L.A.COMMUNITY COUNCILS: REFLECTIONS OF AN I.E.A.

Another article in a series that we have posted tracking the progress of the Neighborhood Councils experiment in participatory democracy in in Los Angeles. - Editor

Private Memoirs of an IEA

By Stephen Box
Source: http://www.citywatchla.com/content/view/1732/


(Note: Neighborhood Council elections are now managed and overseen by the City Clerk. Independent Election Administrators are no longer a part of the NC election process.)

This past Saturday marked the end of my tour of duty as an Independent Election Administrator charged with supervising Neighborhood Council elections throughout the City of Los Angeles. My final election was held in Chatsworth, where stakeholders have traditionally been identified as those who "Live, work, own property or board a horse." The week prior, I was in Coastal San Pedro where stakeholders have traditionally been identified as those who "Live, work, own property or dock a boat." Such is the diversity of Los Angeles. Of course all of that changed when our City Council imposed the new "Live, work, own property or whatever" stakeholder status on Neighborhood Councils and it was then that I knew the end was nigh.

Through it all, I learned a great deal from those I've worked with, encountering along the way a multitude of people with unique talents and perspectives who challenged me to be innovative in making the election process relevant to the needs of their local community.

I've also been humbled as I watched newly immigrated senior citizens listen patiently as a translator explained how to use a ballot, all as they prepared to vote for the first time in their lives. I listened to a candidate explain to a Forum audience that he came from a country that held no elections. Now that he was here, he felt that it was his duty to run. These experiences served to remind me that Neighborhood Council elections are a significant and important step into the world of participatory democracy.

As an IEA, I've been run ragged and overwhelmed with voters. I've sat in an empty room, bored and holding an empty ballot box, waiting for the day to end. I've been yelled at and cursed and I've been hugged and thanked and made to feel like family.

I've conducted elections in museums, churches, community centers, schools, a train station and even the Farmer's Market. I've even held meetings in parking garages and I’ve held two elections on the sidewalk after getting locked out by LAUSD. Along the way, I was perpetually reminded that it was never the comfort of the facility but it was always the spirit of the people that made for a successful election.

In spite of the fact that Los Angeles is the second largest city in the country, I now think of LA as a collection of small towns, NC sized, complete with unique character, personality, needs and desires. It's my experience that it was the ability of NC's to make unique the Neighborhood Council experience, tailoring the bylaws and election procedures to their needs and philosophy, that was key to creating ownership and responsibility.

While critics claim that the old system of elections allowed for too much variation, deviation and even failure, I counter with this: True democracy is a guarantee of process, not of result. Granted, it allows for failure but it also allows for success. Either way, the results belong to the participants and that is the essence of participatory democracy.

For all of the pontificating and posturing as the City Council weighed in on the Neighborhood Councils and revised the DNA of the system, I never encountered a City Councilmember at an NC election. Perhaps they think it inappropriate to meddle in NC politics and they might have a point, a good point.

Still, it would have been nice to see them drive by, drop off a box of Krispy Kremes and thank the volunteers. After all, this is where the business of the people takes place.

As this era fades, I'm optimistic for the Neighborhood Council system, not because of the recent changes in process but because of the people I've met, the friends I've made and the passion and enthusiasm I've encountered along the way.

To the neighborhood councils I've worked with, thanks for the ride!

(Stephen Box served as an Independent Election Administrator for a number of years. Box writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@thirdeyecreative.netThis email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it ) ◘

CityWatch
Vol 6 Issue 90
Pub: Nov 8, 2008

L.A. NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS: PLANNING THE CONGRESS - A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE

Another in a series of articles we have posted on the L.A. niegborhood councils and the evolution of the participatory governance they hope to bring to the City of Los Angeles. - Editor



Planning the Congress: A Different Perspective

By Guy Leemhuis
Source: http://www.citywatchla.com/content/view/1493/

I have been involved in this wonderful experience in participatory democracy:-neighborhood councils for the past seven years.

I remember the first Congress of Neighborhoods. It was very exciting to have an opportunity to meet and network with fellow volunteer stakeholders with their hearts and minds focused on making a better Los Angeles and ensuring that the voice of its people was heard. The framework for the neighborhood council system is one from which Angelenos can draw pride.

However, the work it has taken, and continues to take, in making this bold experience a continuing reality takes, time, effort and assertiveness and a healthy dose of public relations skills.

It is no easy task soliciting input from 90 diverse neighborhood councils with a stakeholder base with even more diversity of perspectives. That may be why there is not one General Manager of Department of Neighborhood Empowerment that has had an easy time wrangling with how to ensure the Congress of Neighborhoods is neighborhood council driven.

