to
further scope out issues and devise solutions. These issues and solutions then become
part of an action plan to be implemented by all of those involved potentially in
partnership with the City or other organizations. The key is it is the team or other
individuals rather than the City may implement the action plan while the local
government provides the necessary guidance and facilitation. Action plans or the
resolution of issues, if initiated by neighborhoods or associations, can then be taken to a
City Council for consideration if funding, other resources or legislative action is required.
It should be understood that there is no single right or wrong way to building effective
collaboration with neighborhoods or the community as a whole. However, as is proven
so often in the private sector, you must know your customer and their needs. You must
investigate what their needs are and determine key areas of mutual benefit or interest and
motivations before launching into extensive and expensive efforts.
Here in Santa Clarita
The City of Santa Clarita has discovered just how diverse the needs and expectation of
its citizenry are. Its initial efforts at broad community outreach and participation began
in 1991 with the successful development and subsequent implementation of the City's
first community wide strategic plan. This was followed by the second strategic plan
initiated in 1994 and scheduled for complete implementation by October of 1997. Both
strategic planning processes included broad base involvement from a diverse base of
citizens providing public input on the priority items to be addressed to enhance the
quality of life within Santa Clarita. In the 1991 plan, the City had a remarkable 98%
completion rate of plan items. However, during the implementation of the 1994 plan, it
was evident that a greater challenge would be faced. The issues were more complex:
building a major roadway; establishing a hotel conference center; defeating the siting of a
proposed landfill; and addressing the growing incidents of youth crime and the needs of
our younger adult citizens today. It was evident, based on several setbacks that staff had
to do more than provide technical expertise and rely on standard procedures and
committees to move items to completion. A new form of public involvement was
essential. Collaborative governance needed to become the norm. Staff needed to amplify
resources in the community and enable others to become part of the problem solving
effort.
What is it that makes a successful collaboration on a community project or complex
societal issue?
Based on a review of many successful collaborative processes in Santa Clarita, several
components come to the forefront.
=> Good timing /favorable environment.
=> Members share a stake in the process and outcome.
=> Shared vision of a future outcome
=> Attainable goals with purpose.
=> Mutual trust and respect among the participants.
=> Broad cross section of members with a stake in the outcome.
Members see collaboration as in their self interest.
Open and frequent communication among all players.
=> Celebrating short and long term successes.
The model referenced below represents a step by step process to follow in effectively
establishing and sustaining a collaborative problem solving efforts. Each of the proven
steps have been captured in this model so all participants have a vested interest in the
outcome of the collaboration. This can and should be used in conjunction with the
neighborhood improvement model previously shown.
1 1'
Collaboration
1.
Identify the Problem
5.
Promote Support From Community
Leaders
What kind of problem is it?
Why is it that traditional styles of
Recruit credible people.
leadership
Find a catalyst and convener who can
and past practices not work with this
take hold and drive and issue.
issue?
Provide excitement for the process.
2.
Identify Stakeholders
6.
Build Trust
Who are impacted?
Gain agreement on the process and rules
Who benefits?
of conduct.
Who is able to reach agreement
Learn from each other.
and generate change?
Take risks once trust is established.
Who could be persuaded on this issue?
7.
Share Ownership
3.
Create a System for Broad Based
Involvement
Build and recruit others in the process.
Cultivate new leaders.
Is this a community or societal issue?
Create ownership in the process and the
Have a bias for inclusion.
outcome.
Seek to understand and trust others.
8.
Celebrate Success
4.
Create an Open Process
Create milestones.
Celebrate small successes to sustain
Clarify the objective.
involvement.
State any agenda or biases.
Publicize results.
Promote the integrity of the process.
9.
Measure Success, Learn From Your
Mistakes and Move Forward.
The graphic below depicts resources (community assets) available in virtually all
communities. In light of the limited resources of all agencies, individuals and
institutions, many feel coming together in collaboration to address problems is the only
real chance of success. Furthermore, this model forces all to look at the positive
capacities of a community and what is available in the form of pooled resources to solve
problems. This is a different approach to most problem solving efforts which focus on
how bad things are today and accumulating a massive list of community deficits.. Here
again, this process of a community assets map can be very helpful in having a broad base
analysis of all the community assets and community issues.
