Thoughts on Public Involvement

At last nights candidate forum a recurring theme centered around public involvement in city business. Several candidates have taken the position that the city council has been lax in encouraging public involvement. On the surface I might find it easy to agree with their position since most city council meetings are only attended by a group of 5-10 regulars. These regulars are occasionally referred to as "season ticket holders", because much like like dedicated sports fans, they are very vocal about who or what they are rooting for and don't like to miss an inning. And just like die-hard football fans, the season ticket holders don't understand why you don't want to come watch the game. But ahh, they are missing one key thing. I believe you are watching the game, and just like with football, it's usually better viewed from the comfort of your own home.

I am continually impressed with my interactions with residents, whether at the store, the park, or on a walk with my kids. Not surprisingly most people I talk to rarely, if ever, attend council meetings. Yet most folks always seem to be generally informed about what is happening around city hall. If the public were truly disengaged or if the city were completely dropping the ball this wouldn't be the case. The networks most people have for information gathering are as diverse and complex as the city itself. The newspaper, email, the internet and neighbors talking to neighbors are all very common and effective ways information travels through the population.

It is through these channels that occasionally an issue circulates resulting in a meeting with phenomenal turnout, sometimes with 50-100 people crammed into city hall. The city advertises these meetings no differently than the ones with only the season ticket holders in the audience. So if the level information provided by the city is the same what causes such a large turnout. I believe it is because most people, while generally informed about the issues, need to have an understanding of how an issue relates to them before they feel empowered to voice an opinion. For example, when i was on the planning commission we were considering changes to the city parking ordinance. We had more than 100 people show up to a meeting to give their opinion on the issue. Not because we communicated the issue any differently to the public but because most people can relate to their cars and understand how changes to those rules might impact their daily lives.

In conclusion, public involvement at times can seem bleak, especially if you are one of 5 same people at every council meeting. It is a good part of why I have chosen to keep up this website. It is my effort to find a way of making more than just parking relateable to the general population.