Participatory Budgeting Expands in NYC for ’14 – ’15

We are excited to share the announcement from our friends with the Participatory Budgeting Project, and NCDD organizational member, that participatory budgeting is once again expanding in NYC to reach even more of its citizens. We encourage you to read PBP’s press release below about the expansion or find it on PBP’s website here.

22 districts will participate in next cycle to designate over $25 million

PBP-logoCity Hall— Today, Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito and the New York City Council announced the expansion of participatory budgeting to 22 districts that will designate over $25 million toward locally-developed projects, proposals, and initiatives in the next budgetary cycle. The expansion more than doubles the number of participating districts and represents a nearly 80% increase in funding allocated for participatory budgeting from the previous fiscal year.

“Participatory budgeting is a gateway to greater civic participation and leadership in our communities, encouraging collaboration between residents and local elected officials to find creative solutions to neighborhood needs,” said Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito. “As we work toward a more inclusive, transparent city government, I am excited for 22 Council districts to take part in the participatory budgeting—more than doubling our participation from the previous cycle. This expanded process will give thousands of New Yorkers a hands-on role in making taxpayer dollars work for our communities.”

Participatory budgeting is a grassroots process through which district residents vote directly to allocate at least $1 million in capital funding toward proposals developed by the community to meet local needs. Through a series public meetings, residents work with elected officials for a year to identify neighborhood concerns and craft proposals to address them. Residents then decide which proposals to fund through a public vote.

Good government groups hail participatory budgeting as a powerful tool to increase civic participation and community engagement. The only identification requirement is proof of residency in the district; voting in participatory budgeting is open to all residents 16 years of age and older, removing traditional obstacles to full civic participation such as youth, income status, English-language proficiency and citizenship status.

Learn more about Participatory Budgeting and how you can get involved at http://council.nyc.gov/html/action/pb.shtml.

For the 2014-2015 cycle, the following Council Members are conducting a participatory budgeting process in their districts:

“The expansion of Participatory Budgeting to 22 districts in the City is a testament to the Council’s commitment to empowering New Yorkers and giving them the ability to decide where their tax dollars are spent,” said New York City Council Majority Leader Jimmy Van Bramer. “For the first time in Western Queens we will give the residents of the 26th District the ability to fund projects that are meaningful to their communities. I am proud to be a part of this historic expansion of Participatory Budgeting. The growth of this inclusive process helps build a better informed, and empowered citizenry which will make our City’s democracy stronger. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the City Council and New Yorkers who will be participating in this process. Together, we will empower our communities and deliver the projects local residents vote to fund in their neighborhoods.”

“After last year’s incredibly successful Participatory Budgeting process in the 38th District, with the highest number of participants in the City, it is my pleasure to re-launch this program for the coming budget cycle!” said Council Member Carlos Menchaca. “I will again be allocating a full $2 million dollars to capital projects proposed, and voted on by community members that focus on the improvement of local schools, streets, parks, and libraries. This process is central to the civic engagement of our residents, and I am looking forward to my continued involvement with local stakeholders, and with my Council colleagues to secure the success of PB, and to expand this model in a meaningful way.”

“I am pleased to join my Council colleagues and have always planned on carrying out an effective and well organized participatory budgeting process that engages a wide range of residents of my district,” said Council Member Paul Vallone. “I look forward to engaging and working with my community in the coming months to have participatory budgeting that is successful and productive.”

“My constituents have loved the opportunity to vote on how their tax dollars are spent,” said Council Member Mark Weprin. “I am pleased that so many of my colleagues in the City Council have embraced the participatory budgeting process, as it allows residents to play an active role in their government.”

“Participatory Budgeting has put budgetary decisions directly into the hands of the people and I am excited to see it expand throughout New York City,” said Council Member Stephen Levin. “I was proud to bring Participatory Budgeting to the 33rd District two years ago and I continue to hear from constituents about how much they enjoy being involved in determining which capital projects get funded in our District. We have all worked hard to make Participatory Budgeting a success and I look forward to seeing this transparent and democratic budgeting process continue to grow under the leadership of Speaker Mark-Viverito.”

“I was proud to be the first elected official from Queens to give my constituents a real say in how their money is being spent and I’m thrilled that my colleagues will be expanding participatory budgeting throughout the five boroughs,” said Council Member Eric Ulrich. “This will provide a real chance for anyone who wants to have a voice in the decision-making process or has an idea for a project that would benefit the community, to step up and get involved. As I have always said, this isn’t my money, it is the taxpayers’ money and they should be allowed a say in how it’s spent.”

“Participatory budgeting is an exciting tool of empowerment the East Flatbush community has engaged in for the past three years,” said Council Member Jumaane D. Williams. “It brings government closer to the people, and provides an open form of democracy that continues to gain momentum. I look forward to it expanding throughout the city, so that more New Yorkers can get engaged in the design and selection of capital projects that better their district.”

“I am proud to be bringing participatory budgeting to constituents in the Central Bronx. Local residents know what their community needs and should be directly involved in decisions around how their tax dollars are spent.” said Council Member Ritchie Torres. “It’s also through processes like participatory budgeting that we deepen the engagement of residents in our districts and cultivate effective civic leaders.”

“A new form of democracy is sweeping New York City, and I am proud that the City Council is taking the lead in growing this process,” said Council Member Donovan Richards. “I’m beyond excited to bring Participatory Budgeting back to my district this year. There is nothing like allowing the public to make decisions on how their community schools, parks, etc., should be improved.”

“When thousands of people get involved through participatory budgeting in making hands-on decisions about what our neighborhoods need, it models government as shared stewardship, in which we work together to tend the common good,” said Council Member Brad Lander. “I am very proud that the process has grown from just four participating Councilmembers to 22 – not bad for an idea that people dismissed as crazy just a short time ago. Participatory budgeting is a growing movement that is changing the way New Yorkers engage with their government: improving transparency, increasing voters’ say in how their money is spent and bringing neighbors together to be stewards of the public realm.”