Community Assets Map
Putting the Concepts in Action
The City of Santa Clarita is consistently looking to new and innovative ways to improve
programs and process. Now based on the emerging needs of the community and our
desire to forge new relationships with our citizens, we are looking to provide open
avenues to local governments so that all can play a greater role in addressing public
concerns. One of the most promising tools devised to re -connect to our citizens is the
Neighborhood 2000 "Block Party Concept." This concept readily recognizes the fact that
those within our valley are very busy and, primarily, commuters. Citizens within the
Santa Clarita Valley are typically commuting parents that spend an extended portion of
Business
schools
/
/
\
Churches
HOA's
Parks
Libraries
Income/
\Artists
/ Youth
Seniors \
\
— —
/ Cultural Groups
Hospital
Community College
Putting the Concepts in Action
The City of Santa Clarita is consistently looking to new and innovative ways to improve
programs and process. Now based on the emerging needs of the community and our
desire to forge new relationships with our citizens, we are looking to provide open
avenues to local governments so that all can play a greater role in addressing public
concerns. One of the most promising tools devised to re -connect to our citizens is the
Neighborhood 2000 "Block Party Concept." This concept readily recognizes the fact that
those within our valley are very busy and, primarily, commuters. Citizens within the
Santa Clarita Valley are typically commuting parents that spend an extended portion of
the workweek outside of the valley and have little opportunity to devote time to their.
community or neighborhood. In addition, weekend time is typically devoted to the day to
day items that must be addressed as well as creating sound quality time with family and
friends. When then is there time to build the bonds that are so crucial to mend our
society?
It has been staff's experience people will attend public meetings if they are directly -
impacted. In a recent survey of residents, taken at the Santa Clarita Valley Business
Expo, the majority of those surveyed indicated that they would like to take time to
address issues if it was made more convenient for them to do so. This is consistent with
the "Donaldson's Zoo Concept." In this example, Donaldson was very interested in
increasing attendance at his zoo. He questioned his clientele to determine what they
needed. Many of them responded that they would.enjoy visiting the zoo if they only had
more quality time to do so. Donaldson then gave his clients what they wanted. He
provided day care at the zoos as well as facilities that allowed docents to guide the
children through the zoo while parents took care of other necessary duties. He fulfilled a
variety of needs for his clients by providing enjoyment to the children as well as the
quality time for parents. Needless to say zoo attendance increased.
This concept is the genesis for the Neighborhood 2000 block party concept. Capitalizing
on the success of the flap jack forums and the idea of convenience, the City would
sponsor a program whereby local residents would be encouraged to host a block party and
provide an entree of local government to various areas. The goals of the party would be:
=> Get neighbors to know each other.
Begin to determine mutual neighborhood goals so that all work together for shared
benefit.
Inform the residents of the neighborhood by having a city official or staff member on
hand to answer questions and provide information.
=> Forge new relationships with those in the community who are now the "silent
majority."
Build a sense of stewardship within the neighborhoods.
=* Help neighborhoods help themselves.
Provide new contact for staff to access when assistance or liaisons are needed on an
issue.
=> Facilitate the building of neighborhood identity and pride.
Provide a forum for community meetings at a time and place most convenient to our
residents... their own neighborhoods.
=> Have fun!
How Will It All Work?
1. The block parry concept will be advertised for all to take part in, and the City will
then provide the neighborhood contact (liaison) with invitations for distribution.
2. The City will provide support for the basic necessities of each block party (i.e.
Parkmobile, games, tables, tents, drinks).
3. Member of the Management Team or the Staff Leadership Forum will rotate attending
the various meetings.
It is anticipated that initially the over 300 Neighborhood Watch captains within the
neighborhood will be the first line of outreach. Due to their current interest in their
community, they are perhaps most likely to want to take the concept a step further and
initiate the block party within their own area. The Neighborhood Watch captains and the
new network of outreach formed through the block parties will form the foundation for
any future formalized outreach. The Neighborhood Watch captain linkage was the
starting point for successful collaborative governance and participation underway within
the City of Anaheim, Simi Valley and San Clemente. Furthermore, it is anticipated that
this approach will eventually catalyze others to reach out beyond their own neighborhood
interests and overcome what Chris Gates of the National Civic League has termed "civic
cocooning." This approach, however, does require significant outreach and building of
rapport with individuals, families, groups and, of course, the interested neighborhoods.
However, along the way, local government can also identify those with special abilities,
talents and other assets that can contribute to the overall goal or vision of the community.
While the neighborhoods form the foundation for any community, historically local
governments have turned to boards commissions and committees as vehicles to assess
and solve various needs. Unfortunately, these groups often then become part of the
system and seen as another arm of a local government. This concept must then also be
retooled.
