July 23, 2003
Leonard Gives ONI New Responsibilities (And Possible Name Change) As 'Two-Track' Bureau
I've been putting this item on changes to the Office of Neighborhood Involvement together for days now, ever since last week's official announcement out of Commissioner Leonard's office.
Alas, I've been awaiting a response to this development from someone at Southeast Uplift, which as of this writing I've yet to receive. In the meantime, The Oregonian yesterday got their story out, complete with a response from someone at Southeast Uplift (although, admittedly, a different someone; guess I simply chose the wrong person).
These changes have been brewing for awhile now, and to those following ONI-related matters it's not a surprise. To others, these changes open the door to new tensions between the City and some neighborhood activists.
Note: For fuller context, I will be including the full-text of the announcement from Leonard's office, as well as some other material.
First of all, what follows here is the complete -- read: quite long -- July 17 announcement from Commissioner Leonard's office:
Leonard Announces Increased Services in Neighborhood Bureau --Name change for Bureau also proposed
PORTLAND-To provide better services at the neighborhood level, the City has moved the noise control office and the neighborhood inspection staff into the Office of Neighborhood Involvement (ONI) at City Hall beginning July 1, 2003.
This consolidation of neighborhood involvement services, neighborhood inspections, and noise control into one bureau is part of Leonard's vision to provide better services to neighborhoods. "The move brings many of the direct services of interest to neighbors together under one bureau," says Commissioner Randy Leonard who spearheaded the proposal. "It will make it easier for neighbors to work together at the local level with their neighborhood associations, neighborhood offices, and city staff to get enforcement action on noise, substandard housing, and other eyesores in their neighborhoods."
Leonard is also proposing to change the name of the bureau to "Neighborhood Services Bureau" to better reflect the importance of providing direct neighborhood services. "I want our citizens to know exactly where to call when they are looking for services and support for their neighborhood issues," comments Leonard.
Neighborhood Inspections and Noise Control had been part of the city's Bureau of Development Services (BDS) at the 1900 Building at 1900 SW 4th Avenue until Leonard suggested the move last Spring.
"This change brings many positive things to ONI," said ONI Director Dr. David Lane. "I am excited about the range of tools that we'll be able to provide to our neighbors. We'll be working to implement Commissioner Leonard's vision of out-placing services and staff, wherever possible, into the neighborhoods to increase our capacity to solve problems that most affect our neighborhoods."
It's the biggest change in ONI since its inception as a bureau in 1974, said Lane as he welcomed 22 staffers into ONI, some of whom will be moving to City Hall. No new funds were allocated for the transition and no new administrative costs are planned. "I have been extremely impressed with the neighborhood inspectors and noise control staff's dedication to neighborhoods and their enthusiasm for providing fair and competent services," said Lane.
More than just a physical move of staff, the new setup will streamline services under one administrative umbrella. ONI already provides an array of services to neighborhood such as supporting the internationally recognized neighborhood system, crime prevention, graffiti abatement, and information and referral.
The Neighborhood Inspection Center administers Title 29 of the Portland Code. It consists of two main parts: nuisance regulations and property maintenance standards. The standards have to do with minimum housing standards, abandoned vehicles, trash and garbage in yards, tall grass and weeds, illegal dumping, fences, pools and sidewalk obstructions. The Noise Control Ordinance, administered by Noise Control Officer Paul Van Orden, regulates loud music, stationary mechanical equipment, construction activities, power tools, noise variances, and other activities.
I have some additional comment from Commissioner Leonard (received over the weekend), but let's get to The Oregonian coverage first, since it was able to relate some of the concerns of neighborhood activists:
But the proposed change alarms officials with Southeast Uplift, a nonprofit coalition of 20 Southeast and Northeast Portland neighborhoods.
They fear the change would dilute the office's commitment to citizen involvement and wrongly shift its focus to services. And they're unhappy about what they consider the lack of citizen involvement in the proposal.
...
Leonard said the name change will bolster services. He said he has vetted -- and will continue to get input about -- the idea in several neighborhoods. But Southeast Uplift representatives plan to speak out against the added functions and the way they were presented.
"I feel they're trying to cut citizens out of decision-making," said Cynthia Peek, board president of Southeast Uplift. "The name change is cause for concern."
Before I get to some of my own comments on all of this, first let me get to the response of Commissioner Leonard when I asked him this weekend about these changes, the nervousness they are prompting in some neighborhood quarters, and the matter of how ONI's provision of more City services relates to ONI's mission of public involvement (which I referred to as a potential "two-track" model for the bureau):
Your latter comment (turn ONI into a two-track bureau, one for involvement and one for services) captures my vision exactly for ONI.