“I congratulate Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito and many of my colleagues for prioritizing the expansion of participatory budgeting in the FY16 budget, continuing successful efforts to get the program off the ground in NYC,” said Council Member Mark Levine. “Participatory budgeting gives people real decision-making power and empowers communities through the democratic process. I’m proud to join this growing movement by bringing participatory budgeting to Council District 7 this year, where we’ve already seen a huge outpouring of interest and ideas for projects to better our neighborhoods.”

“I am proud to join a growing list of my council colleagues who have made the commitment to participate in a progressive way of allocating fund,” said Council Member Ydanis Rodriguez. Participatory budgeting gives a direct voice to the residents of our districts and it is our job as their representatives to honor that voice. I look forward to a productive and engaging conversation with my constituents during this process of community empowerment.”

“This is a historic chance for residents across New York City to have a key role in deciding how their tax dollars are reinvested in their community,” said Council Member Mark Treyger. “I am proud to provide this great opportunity for community involvement in my district for the first time ever and to make sure that residents finally have a real voice in the budgeting process. I have no doubt that my constituents will use this unique chance to improve the quality of life throughout Bensonhurst, Gravesend, Coney Island and Sea Gate for years to come.”

“I am excited to bring PB to the 34th District this year,” said Council Member Antonio Reynoso. “My community is very creative, and I’ve heard lots of great ideas from my constituents already. I am looking forward to seeing how they decide to spend a million dollars.”

“I am thrilled to be partaking in Participatory Budgeting for the 2015-2016 budget cycle,” said Council Member Andrew Cohen. “This innovative process will give my neighbors a direct voice in how their tax dollars are spent on projects that will address community needs. It is my hope that through this process, we will be able to give City residents more confidence in government and increase civic engagement. The more participation and higher turnout we have will ensure that our communities will benefit in the long run. I am looking forward to further implementing this practice and hearing all of the terrific ideas that my neighbors will propose.”

“Participatory Budgeting and Upper West Side involvement go hand-in-hand,” said Council Member Helen Rosenthal. “The community is hungry to participate in this democratic process to identify and select projects for funding.”

“There is no greater vehicle galvanizing communities today than participatory budgeting,” said Council Member I. Daneek Miller. “It enables individuals to work together for common causes that will have a lasting impact on community needs. We have seen it in action already, members from across neighborhoods working side by side in harmony. I am proud to have begun the participatory budgeting process in my district this year and thank the Speaker for her assistance in getting this expansion off the ground.”

“The expansion of participatory budgeting (PB) to 22 council districts, and the institutionalization of the process in the City Council as a new way to govern, is truly exciting and a tribute to the success of the early cycles,” said Sondra Youdelman, Executive Director, Community Voices Heard. “Community Voices Heard is proud to have helped spearhead this process with Council Members, community organizations, and local residents. Looking forward, PB has the potential to engage new and diverse groups of people – including those typically most disenfranchised – more deeply in their communities and in the practice of governing. We’re anxious to see more people involved in the process and community power grow to influence more pots of money over time.”

“Participatory Budgeting in New York City is the largest and fastest growing such program in the country,” said Josh Lerner, Executive Director of Participatory Budgeting Project. “It has become an international model for real grassroots democracy, and for making city government more responsive to the people. We look forward to continuing to work with the Speaker and other city officials to take participatory budgeting to the next level.”

“The data that we have collected over the past three years shows that participatory budgeting is a gateway to civic engagement for New Yorkers that are often left out of politics and government such as youth, immigrants, and low-income people,” said Alexa Kasdan, Director of Research and Policy at the Community Development Project at the Urban Justice Center. “With the expansion of PB in 2014-15, the Speaker and the NYC Council are creating even more opportunities for civic participation for the most disenfranchised New Yorkers.”

You can find the original version of this post at www.participatorybudgeting.org/blog/6049.

CM Call on Rural Design, August 20th

CM_logo-200pxWe are pleased to invite NCDD members once again to join our partners at CommunityMatters for the next installation in their capacity-building call series, which is jointly hosted by the Citizens’ Institute on Rural Design. This month’s call is titled “How Design Sparks Rural Development”, and it will be taking place next Wednesday, August 20th from 4-5pm Eastern Time.

The folks at CM describe the upcoming call this way:

Urban, not rural, places are usually thought of as hubs of creativity and innovation, but this month’s CommunityMatters® and Citizens’ Institute on Rural Design™ webinar turns that notion on its head.

Emily Pilloton of Project H and Mark Rembert and Taylor Stuckert of Energize Clinton County, Ohio use the principles of good design to improve rural places, often in unexpected ways. Join us for an hour-long webinar highlighting community design that kick starts rural development. You’ll learn smart ways to introduce decision makers to design principles and find appropriate roles for “experts” and outsiders in resident-led design projects.

Register today by clicking here, and we hope to hear you on the call!

Before the call, we encourage you to check out the accompanying piece on the CM blog by Caitlyn Horose, which is cross posted below. You can find the original piece here.

Good Design Sparks Rural Community Development

Instead of focusing on developing products and services, now more than ever, architects, industrial designers, graphic artists, landscape architects, and other creative professionals are turning their attention to community development—working to solve bigger and messier problems. Just look at Human Centered Design from IDEO.org, a method for using good design to help people living in extreme poverty around the world. Association for Community Design, has supported community-based design and planning for more than three decades. Public Interest Design chronicles the growth of the community design movement in a cool infographic.

While this trend toward good design is exciting, it’s harder to find in rural community development. Many small towns aren’t bursting at the seams with graphic designers or architects.

Creative professionals are trained with an eye toward innovative and context-sensitive solutions to complex challenges. Without designers at our disposal we may fail to see all the great options for growing a village center, establishing welcoming public spaces or revitalizing downtown.

How might we encourage a greater emphasis on design in rural community development? Here are a few ideas from the forefront of rural design:

1. Introduce Elected Officials to the Principles of Good Design

Design Cents teaches public officials and community partners how to promote and implement good design to improve the quality of life in their communities. The workshop is offered by the Carl Small Town Center at Mississippi State University in Oktibbeha County (pop. 47,671).

2. Attract Creative People

Frontier Fellowship is a four-week program for creative professionals run by Epicenter in Green River, Utah (pop. 953). Fellows split their time between working on personal projects and contributing to a community improvement project.