The Committee Process
As noted, bringing together diverse stakeholders, melding their resources and challenging
their capabilities to tackle difficult community issues is essential to solving our most
pressing concerns. The concept of collaboration provides an opportunity and a challenge
to bring people together in ways that are more than the sum of the individuals to have a
real and lasting impact on organizations and communities.
Collaboration is a process that gets people to work together in new ways. Ideally, when
utilized effectively collaboration can have a wide range of results that empower people
and make process and systems change for the better.
Currently, within the City of Santa Clarita, we rely a great deal upon associations,
boards, committees and commissions for input from the "community" on various issues.
Their input is often critical to decision making at both the staff administrative level and
the City Council policy level. However, are these various committees organized in the
most advantageous way possible to realize the maximum benefit for the community?
Are collaborative processes at work in both forming these committees as well as
sustaining their interaction?
Several mechanisms for gaining public input and facilitating interaction utilized by the
City include:
Advisory Committees - Provide suggestions and assistance on a given topic at the
request of the City or other community organization. (Citizen Transportation
Advisory Committee, Redevelopment Committee, Solid Waste Advisory Committee,
Public Information Resource Group, Transportation Joint Chamber, Chamber
Environmental Committee)
• Commission - An appointed body authorized to perform certain duties and may
have vested powers. (Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission)
• Joint Powers -A legally formed or constituted group or organizations with particular
powers formed for a mutually defined purpose. Typically a joint powers agreement
spells out the terms and goals of the relationship. (The City and School Districts)
• Partnerships - An association of two or more individuals or organizations who .
contribute to meet a common goal. (Santa Monica Mountain Conservancy, School
Districts, Business Community, Chamber of Commerce)
• Task Force - A self contained unit formed for a specific (not ongoing) purpose often
at the request of the City Council. (Newhall Task Force)
If, however collaboration is the future for local government and the success of our
communities as a whole, it must be asked if these traditional avenues for gathering the
public and gaining public input listed above are still viable or if their needs to be a
fundamental change in the way in which we form, organize and structure such
committees.
There are three committees that currently warrant some review of their purpose, need,
composition and success to date. These include the Citizen Transportation Advisory
Committee (CTAC), The Solid Waste Advisory Committee and the potential Water
Agency Group or Committee.
Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee
CTAC, as it is now known, was formed in 1992. This committee now composed of a
maximum of seven members was established by the City Manager to review traffic and
transportation issues in order to:
=* Advise the City Manager on policy recommendations to the City Council.
=> Provided a public forum for the exchange of information between the City staff and
residents.
Develop and recommend prioritization of major improvement projects.
Establish a new vehicle for community participation in policy decisions.
=> Formalize an organizational structure to focus and strengthen citizen input.
The City Manager, as stated in the operating procedure for the committee, considers
recommendations for the committee for staff reports to the City Council and/or Planning
Commission.
In forming CTAC, the City staff attempted to balance the membership for each
geographical area of the community so that a broader based approach to decision making
would be achieved. In addition, a maximum of two members could be non residents.
The current composition of members is as follows:
The first issue addressed by the committee was the circulation element, specifically the
removal and subsequent impact of the State Route 126, in which various
recommendations were made to the City Manager. Following this issue membership
began to wane. Several meeting including one in which crucial decisions were made
regarding CTAC's recommendation for selection of a road were attend by only half of the
members. Other issues such as bikeway planning issues were scheduled yet meetings
10
were canceled due to lack of attendance. Several other meetings have also been
canceled due to lack of quorum. Questions that must be addressed are:
1. Are there substantial issues that this group must now address?
2. Is their value in continuing this group?
3. Is there a new or existing mechanism to address the transportation issues facing the
community in a comprehensive and collaborative manner?
4. Have we determined what assets our community has in this area to address needs and
successfully convened. the correct group to address the issues?
Water Group or Committee
The City Council has expressed an interest in the development of an informal water group
or committee to provide and ongoing forum for public input concerning Santa Clarita's
water issues. The purpose of the committee would be to provide credible, factual,
objective information from a neutral source on water issues. Specific issues in question
are water and availability, impact of future development on existing resources, wellhead
protection of groundwater and use of reclaimed water. Currently in order to keep abreast
of these issues that City takes the following actions:
=> 'Attends and monitors Castaic Lake Water Agency Board meetings monthly.
=* Monitors and reported on Sanitation Districts #26 and #32 activities.
=> Liaisons with Newhall County Water District in development of wellhead protection
plan.
