Local Government Programming In-service October 22 & 23, 2014

1. Local Government Programming In-serviceOctober 22 & 23, 2014 Deliberative Governance:Civil Discourse and Public Engagement Presented by Bill Rizzo Professor & Local Government Specialist UWEX Local Government Center

2. Toward More Deliberative Local Government:A Theory of Change • To be democratic, local government must be representative. • To be representative, local government must be well-informed. • To be well-informed, local government must be deliberative. • To be deliberative, local government must be collaborative. • To be collaborative, the governance environment must be civil.

3. What is ‘deliberative governance?’ Deliberative governance is a set of three topics dealing with how communities make decisions, address local issues, meet local needs, and solve local problems. It is, therefore, not just a core local government topic but a core community development topic.

4. Three Topics • Civility and Civil Discourse • Public Engagement • Deliberative Process

5. Civility • Tolerance • Respectful Interaction • Listening • Compromise

6. Civil Dialogue Civility – Tolerance, Respectful Interaction, Listening, Compromise Dialogue – An exchange of ideas and opinions. (Merriam-Webster Dictionary) Civil Dialogue – A respectful exchange of views during which participants listen to better understand others’ perspectives and seek solutions through compromise and the pursuit of common ground.

7. Civility is not a new idea in government. • Absent a civil environment, effective public engagement is virtually impossible. • The public is frustrated with the lack of civility in government. • Civility is intentional; a civil governance environment can be built and sustained.

8. Public Engagement… …what local officials do to find out what their constituents think, feel, believe, and value…what concerns them…relative to a local issue, problem or decision.

9. Purposes of Public Participation(IAP2) • To inform the public; • To consult the public; • To involve the public; • To collaborate with the public; • To empower the public

10. Public Engagement Principles(IAP2) • Those affected by a decision are involved in the decision-making process. • The public's contribution will influence the decision. • Decision-makers communicate to participants how their input affected the decision. • Recognizes and communicates the needs and interests of all participants, including decision makers.  

11. Public Engagement Challenges in Local Government • Differing views of representative democracy; • Local government culture, process, and history; • Public attitudes toward involvement; • The politicization of government

12. Deliberative Engagement • Engagement activities in which the public collaborates with local officials to define an issue and generate solution and policy ideas to address it. • Two-step process: • Issue Naming & Framing • Public Deliberation

13. Issue Naming & Framing Issue Naming - What is the problem we need to talk about? Issue Framing- What are the critical options and drawbacks are for deciding what to do about that problem?

14. Done through a representative team of citizens; • Involves learning about the issue and how citizens feel about it? • Addresses three questions: • What concerns you about this issue? • Given those concerns, what would you or others do about it? • If that worked to ease your concern, what are the downsides or trade-offs we might then have to accept? • Produces an Issue Guidefor public deliberation step.

15. When to Name & Frame an Issue • With “wicked” problems; • Contentious issue; • When an issue affects most or all of a community; • Issue keeps coming back…eludes resolution; • Do NOT use with routine issues or issues that can be resolved using education, technology, or technical information.

16. Public Deliberation • Facilitated, structured public events where a representative collection of citizens meet to talk about and evaluate each alternative generated by a Naming & Framing team. Three questions are addressed: • What actions should be taken to implement this alternative? • What are the advantages of this alternative? • What are the tradeoffs of this alternative? • May produce preferred alternative/recommendation.

17. Provides local officials with good information to support decision-making; • Build a community’s ‘deliberative capacity:’ • Promotes sustainable decisions; • Helpful for addressing difficult, stubborn issues.

18. Intended Outcomes & Impacts(the “so what” question) • Increase community problem-solving capacity; • Minimize transaction & opportunity costs; • Change the culture & cycle of disengagement; • Produce more supportable, sustainable policies;

19. Audience Wants and Needs • When and how to engage; • Tools and strategies for engagement planning and implementation • Reducing or intervening in conflict associated with uncivil or disruptive behavior by citizens and officials; • How to increase citizen involvement; • Core concepts and principles.

20. Programming Opportunities • Base concepts education • Public engagement planning • Tools & resources • Engaging local officials

21. Resources • My page on the LGC website (http://lgc.uwex.edu/dg/index.html) • LGC Public Engagement Planning Tool • IAP2 Spectrum • IAP2 Toolbox • Clear Vision Case Study

22. Scholarship Opportunities • Case studies, exemplars; • Impact measurement; • Examine attitudes of local officials toward civility, civil dialogue, public engagement, and deliberative process and techniques. • Training and education guides.

23. Local Government Programming In-serviceOctober 22 & 23, 2014 Deliberative Governance:Civil Discourse and Public Engagement Presented by Bill Rizzo Professor & Local Government Specialist UWEX Local Government Center