3. Offer Pro Bono Design Services

By providing design services in the community decision-making process, Energize Clinton County in Wilmington, Ohio (pop. 12,448) aids conversations about local development proposals. Past projects include plans for a micro-brewery to catalyze business growth, design support for redeveloping historic buildings, and informational visualizations in community plan documents.

4. Design AND Build

Auburn University’s Rural Studio in Newbern, Alabama (pop. 181) emphasizes hands-on education. That’s why they didn’t stop at the blueprints when they designed a well-built, affordable housing alternative to the mobile home. The Rural Studio program designed and built 12 versions of the 20K House and is now exploring reproducing and designing on a large scale.

5. Community Education Through Design

Combining storytelling and story gathering with graphic narratives, the Beehive Collective in Machias, Maine (pop. 2,353) creates illustrations that are used for education—and conversation—starters around complex community issues.

While not a rural example (this one comes from New York City), we can’t resist mentioning the Center for Urban Pedagogy’s Envisioning Development toolkits. Using objects and plain language, participants learn about planning issues like affordable housing and zoning.

6. Balance Local Knowledge and Professional Expertise

The Citizens’ Institute on Rural Design™ (CIRD) offers annual competitive funding to as many as four small towns or rural communities to host community design workshops. The workshops bring together local leaders and national experts to develop actionable solutions to pressing design challenges.

CIRD has convened more than 70 workshops in all regions of the country. Follow the CIRD blog to keep up on the 2014 workshop communities.

7. Engage Youth in Community Design

When Project H founders Emily Pilloton and Matthew Miller wanted to bring design to a rural town, they started in an unlikely place: the poorest county in North Carolina. Bertie County had no licensed architect and more than one unfortunate statistic—24 percent of residents dropped out of high school and 65 percent of youth were unemployed.

Using education as a vehicle, the Project H team incorporated good design in improvements to the school computer lab and playground. The team’s next step was to rethink shop class, teaching design with construction and fabrication skills focused on building a farmers’ market. Project H then facilitated a summer youth employment program, paying students to build the 2,000-square-foot building, making the market a reality.

Watch the video below to hear Emily talk about the project, then head to the Project H website for a toolbox to bring design thinking into any classroom.

On Wednesday, August 20, Emily Pilloton of Project H and Mark Rembert and Taylor Stuckert of Energize Clinton County join CommunityMatters® and the Citizens’ Institute on Rural Design™ for an hour-long webinar on design in rural community development. They’ll highlight additional examples of how community design has catalyzed rural economies, with thoughts about introducing decision makers to design principles and the role of experts and outsiders in community-led design projects. Space is limited, so register early!

Jefferson Center Hosts Rural Climate Dialogues

Our NCDD organizational members at the Jefferson Center recently shared a write up on a series of deliberations on climate issues in rural Minnesota. The project produced positive results and a detailed report with recommendations for moving forward. We hope you will read their write up below or find the original version by clicking here.


JeffersonCenterLogoWay back in March, we talked about our plans to engage citizens in rural communities in Minnesota to discuss climate and extreme weather. Our first conversation, the Morris Area Climate Dialogue, took place at the beginning of June. Fifteen Morris Area residents came together in a Citizens’ Jury to study and deliberate on the local impacts of extreme weather and shifts in climate. Community members heard from local experts on weather and climate trends, energy & energy efficiency issues, insurance industry concerns, potential changes in agricultural production, impacts on local infrastructure, and opportunities to build a stronger, more resilient community.

Community members analyzed the knowledge gained during presentations and prioritized critical concerns, key opportunities, and potential action steps. Principal concerns include limited public awareness of changes in extreme weather and climate, disproportionate impacts on low- or fixed-income residents, and strains on local agricultural production. Opportunities for community responses include adapting local agricultural systems, developing new economic opportunities, and utilizing the skills and resources of community members. You can read their full statement, along with community action recommendations, in the MACD Final Report. You can also find more information at our Morris Area Climate Dialogue page.

Briefly, here’s what a few participants thought of the event:

“I’d like to say thank you for the information. I kinda came into this warily, but I enjoyed the presentations and information. I also really appreciated the level of intelligence and the intensity that everybody put into this. It was thought-provoking, it was challenging at times with the subjects that were coming at us, and yet everyone was very professional, very open, and very intelligent.”

“I wasn’t sure what to expect. I thought it’d be a bunch of people who were very adamant about this topic and would want to get together and “hurrah” about it. I was very impressed with this group’s ability to come together as community members, as neighbors, and talk about these things in an open, civil, and friendly manner. I thought the whole thing was very well coordinated and run in a very unbiased way. A way that definitely encouraged that openness.”

“I was impressed with the group and how we worked together, everybody contributed.”

The priorities and recommendations of citizens are only the beginning. Along with our partners at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, we’ll continue to work with participants, community members, local partners and community organizations, public officials and agencies, and other interested stakeholders to pursue and realize the ambitions of the Morris Area community as citizens work to address climate and weather issues.

For more information about the Morris Area Climate Dialogue, including daily summaries and the full list of community concerns, opportunities, and actions, check out the Dialogues page of the Rural Climate Network.

You can find the original version of this blog post at http://jefferson-center.org/morris-area-climate-dialogue.

CM Conference Call on Grassroots Grants, July 31

CM_logo-200pxIt’s time again for another capacity-building conference call from our organizational partners at CommunityMatters, which is coming up this Thursday, July 31st from 4-5pm EST.

The topic of this latest call is “Grassroots Grants“, and CM will be partnering with Janis Foster Richardson, the Executive Director of Grassroots Grantmakers, to host it. They introduce the call’s topic like this:

Is your community a place for possibilities? Can residents bring their ideas to life, take risks, make connections and ply their creative skills? Grassroots grantmaking focuses on helping organizations turn possibilities into realities.

Through small grants, residents move from dreaming to doing and become critical change makers in their community.

Janis Foster Richardson, executive director of Grassroots Grantmakers, joins CommunityMatters on Thursday, July 31 for an hour-long webinar on how local governments, nonprofits, foundations and other community groups are supporting everyday people in making positive change through small grant programs.

Register today by clicking here, and we hope to hear you on the call!