Provides NPDES oversight which included monitoring and review of watershed
areas.
There has been support for the development of a committee from the general community
and the Newhall County Water District. In addition CLWA has proposed an Integrated
Water Resources Plan (IWRP) to their board for the entire valley including watersheds.
The goal of phase I of this plan is to assess water supply and demand with all entities and
reach consensus with stakeholders in the valley. No form of public participation has been
indicated yet.
In addition, several community members gave expressed an interest in having a
committee organized. General managers for the local water retailer all express support
for a committee or water group and have indicated that they would participate. They have
however expressed reservations about participation if the group was formed by an entity
other than the City. Members of CLWA have also expressed some reservation about the
usefulness of such a committee as they feel that the IWRP will be the guiding document
for water issues and questions.
11
In term of the water issue the City does have a planning role to ensure orderly growth and
availability of water, as well as other essential services during the development review
process. This role was strengthened by the passage of SB 901 which that requires that of
January 1996 coordination and consultation between water suppliers and municipal
planning agencies occur for general plan amendments and development projects expected
to substantially increase the demand on local water supply.
The City does not, however, have any direct responsibility for the supply or distribution
of water in the valley, in fact no City managed utility or water company exits.
Based on the information, should a water information group be formed, possible objective
may be:
• Providing a clearing house for information in the SCV.
• The City serving as the facilitator or convener for a forum for information and
education on water issues.
Enhance the coordination, cooperation and collaboration among water interests in the
valley.
Key questions facing the potential formation of a group of this nature include:
1. What if any is the role of the City?
2. Are their currently process now in place that if re -tooled can address the issue?
Is their sufficient interest on the part of the community and the City Council to take
on such an issue?
4. Is the City the appropriate agency to initiate such a processor convene such a group?
5. What is the vision and or goal of this collaboration?
6. How will we know if the effort is successful?
Solid Waste Advisory Committee
The Solid Waste Advisory Committee is an ad hoc committee established in 1992 to
provide recommendations to the City on coordinating and implementing the City's
Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) and to assist the Public Works
department in their review of the County Siting Element and the County Integrated Waste
Management Plan (CIWMP). Essentially these tasks have been achieved, however the
12
committee has been called upon in a few instances for recommendations on projects such
as the "Forever Green" yard trimmings program and the commercial franchise agreement.
The last regular meeting of the committee was in February of 1993. In contacting the
members, six of the ten original ad hoe committees members have an interest in
continuing to assist the City.
According to the work plan of the Public Works Department, there appears to be work
products that would benefit from additional public input. These include:
Implementation of citywide yard trimmings program
Development of residential unit pricing
=> Development of roll off bin refuse franchise
=> Public education and acceptance of new programs and program refinement `
There appear to be several public participation options available to address these needs.
They include:
Waste Management Ad Hoc Committee - This option would revive the ad hoc concept.
The committee formed could report to the City Manger or his designee and assist the
Waste Management Division in implementing the work program discussed.
Waste Management Hearings=This concept involves working without a formal
committee, yet initiating the process of citywide hearings to gather information prior to
presenting recommendations to the City Council on the items contained within the work
program.
Waste Management Public Forum - This option utilizes a model of collaboration in
which interested stakeholders in the community are identifies and invited to participate in
the effort. Jointly, with the city facilitating, not leading the outreach, hold public forums
on topics citywide. Here others would take hold of the waste management issue from a
community perspective. Their recommendations would then be presented to the City
Council for consideration.
Key questions regarding the Solid Waste Advisory Committee include:
1. Is it appropriate for the City to take the lead on this issue, or should it serve as a
facilitator and convener in the process?
2. Does the current scope of programs warrant the establishment of a committee?
13
Effective Collaborations and Group Development
In initiating any type of collaboration including the creation of associations, boards,
commissions and committees, it is essential to first bring the right people together. This
is by no means an easy task. Typically organizations tend to choose people that are
"known" or know about or have access to resources. Successful collaborations need to
involve minority, grassroots, stakeholders and other end user groups. This can be
difficult when those who are initiating the collaboration are from the main stream. When
attempting to initiate a collaborative effort to form a committee designed to collaborate,
there a several key topics to address:
ENVIRONMENT
• History of collaboration in community.
MEMBERSHIP CHARACTERISTICS
• Mutual respect understanding and trust.
• Participants seen as leaders in their
• Appropriate cross section of
area.
community/variety/stakeholders/end
• Favorable social or political climate.
users.
