June 13, 2003

Young Portlanders Want Access, Outreach, and Recognition In Public Involvement

While Wednesday evening's public involvement constituency discussion for 13-34 year olds was not quite as focused as others have been, some clear trends emerged.

Some suggestions -- such as early noitfication, holding events and meetings at times that don't conflict with work or school hours, and working with groups already established in the community for purposes of information and outreach -- were similar to those offered at other public involvement discussions.

So, not all the discussion was limited to the specific issue of youth and young adult involvement. And although it was evident that real work needs to be done to engage this particular constituency, the group exhibited a definite desire -- and some specific opportunities -- to see that work done.

One participant recounted an instance of public notification for a capital project in which the City sent out advance notice of the project in the form of a map of the work to be done, accompanied by a project schedule, followed-up by an in-person visit to make sure residents were aware of the work to be done. This participant stressed the idea of providing information through graphic representations, which are more easily understandable by a wider range of communities.

"Debate in the City of Portland," said another participant, "seems to always be controlled by very vocal minorities. People with money, influence." There doesn't seem to be "a vehicle for the majorities to get involved," they observed.

One thing to "be very, very, careful about in addressing public involvement principles and value," offered another, "is to draw a line between having adequate time for public involvement and not making the assumption that if one's point of view is not ascribed to on a particular issue, it doesn't necessarily mean there was not adequate public involvement."

At least one participant wanted more information out of City Council itself, wanting there tobe a "requirement that Commissioners explain their point of view on why they voted a certain way."

Several expressed frustration over the sense that at some Council sessions, the "vast majority of those present go one way, but the Council goes the other way," giving them the feeling that City Council doesn't really listen to those who do show up to testify.

Having established that the youngest participants -- a small group of school-agers -- had no real sense how to go about having their voices heard, one participants suggested "making coalitions between schools and the City."

"To really educate people," they continued, "these citizens coming out of these schools." In essence, a real mandate to make sure students know how the local process works, how policies are made, and how to get in and have their voices heard.

Returning to thoughts which apply no matter what constituency is involved, another participant suggested (after asking to much laughter whether or not Portland engaged in strategic planning) that measures needed to be developed that "track communication, issues, and impact."

"How do different groups communicate with Commissioners?" they offered as one item to track. "Identify who the affected interests are [and] track communications against the strategic plan, [as an] ongoing process. Track the issues related to the strategic plan that are coming out of different groups." An ongoing process, in other words, to determine the impact of decisions, and to communicate that back to the affected parties.

Addressing the issue of actual public involvement standards, another term came into play which would probably make some of the participants in the earlier City staff constituency discussion nervous: Benchmarks.

Concerned about what to do in a situation wherein a Bureau says they have engaged in public involvement, but the public demands that they prove it, one participant asked, "Are we setting some kind of quantifiable standards or benchmarks that we want every City agency to meet in [public] involvement?"

At the same time, they admitted this could become an interesting political pitfall, as candidate for municipal office point to the potentially poor showing of their opponents in terms of the public involvement benchmarks at the bureaus for which they've been responsible.

In the end, each participant was asked to come up with one thing to change about public involvement.

"More events where businesses [and others can] come together," one suggested. "More casual, [with] different areas of the community, just talking." In other words, to bring in elements of the City staff and cultural communities constituency discussions, relationship building.

Doing a better job of outreach was suggested as well -- including distributing fliers on school grounds. Increased media coverage of important public involvement needs was also mentioned.

Again reflecting ideas not limited only to this single constituency, one participant made a rather bold proposition: "Take City Hall out of downtown." My impression of this was not that they meant removing City Hall from downtown altogether, but instead turning the City Council into something of a travelling roadshow. Explaining that the burden should nto always be placed upon citizens to get involved -- which often means coming all the way downtown as part of an already-busy life -- we could hold "Council meetings at schools or [elsewhere] in the neighborhoods."

(I'm very fond of this idea, and readers should expect me to come back to it again at a later date.)

"Engage students," one participant prompted, "[and] the youth will inspire parents."

Another participant cautioned against merely having some sort of "targetted day" for engaging youth in the process. Instead, for example, there should be some sort of mentoring program, connecting Portland youth with City staff.

Not long before the discussion concluded, one participant put something of a motto around it all: "Taking youth seriously." But at the very end, someone brought that idea around to the much larger point: "Taking everyone into serious account."

Posted at 10:04 PM | PermalinkComments (1) | TrackBacks (0)
More In Design & Development, Livability, Metro-Area Politics

« Previous Next »