Before the call, we encourage you to check out the accompanying piece on the CM blog by Caitlyn Horose, which is cross posted below. You can find the original piece here.

Investing in “What Ifs” With Grassroots Grants

No matter how rich or poor, every community has a wealth of ideas, often nascent, for making things better. What if we timed the traffic lights differently? What if we added more trashcans, or lights or widened our sidewalks? What if we turned that blank wall or fence into something more beautiful?

Despite the multitude of improvement ideas, people rarely act on them. Residents may feel limited by time, money, or uncertainty about whether formal permits are required. Grassroots grantmaking is the business of investing in “what ifs” and crazy ideas.

Grassroots grants focus on what people can do better together rather than what agencies or institutions can do for them; help people move from dreaming to doing; and invest in people and associations as critical change-makers in a community.

Municipalities, nonprofits, and community foundations are supporting and stimulating citizen-driven efforts through these small grants.

Here are two organizations doing this work:

The Vancouver Community Foundation’s Neighborhood Small Grants program in Canada supports diverse projects like “Host a Hope” murals to increase community connectedness, a mobile Truck Farm to promote local produce and a digital storytelling project for youth called Callingwood Snapshots. Efforts funded by the initiative encourage neighborhood connections and engagement. Learn more. View the video:

Neighborhood Connections, a 10 year old community building and small grants program of the Cleveland Community Foundation has provided resources for nearly 2,000 projects—public murals, after school programs and even a marching band. All funding decisions are made by a resident grantmaking committee. Watch the video below to learn more.

While many grassroots grant programs are affiliated with community foundations and other funding entities, local governments and nonprofits are also establishing them.

After completing the Golden Vision 2030 and Community Heart & Soul™ planning process, city employees and elected officials in Golden, Colorado wanted residents to take action. Golden created the i-Golden Neighborhood Grants program, offering small grants for resident-led projects that support community values. Through i-Golden grants, the city supports many local efforts including beautification, block parties, and pedestrian safety improvements.

The North Fork Valley Heart & Soul Project in Western Colorado featured a mini-grant program to involve residents in their new community vision. Ten thousand dollars was split between seven winners. Projects included the installation of a community bulletin board, creation of a seed library, and a community kitchen feasibility study.

The Youth Leadership and Philanthropy Initiative of Perry County, Kentucky engages youth through community service, leadership development and small grants. The program helps stem outmigration by teaching the value of investment in the local community. In its first year, the initiative awarded four $500 grants raised from individual donations and fundraising events.

Grassroots Grantmakers is a network of many different types of organizations that share a commitment to the values and principles of asset-based community development and a belief in the power of everyone to be contributing, active citizens and changemakers.

On Thursday, July 31, Janis Foster Richardson, executive director of Grassroots Grantmakers, will join CommunityMatters to share how local governments, nonprofits, foundations and other community groups are supporting positive change through small grant programs.

Register now.

Announcing Next Stage Facilitation Intensives in Montreal and Boulder

We are happy to share the announcement below from NCDD Sustaining Member Rebecca Colwell of Ten Directions. Rebecca’s announcement came via our great Submit-to-Blog Form. Do you have news you want to share with the NCDD network? Just click here to submit your news post for the NCDD Blog!


Integral Facilitator® Next Stage Facilitation™ Intensives are 3-day workshops introducing the core competencies of an Integral approach to facilitation designed to enhance your capacity to generate greater coherence and increased collaboration and dialogue in the groups you work with.

In this three-day workshop, you’ll learn:

  • How to maintain presence in the face of challenging situations.
  • How to work effectively with group energetics and emotional states.
  • How to effectively build connection and working with tension to deepen coherence and intimacy.
  • How to engage tension, power dynamics and conflict in a group.
  • How to increase the positive impact you have on others.
  • How to bring an integral approach to your work.

As a Next Stage participant, you’ll learn directly from master facilitator, mediator and former Director of Dispute Resolution for the Utah State Judiciary, Diane Musho Hamilton.

Your participation will include a deep dive into your personal presence as a facilitator, including how bring an Integral approach to your work with groups, and opportunities to practice new approaches that will stretch your development as a skilled facilitator. Masterful facilitators with depth and presence are more responsive to the subtleties of group dynamics and can create more rewarding and effective dialogue and collaboration.

Next Stage Facilitation Intensives will be taking place September 8 – 10 in Montreal, Quebec, and October 6 – 8 in Boulder, Colorado.

Sign up for an upcoming Integral Facilitator Next Stage Facilitation Intensive.

Praise from workshop participants:

“The workshop has shifted my perception of issues such as power, and allowed me to understand where my choices lie. I feel confident to run with those issues now as opposed to fighting against them and using up all my energy.” – Marissa Moore, Senior Finance Executive

“This has been my best experience ever in a 3 day training. Diane is an amazing facilitator! I’m currently figuring out how to get myself in the 1 year program as the 3 days were so exciting and promising in terms of my personal growth.” – Tremeur Balbous, Consultant & Integral coach

“Take facilitation to a whole other level. The Next Stage Facilitation three day intensive shakes you out of conventional and stifled facilitation modes and expands your view to multi-perspectival, grows your competencies toward integral–exploring what it means to work with individuals, the collective and the topic at hand in a balanced, elegant and effective way, and, it strengthens your intuitive faculties to sense and trust the energetic field of the room and respond.” – Michelle Elizabeth, Consultant

Watch Integral Facilitator Lead Teacher Diane Musho Hamilton’s recent Google Book Talk on conflict resolution:

For more information, visit https://tendirections.com/next-stage-facilitation-3-day-intensive.

Community-Building Arts Project from Tamarack

We wanted to share a write up from Axiom News that featured a great initiative in Canada led by NCDD organizational member Tamarack. The lessons learned from this arts-based project to support community building are valuable for all of us, so we hope you’ll take a moment to read the Axiom piece below or find the original version here.


Massive, Main Street Photo Exhibit ‘Shifts Feelings’ in Alberta Community

The Village of Delburne, located halfway between Calgary and Edmonton, Alberta provides a model for communities looking to engage residents in setting priorities and making decisions on what matters.