RESOURCES
PURPOSE
• Skilled convener and facilitator.
• Concrete attainable goals and
• Time commitment.
objectives.
• Dedication to the shared/community
• Shared vision.
benefit of the outcome.
• Unique purpose.
COMMUNICATION
PROCESS/STRUCTURE
• Open & frequent communication.
• Members have a stake in the process &
• Establish formal and informal
outcome.
communication links.
• Multiple layers of decision making
understood.
• Flexibility.
• Development of clear roles and policy
guidelines.
• Adaptability of membership to changes.
Effective Strategies
All within the community must form new relationships if we are to tackle real concerns
and if more citizens wish to become part of the solution. Leaders through collaborative
14
processes must engage people who want to be something larger than themselves and who
can play a significant role in addressing public concerns. Local government must
however find ways to open the doors to these new individuals an give them a vital role to
play rather than relying on those who traditionally volunteered to play a part. In forming
various committees and preparing public participation plans we must ensure that citizens
know they have a responsibility for their community and determine new and innovative
ways to gain their involvement. A community cannot however sit by idly and wait for
new leaders to slowly emerge. Current leaders need to find innovative means to tap into
the community asset base, build a foundation of trust and ensure that others take a role in
responding to community needs. They must provide others with the necessary tools to
become effective problems solvers and facilitators. In other words local government
must learn to do with rather than to only do for the community and actively engage
citizens in problems solving efforts. Often it will take waiting and letting issues fully
emerge and have the community rather than the city as an organization take hold of an
issue and solve it.
Some effective means to engage citizens as defined by the Washington D.C. based
Project Democracy include:'
=� Working toward new goals.
=> Defining key priorities with the community and getting to what matters.
Nurturing a culture of civic engagement where participation is encouraged.
Bring people into the process early enough to understand their concerns and the kinds
of trade offs they are willing to accept.
Treat people as stakeholders in the City as a corporation, not as consumers of
services.
=> Focus the needs of the whole rather than select individuals with agendas.
Don't treat people as passive spectators and interact with them only after decisions
have been made in a "tell and sell" mode.
Still, it is very difficult to bring the right people together to form a successful
collaboration. A key is to have the broadest possible base to work from. Once this base is
formed through a variety of viable means including seeking out of future leaders and
participants from the existing and future untapped community asset base there will be a
greater potential for involvement. When seeking out individuals to collaboratively
address a given issue the following should be considered:
Capacity - How many individuals are required?
Difficulty - Are those that oppose those initiating the process not included because they
make the initiators uncomfortable?
Dynamics - Are there special relationships of the individuals outside of the collaboration
that will compromise the effort?
15
Familiarity - Similarities in purpose and expertise can often make a collaboration
flourish. However, familiarity should not be exclusionary of other stakeholders.
Power - Members are chosen because that have the power to achieve results. It is often
necessary to look a connection, expertise, resources, position, charisma and integrity of
individuals.
Stimulus - Ensure there are those in the group that can serve as a stimulus and catalyze
others over the long haul.
Territory - People tend to invite those of similar disciplines and backgrounds as not to be
uncomfortable. Many people from different sectors should be included.
Variety- Look at a variety skills and abilities so that all benefit from each others' talents.
Ensuring that these items, at a minimum, are present will ensure that all other facets
essential to an affective collaboration or group process are met and increase the chances
of buy in of any future resolution from a broader base of individuals.
Summary
No longer can local government afford to rely on its past success or traditional process or
let the idea that the community is not supporting ideas become a stumbling block to
problem solving. We can no longer afford to think that -because what we have to offer is
badly needed, others should simply support the effort. Rather, we must know who
supports us, who the stake holders -are, and actively create processes to reach shared
solutions. The resources are there. They are just not where they used to be and are not
accessible in the ways they.once were. They can be found in every neighborhood, school,
church, business and Saturday afternoon soccer game. The question is "How to access,
amplify and share them?" This is the power of collaboration!
We Need to Consider:
Creating a Community Assets Map with the NCL, prior to initiating our Community
Strategic Plan, Share the Vision III, scheduled for fall, 1997.
=> Be part of the solution to community problem.
=> Createnewrelationships with neighborhoods, other agencies and businesses to work
together.
16
=> Go to the people and not expect them to come to us (i.e. block party concept).
=> Base our work program and solutions to obstacles on our "Stakeholders" ideas and
commitment to participate.
=> Discuss revamping our City committees.
TMM/hrtcty—l.tmm
17