I started out my political career as a member of the Concordia Neighborhood Assn. and represented that association on the NE Coalition of Neighborhoods. While I and other neighborhood activists cherish the neighborhood involvement component of ONI, most Portlanders consider that good work irrelevant to their lives. I don't think of that attitude as a problem, but rather, a challenge.
Therefore, transferring the neighborhood inspection teams from the Bureau of Development Services to ONI will bring those services closer to the neighborhoods they serve by being located within ONI. It is my hope the neighborhood inspections team new location will cause more citizens to become involved in the neighborhood involvement/citizen participation side of ONI. I also am hoping that those who are concerned about this addition of responsibilities to ONI's charge will see that having direct access to city employees whose responsibilities include ridding neighborhoods of abandoned cars, enforcing the noise ordinance, dealing with derelict houses and yards will actually connect them more to the neighbors who they would like to become more active.
If we could get people who traditionally shy away from neighborhood associations more active and involved, it is my belief that neighborhood associations would be more representative of the parts of the city they represent and would, as a result, become more influential in the decisions the city council makes.
On or about October 1, 2003 I am going to kick off a pilot project that will co-locate at ONI's Kenton office various city employees already assigned to that geographic area of the city including a neighborhood inspector, the local SNO (senior neighborhood officer) officer, the crime prevention specialist and other city employees that have responsibility for that area of the city's neighborhood livability. It is my hope this blending of neighborhood services and community involvement under one roof will integrate ONI into the average persons life in a way that has not happened up until now. It is also my goal to have city employees whose jobs compliment one another actually know each other exist (something the current bureau system does not encourage).
I am not one to use new names to describe the same way of doing business....a criticism I have often heard of Portland government. Therefore, I am asking citizens to give me feedback on changing the name of ONI to the Bureau of Neighborhood Services. I believe that this expanded mission I have described on the part of ONI is better captured and is more inclusive of it's responsibilities when we use the name Office of Neighborhood Services rather that Office of Neighborhood Involvement.
First off, in some sense ONI has been a sort of two-track model for some time now, since services such as grafitti abatement are run out that bureau. This new announcement, in some sense, simply increases the neighrborhood-related services ONI will handle.
Secondly, I am admittedly rather fond of the idea behind the forthcoming pilot project putting "neighborhood services and community involvement under one roof" within neighborhoods themselves. Commissioner Leonard spoke briefly about this at a meeting of the GREAT committee (discussing changes to ONI's section of City code, as well as the bureau's guidelines document), and I suspect that distributing access to the sorts of services neighborhood residents have the greatest need for can only benefit the City as a whole.
Now, there is of course a great deal of consternation out in the neighborhoods when it comes to their sense that the City increasingly has been betraying its experiment in institutionalized neighborhood involvement -- as evidenced by some of the constituency discussions for the Public Involvement Taskforce which I attended not so long ago. So it comes as no particular surprise that they are troubled that this changes at ONI will stunt the involvement side of the bureau's responsibilities.
But, as near as I can tell, the fact that ONI has been working so hard on the PI taskforce at all -- and that the effort reportedly has the backing of at least three members of the City Council -- does seem to somewhat contradict the idea that the City is utterly unconcerned with the issue of public and neighborhood involvement. Is the issue tricky? Are there divisions to overcome to make institutionalized neighborhood involvement function well? Of course.
But this latest difference of opinion seems almost entirely driven by a combination of simmering neighborhood concerns and a problem with a change of name for ONI.
Names do have power. They aren't the ballgame, but it's important to consider what they communicate. So I'll weigh in on this one, in the hopes that maybe it can be diffused and we can focus on the tasks of making ONI stronger all around, so it can better serve neighborhoods and their residents.
If we simply must change ONI's name, I suggest the Bureau of Neighborhoods and Involvement. Yes, it drops the "Services" component, which seems to be the gist of Leonard's own proposed name change. But since the real emphasis is on neighborhoods, their residents, and their needs -- be it services or involvement -- there's no need to specify "services" in the name. For that matter, there's no inherent reason to have to specify "involvement" in the bureau's new name, but it might be politically smart to tack it on anyway.
To my mind, it's either the Bureau of Neighborhoods and Involvement, or the Bureau of Neighborhood Services and Involvement -- and the latter just seems like a stumble.