Earlier this year the village engaged in the “1,000 Conversations Across Canada” initiative championed by Tamarack, the Institute for Community Engagement.

The intent of the 1,000 Conversations campaign is to help shape communities by promoting the idea that citizens can collaborate and communicate with one another to create positive change.

Close to half the village population of about 830 representing a broad cross-section of the community participated in the conversations, a related survey, and an art project geared to strengthening the community’s sense of connection.

For the art project, internationally renowned portrait artist John Beebe collaborated with the village to create gigantic photos of local residents. These were then wheat-pasted on multiple exterior building surfaces throughout the village. The village school featured a collection of about 140 portraits.

Delburne Family and Community Support Services (FCSS) community worker Nora Smith has been a key champion of all of these efforts, but has been especially struck by the possibilities in art as a community-building tool.

“There’s something incredibly powerful in tying the art element into the community development piece,” says Nora. “I can’t really put my finger on it, but I know it’s there just by the way I watched the community members stop and appreciate each other.”

The art project is “shifting the feeling” in the community, which testifies to the foundational level of change that Nora and others are investigating through this community engagement process. The work is largely about the biases and prejudices that shape one’s thinking and therefore one’s way of being in society. “If we can start shifting people at that level, that would be fantastic,” Nora says.

Delburne residents have now identified and voted on the following four priorities for their community:

  • Main Street revitalization
  • Health and Wellness
  • A Belonging Delburne project (which includes the art project)
  • A communication project
  • Plans are underway to re-engage in the Fall to flesh out tangible action plans within each of these four priorities. These plans will be revisited on a yearly basis to gauge accomplishments and reevaluate priorities.

Delburne represents a growing shift amongst communities and neighbourhoods in Canada to focus on stronger resident engagement, reducing the “role” of the local government in deciding what gets done and what doesn’t.

What other communities can learn from Delburne:

  • Be strategic about engaging people. Paul Born’s book, Community Conversations, offers valuable insights on how to ensure everyone who should be at the table is there.
  • People inviting those they have a relationship with to participate in the community engagement process is critical to ensuring strong engagement.
  • Trust the process. “It’s so easy as someone working in community development to want to give the answers,” Nora says. “Have faith that the answers are eventually going to come out of the community itself.” It’s important that the answers do emerge this way, to ensure sustainability as residents “own” the actualization of these answers.
  • Strengthening community engagement is a process: it takes time and work.
  • Strongly consider integrating the art element into community development efforts.

This story is part eight of a series focused on placemaking and other citizen led initiatives. To read the other entries in this series, visit the original post here.

You can find the original version of this Axiom News piece at www.axiomnews.com/massive-main-street-photo-exhibit-%E2%80%98shifts-feelings%E2%80%99-alberta-community.

Featured D&D Story: Putting People at the Center in Public Health

Today we are happy to feature another great example of dialogue and deliberation in action. This mini case study was submitted by NCDD student member Megan Powers of Grassroots Solutions via NCDD’s Dialogue Storytelling Tool. Do you have a dialogue story that our network could learn from? Add YOUR dialogue story today! 


ShareYourStory-sidebarimageTitle of Project:

Putting People at the Center: A Fundamental Shift in Public Health Campaigns

Description

One of the most pivotal developments in public health practice over the past 20 years is the attention that is now being paid to the wide range of factors that influence health, such as social connectedness, the built environment, and the characteristics of the places where people live, work, and play. As a result, the public health field not only educates people about individual behavioral changes people can make to improve their health, but also works to change the policies, systems, and environments that shape our world and our ability to make healthy choices.

We’ve seen this impact firsthand. Grassroots Solutions works extensively with public health entities at the local, state, and national levels to reduce tobacco use, mitigate obesity, and address other critical public health concerns.

This work has taught us that while facts and data are, of course, powerful tools, the most successful public health campaigns put people at the center. When you combine data and facts with real people’s passion, commitment,
and involvement, communities embrace changes that have a significant impact on the health of residents.

Our whitepaper draws on our 12 years of on-the-ground experience to illustrate how putting people at the center of public health campaigns results in better and more sustainable health outcomes, and why we believe that people-centric campaigns should serve as the gold standard for population health management.

Which dialogue and deliberation approaches did you use or borrow heavily from?

  • Sustained Dialogue
  • Charrettes

What was your role in the project?

Grassroots Solutions served as the project manager and hired grassroots organizers for a variety of these projects, executing engagement tactics and in some cases, facilitating participatory dialogue.

Who were your partners in the project, if any?

Blue Cross Blue Shield Center for Prevention, Cities of Bloomington, Edina, and Richfield (for the do.town initiative), Minnesota Dept of Health (for the CDC Communities Putting Prevention to Work technical assistance project).

What issues did the project primarily address?

  • Mental or physical health

Lessons Learned

  1. An important shift is to move from a campaign that is data-centered and people-supplemented to one that is people-centered, and data-supplemented. We’ve learned that this shift enables campaigns to create space for residents to shape their own neighborhoods with health in mind, and offers the opportunity to form both an intellectual and emotional attachment to their vision for a healthier community.
  2. Putting people at the center means that everything in the campaign is done with an eye towards how residents can be involved. Whether it’s prioritizing which issues to pursue, examining how a neighborhood could be made more walkable and bikeable, or exploring how a new development can support healthy behaviors, a people-centered campaign focuses on engaging residents. Everyday people are encouraged to chime in, talk with others in the community, participate in planning sessions, and make the case for changes to their friends and neighbors.
  3. The reason it is critical to put people at the center of health campaigns is that it results in better health outcomes. Communities that are built to support health will produce better health outcomes, such as bike paths, access to healthy food, walkable neighborhoods, and safe walking and bike routes for kids to get to school. Additionally, these kinds of community features also help shape how people connect with each other and with their neighborhood, town, or city. When it comes right down to it, healthy living is about people and relationships.
  4. Putting people at the center shifts a campaign from episodic, isolated opportunities to engage, to a more relationship-driven approach. This means that residents are invited to help set the campaign’s tone and direction from the very beginning, they are offered leadership opportunities, and become a part of the campaign’s infrastructure. When the campaign’s orientation is centered on people, engagement becomes grounded in relationships with residents who get involved in different ways over time. People’s participation becomes more authentic, like an ongoing conversation, rather than just a single event or action.

Where to learn more about the project:

http://healthy-communities.grassrootssolutions.com

JPD Special Issue Looks at “The State of Our Field”

JPD logoThis month, the Deliberative Democracy Consortium (DDC) and the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) released a special issue of their collaboratively produced Journal of Public Deliberation, and it is a must-read.  They collected writings from leading scholars and practitioners of our work – including numerous NCDD members and our director, Sandy Heierbacher – to create this special issue focused on “The State of Our Field”:

This is a special issue that assess the state of our field, celebrates our successes, and calls for future innovative work. The authors are scholars and practitioners who represent the diversity of our field and provide a wide range of perspectives on deliberation, dialogue, participation, and civic life. The ideas from this issue will be discussed at the upcoming Frontiers of Democracy conference, after which the editors will write an “afterword” reflecting on lessons learned.

We’re excerpting all of the abstracts of the articles in this issue here on the blog, because we think it will entice you to read these important articles. The special issue starts with an introductory overview, then is divided into three areas of focus: the scope of our field, challenges to our field, and promising future directions that some of us are taking.

Visit www.publicdeliberation.net/jpd to download each article for free.

JPD Volume 10, Issue 1 (2014) Special Issue: State of the Field

Introduction

The State of Our Field: Introduction to the Special Issue by Laura W. Black, Nancy L. Thomas, and Dr. Timothy J. Shaffer – “This article introduces the special “State of the Field” issue. The essay highlights some of the key tensions that our field is wrestling with at the moment, and advocates that we think carefully about the terms we use to describe our work. It previews the articles in this special issue and urges future work in the field to take up the ideas, questions, and challenges posed by these essays.”

The Scope of the Field

Why I Study Public Deliberation by John Gastil – “The author argues that scholars can best advance public dialogue and deliberation by conducting systematic research on practical innovations that have the potential to improve political discourse. The author explains and justifies this position through a personal narrative that recounts formative experiences with debate, group dialogue, political campaigns, academic research, and electoral reform.”

A 35-Year Experiment in Public Deliberation by David Mathews – “In the late 1970s, a small group of academics and former government officials began an initiative that led to the creation of a network of National Issues Forums (NIF) in 1981. NIF-style deliberation is based on the assumption that the greatest challenge in collective decision making is dealing with the tensions that result when many of the things most people hold dear are brought into conflict by the necessity to act on a problem. Public deliberation is a naturally occurring phenomenon that makes use of the human faculty for judgment. The most powerful insight from the NIF experiment has been the recognition that democracy depends on constant learning and that deliberation is a form of learning.”

Repairing the Breach: The Power of Dialogue to Heal Relationships and Communities by Robert R. Stains Jr. – “Dialogue can be a powerful force for healing communities and relationships broken by divisions of identity, values, religion and world-views. This article explores the reparative effects of dialogue and the elements that make them possible: re-authoring stories, communicating from the heart and witnessing others’ identities in constructive ways.”

What We’re Talking About When We Talk About the “Civic Field” (And why we should clarify what we mean) by Matt Leighninger – “The field of public engagement is experiencing a harmful identity crisis. While advocates of public participation may all agree that our work relates somehow to democracy, we have not established or articulated a common vision of what that really means. This lack of clarity has dire consequences, producing rifts between academics and practitioners, community organizers and deliberative democrats, civic technologists and dialogue practitioners, policy advocates and consensus-builders. Worst of all, the lack of clarity about democracy provides no help to people who are trying to create sustainable, participatory political systems in Egypt, Thailand, Ukraine, and many other countries. None of the participatory tactics and assets we have developed will reach their full potential if we don’t admit, to ourselves and the world, their true significance: these aren’t just props for conventional processes, but building blocks for new political systems.”

Democracy by Design by Nancy L. Thomas – “Renewing US democracy will require an active and deliberative public, people who can work together to address pressing social and political problems. To engage effectively Americans need an understanding of how American democracy works, its foundations and the complex and sometimes changing dimensions to those foundations. Advocates for increasing active and deliberative citizen engagement need to work with reformers in different areas of democracy’s ecological system, integrating public engagement with reform efforts in justice and equal opportunity, knowledge and information development, and government integrity.”

The Next Generation of Our Work by Sandy Heierbacher – “In this reflective piece, Sandy Heierbacher, Director of the National Coalition for Dialogue & Deliberation (NCDD), outlines some of the trends she has been noticing from her unique vantage point in the rapidly growing and innovating field of deliberative democracy. Heierbacher reflects on ways this field, centered around practices designed to engage citizens in the decisions and issues that effect their lives, is changing its relationship with government, becoming more receptive to online tools for engagement, shifting its attention back to local efforts, focusing attention on building infrastructure, and increasingly relying on collaboration to achieve its goals.”

Challenges

Public Engagement Exercises with Racial and Cultural “Others”: Some Thoughts, Questions, and Considerations by Yea-Wen Chen – “Concerns about the inadequacy of using dialogue to address the material realities of race and racism motivate this essay. Hence, I reflect on the current state of conversations on race, diversity, and inclusion from the standpoint of cultural and racial “others.” To orient my reflections, I first unpack assumptions about what might constitute “productive” public deliberation on race. I argue that productive public engagement exercises on race (a) move participants into praxis, (b) require participants to consider cultural identity differences, and (c) demand an understanding of how social forces such as racism and whiteness hinder and/or enable public engagement processes. I then reconsider public engagement from a cultural lens and rethink intercultural communication as publicly deliberating highly charged topics such as race. Finally, I caution against relying on cookie-cutter formulas to address complex issues such as race and recommend utilizing the strategy of counter-storytelling in public engagement exercises on race.”

Deliberative Democracy, Public Work, and Civic Agency by Harry C. Boyte – “This essay locates deliberation and deliberative theory as an important strand in a larger interdisciplinary and political movement, civic agency. The civic agency movement, and its related politics, a politics of civic empowerment, include a set of developing practices and concepts which enhance the capacities of diverse groups of people to work across differences to solve problems, create things of common value, and negotiate a shared democratic way of life. Stirrings of civic agency can be seen in many settings, including efforts to recover the civic purposes and revitalize the civic cultures of institutions such as schools and colleges.”

The Unfulfilled Promise of Online Deliberation by Jannette Hartz-Karp & Brian Sullivan – “Since online deliberation has not delivered on the expectations of more considered, democratic participation, the authors propose less focus on technological ‘fixes’ and more on re-conceptualizing its primary purpose to gathering resonance in an authentic public square. The ideas that emerge can then be deliberated in representative face-to-face public deliberations, with the coherent voice that results contributing to more inclusive, legitimate, and implementable democratic decision-making.”

A Brief Reflection on the Brazilian Participatory Experience by Vera Schattan Pereira Coelho – “The article highlights Brazilian participatory experiences such as the participatory budget and the policy councils and conferences. Based on research done by the author on daily routines and policy impacts of these forums, it is argued that there is still a long way before fulfilling normative expectations. In light of these challenges, reflections about how to move forward in the future are presented.”

Beyond Deliberation: A Strategy for Civic Renewal by Peter Levine – “To expand opportunities for discussion and reflection about public issues, we should look beyond the organizations that intentionally convene deliberations and also enlist organizations that preserve common resources, volunteer service groups, civics classes, grassroots public media efforts, and partisan, ideological, and faith-based movements that have some interest in discussion. Many of these groups are not politically neutral; more are adversarial. But they have a common interest in confronting the forces and decisions that have sidelined active citizens in countries like the US. They are all threatened by the rising signs of oligarchy in the United States. Collectively, they have considerable resources with which to fight back. It is time for us to begin to stir and organize–not for deliberation, but for democracy.”

Finding A Seat for Social Justice at the Table of Dialogue and Deliberation by David Schoem – “What does it mean for the dialogue and deliberation or public engagement community to exclude social justice from its mission and activities? Many dialogue and deliberation organizations, though clearly not all, shy away from either an explicit or implicit acknowledgement of issues of social justice or inequality, and power and privilege. This article argues that the field needs to 1) work intentionally for social justice and serving the public good for a strong, diverse democracy, 2) confront the illusion of neutrality, and 3) address issues of privilege and power. It discusses five principles to achieve this goal.”

Deliberative Civic Engagement in Public Administration and Policy by Tina Nabatchi – “This article explores deliberative civic engagement in the context of public administration and policy. The field of public administration and policy is seeing a resurgence of interest in deliberative civic engagement among scholars, practitioners, politicians, civic reformers, and others. Deliberative processes have been used to address a range of issues: school redistricting and closings, land use, and the construction of highways, shopping malls, and other projects. Additional topics include race and diversity issues, crime and policing, and involvement of parents in their children’s education. Finally, participatory budgeting, which has been used with success in Porto Alegre, Brazil since 1989 and has been employed in over 1,500 cities around the world, has been one of the most promising forms of deliberative civic engagement. Finally, the article suggests what we must do to build a civic infrastructure to support deliberative civic engagement, including government, but also practitioners and scholars.”

Key Challenges Facing the Field of Deliberative Democracy by Carol J. Lukensmeyer – “Deliberative Democracy has proved its value as an alternative to governance dominated by special interests, but its use in governing remains inconsistent. Overcoming this challenge will require the field to focus its energy on 1) building a cadre of elected leaders and public officials who understand deliberative democracy’s value and how to do it, 2) engaging with the media so that it becomes an effective partner for the field and a more productive part of our democratic system, and 3) continuing to embrace opportunities – like Creating Community Solutions – to work in unique partnerships, build national infrastructure to support high-quality deliberation, and innovate across methodologies and models.”

Promising Future Directions

The Design of Online Deliberation: Implications for Practice, Theory and Democratic Citizenship by Idit Manosevitch – “The essay focuses on the role of design in online deliberation, and outlines three directions for future research. First, research must embed the study of the technical and organizational architecture of online discussion spaces, as an ongoing area of inquiry. Scholars need to take stock of varying available design choices and their potential effects on the deliberative quality of online public discourse. Second, looking more broadly, research must examine the design of deliberative processes as they manifest themselves via digital technologies. The author discusses the importance of surveying the broad array of processes that are currently employed, and the varying theoretical assumptions that they convey. Third, the essay concludes with an outline of possible implications that online deliberation endeavors may have on democratic citizenship, and calls for further research on the broader implications of this work for promoting healthy democratic societies.”

Deliberation In and Through Higher Education by Dr. Timothy J. Shaffer – “This article explores how deliberative democracy has the ability to change how colleges and universities function. Deliberation offers a powerful way for students, faculty, staff, and community partners to learn and practice modes of reasoning and deciding together in a variety of settings such as classrooms, other campus settings, and in communities. The article includes scholarly resources as well as examples of deliberation in various contexts. The article suggests that deliberation can replace, or at least complement, many of the more familiar models pervasive in our institutions.”

The Critical Role of Local Centers and Institutes in Advancing Deliberative Democracy by Dr. Martín Carcasson – “Utilizing the development and early history of the Colorado State University Center for Public Deliberation as an example, this paper makes the case for expanding the number of and the level of support for such campus-based centers as critical resources for expanding deliberative democracy. Due to their ability to not only provide deliberative capacity to the community, but also to attract students to our field and equip with them with essential skills, to strengthen the connection of colleges and universities to their local communities, and to contribute to the further development of deliberative theory and practice, these local “hubs of democracy” represent a natural “win-win-win-win” that warrants significant focus as we work to develop the deliberative culture of our communities.”

A Path to the Next Form of (Deliberative) Democracy by Patrick L. Scully – “Supporters of deliberative democracy must work through complex tradeoffs if we hope to realize the full potential of empowered civic engagement in which citizens employ multiple forms of action and change. In order to sustain citizens’ interest, time, and resources in creating a robust civic infrastructure, we need to engage them in more highly empowered forms of civic engagement than is now typical of many deliberative initiatives. Our field’s strong emphasis on temporary public consultations diverts a disproportionate amount of time, intellectual capital, and other resources from efforts to improve the ability of citizens and local communities to have stronger, more active, and direct roles in shaping their collective futures. One set of choices facing us centers on tensions between reformism and more fundamental, even revolutionary changes to democratic politics. Other key tensions are rooted in aspirations for deliberative democracy to serve as both an impartial resource and as a catalyst for action.”

The State of Our Field in Light of the State of Our Democracy: My Democracy Anxiety Closet by Martha McCoy – “There is a large and troubling gap between the promise of deliberative innovations and the most prevalent practices of our largely dysfunctional democracy. A web of factors is widening this gap and increasing the urgency of addressing it. With democracy in crisis, the deliberative civic field is engaging in more collaborative efforts and in more pointed conversations about how to have a systemic impact. To have any chance of improving the state of democracy, our field needs to: 1) envision and work toward structural change; 2) find more compelling ways to describe empowered public participation and more welcoming entry points for experiencing it; and 3) address the challenge of equity head-on. As a field, we have begun to address the first two, though we have much more to do. Our field has been more reticent to address the challenge of equity.”

The Compost of Disagreement: Creating Safe Spaces for Engagement and Action by Michelle Holt-Shannon & Bruce L. Mallory – “The experiences gained in almost two decades of supporting community-based deliberative processes highlight the importance of balancing participants’ desire for civility and safety with the passionate expression of deeply held values and beliefs. Effective deliberations may surface highly contested positions in which intimidation or bullying can occur. At times, even the deliberative process itself may become the object of ideological objections. This has the potential to a create a climate of fear on the part of participants and public officials seeking solutions to complex issues related to public investments, long-term planning, or improved governance. We apply the metaphor of “community compost” to emphasize the value of eliciting diverse points of view on hot topics that have divided residents as well as public officials. By turning the fertile soil of passion, values, and disagreement, we have been able to find common ground useful to decision-makers. Balancing the need for safety and the benefits of strong disagreement, shared understanding and agreement may be achieved.”

- — -

If you’ve seen a few articles that you’d like to read more of, we encourage you to visit www.publicdeliberation.net/jpd to download the full text. Happy reading!

CM’s 4 Tips for More Inclusive Communities

Our partners at CommunityMatters recently put together a useful list of tips for creating more inclusive communities to go along with their recent conference call on the same topic. We wanted to make sure to our members see these pointers, so we encourage you to read CM staffer Caitlyn Horose’s write up below or find the original CM blog post by clicking here

CM_logo-200pxWhat do you do to make people in your community feel welcome? How do you create opportunities for people from all backgrounds to participate fully in building and improving your community?

Creating an inclusive community isn’t easy, but many places are finding ways to start building a more inclusive and welcoming culture.

Here are four strategies from cities and towns committed to inclusivity—share your own stories and ideas in the comments!

1. Make a statement. Riverside, California developed a, set of principles for building a more inclusive community. Their Inclusive Community Statement identifies the responsibilities of individuals, groups and institutions for achieving this common goal. Through maintaining an openness to dialogue, building intergroup partnerships and providing education about diversity the principles set a path toward fair treatment and equal opportunity for all residents of Riverside.

2. Spread the word. Signs line the streets in Newark, California signifying the city’s ongoing efforts to foster acceptance and inclusion.

3. Welcome newcomers. How do newcomers in your city learn about local people and places? Communities in the West Kootenay and Boundary regions of British Columbia developed welcomemap.ca, The website welcomes new immigrants to the area, and provides easier access to local information and services. Similarly, British Columbia’s North Shore developed a short video that illustrates the power of individual action in welcoming newcomers. Both efforts are part of British Columbia’s Welcoming and Inclusive Communities Initiative.

4. Adopt a resolution. Greenacres, Florida, Fort Worth, Texas and many other cities and towns have demonstrated a commitment to inclusion through the adoption of a public resolution. The National League of Cities offers a sample resolution that communities can use and build from.

On June 12th, Moki Macias and Tramunda Hodges of the Annie E. Casey Foundation will join CommunityMatters to share their experience promoting equal treatment and opportunity in community decision-making at the Foundation’s Atlanta Civic Site. Join this call to hear more ideas and strategies for building inclusive communities. You can see the notes and listen to the call here.

Fusion Partnerships Wins Social Activist Award

We hope you’ll join us in congratulating NCDD supporting/founding member Polly Riddims and the wonderful team at Fusion Partnerships on recently being awarded the Social Activist Award from the Justice Studies Association. We are proud to count Polly and her team as part of our NCDD community, and we hope you’ll take a moment to read the Fusion team’s statement on their award below. 

On Friday, May 30, 2014, Fusion Partnerships, Inc. received the Social Activist Award from the Justice Studies Association in recognition for their continuing work for justice and well-being in Baltimore. The award was presented during their 16th Annual Conference “Revisiting to Revisioning: Restorative Justice to Transformative Justice” at Towson University, May 29-31, 2014. Polly Riddims, Managing Partner and Jim Kucher, Board Chair were there to accept the award.

Through collaborative action, including fiscal sponsorship, Fusion Partnerships works to be a catalyst for social justice and peace. Fusion currently provides fiscal sponsorship and incubation support for over 65 community based program in the Baltimore region working for social change. These projects are making a difference in areas of youth development, health and nutrition, gender and LGBT issues, criminal justice reform, racial justice, and the arts.

Fusion was established in 1998 to educate and facilitate community building and collaborative efforts toward social change. Through work in the community, Fusion found many underserved grassroots community leaders with great new ideas, entrepreneurial projects and innovative strategies, struggling to do their best with little financial support and without access to the nonprofit resources. Fiscal sponsorship provides an opportunity for individuals or groups tocarry out their ideas, where they can succeed and grow, and create a space for collaborative work and sharing of resources.

Justice Studies Association (JSA) is an international not-for-profit membership association established in 1998 to:

  • Foster writing and research about, the practice of, and activism for, justice without violence;
  • Provide venues in the form of an annual conference and a journal of progressive thought to tackle pressing issues of criminal, social, restorative, and economic justice;
  • Foster a sense of community among scholars, activists and practioners of justice interested in creating a global community in which the needs of all are met; and
  • Welcome scholars from all disciplines to think and write about issues of justice from an interdisciplinary and global perspective.