Although many of us at various times over the past years have requested, or even demanded, more control in the planning of the Congress, there has always been controversy over the transparency of its planning and more importantly its purpose.

To date, there is not consensus among the 90 neighborhood councils on what the purpose of the Congress of Neighborhoods is. I certainly have given my input over the years and have not always been pleased with the result. However, I have learned that we must continue to remain at the table and bring forth ideas and work with the City, DONE and the Mayor's office if we are to yield a working solution.

Most of the good people within the neighborhood council system are talented, energetic, and hard working. They are also volunteers, many of whom have a day job or two. It is imperative that DONE play a significant role in assisting neighborhood councils in making Congress of Neighborhoods a reality.

I recently had the opportunity to partner in the planning and development of the first ever regional Congress of Neighborhoods which focused on issues in South Los Angeles. I found the process in working with DONE's new General Manager and staff to be one that was truly collaborative. They learned a lot from those of us from neighborhood councils.

I also realized that pulling off a successful Congress takes consistency of effort from beginning to end.

The feedback from neighborhood council members attending that event was that for many it was the best congress they have ever attended. I believe it was due to the fact that it was issue and outcome oriented. I hope that this will be something to replicate in other regions and city-wide congresses.

At the recent planning meeting for the city-wide Congress coming in October, much time and energy was spent by a few individuals giving some constructive feedback on planning of the Congress. Those in attendance were encouraged to react to a draft framework for the Congress. I did not feel like it was written in stone and I encourage folks to continue to give input.

Although I agree time and place was not decided by the group, I don't ever recall that being left to neighborhood councils before. In fact the Los Angeles Convention center has been used almost exclusively in prior years.

The biggest challenge was reaching consensus. A planning group was formed per the recommendations from the group that very night. Many folks liked the idea of tackling issues important to various regions throughout the city. Much of the agenda of the Congress has yet to be formed.

I hope that neighborhood council members will not boycott (as has been suggested) a process that quite frankly is currently ours to design in more ways than ever before. At the end of the day, the challenge is how do neighborhood councils work together and reach consensus on these important issues.

Empowerment of our communities is an awesome responsibility. I hope we can create positive energy to make this Congress and future ones something meaningful for all neighborhood councils. I plan to stay engaged in the process and hope others will do the same.

(Guy Leemhius is an attorney, neighborhood council activist and served on the NC Review Commission. Leemhius is an occasional contributor to CityWatch.) ◘

CityWatch
Vol 6 Issue 64
Pub: Aug 8, 2008

L.A. NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS: COUNCIL MEMBERS MUST BE INCLUDED IN POLICY DECISIONS

The following post is another in a series of articles we have posted about the evolution of the Neighborhood Council system in the city of Los Angeles. This experiment in participatory democracy seems typical of many in that at first it is often hard for those involved to shed the habits of past governing models and truly entrust the people with decision making power. This article rightfully calls for more popular involvement in overall policy decisions on the functioning of the councils. - Editor

Time for the Commission to Get Out of the Dark

By Greg Nelson

Source: http://www.citywatchla.com/content/view/1360/

I’ve been making a mistake by stating that our neighborhood council system is based upon a belief by its founders that the goal is to encourage the spread of “participatory democracy.”

I have come to realize that this term leaves open an opportunity for a very broad interpretation by those who resist change in the culture of City Hall. The elitists who can’t bring themselves to accept that better decisions can result from the public’s involvement in government. It saddens me to read the policy that the Board of Neighborhood Commissioners enacted that describes how it will adopt policies.

The commission forms committees of its members that discuss specific issues in private, present them at a commission meeting, and give the public usually a couple of weeks to send in their written comments or trek to its meeting and speak for three minutes, which never occurs at the start of the meeting.

The flaws in this approach are that (1) it is “business as usual”, (2) it is critically important to be part of the drafting process, and (3) the comments, written or verbal, are routinely ignored. There is no exchange of information and ideas. The expertise of the neighborhood council members, which often exceeds that of commissioners, is shunned.

A more recent example occurred last week.

The Department of Neighborhood Empowerment, the other agency created to lead the culture change, released a nine-page report on proposed and newly enacted changes to the Neighborhood Council Funding System. The report explained that there would be a 90-day public comment period.

This report and the process are laced with still more flaws.

Neighborhood councils and the public were not part of the drafting of the report. The collective wisdom of the councils could have nixed some bad ideas, noted that some proposed solutions were already in place, and suggested better answers.

But it is extremely difficult for neighborhood council members and the public to provide meaningful comments, regardless of the length of the public comment period, without being provided an explanation of the problem that everyone is trying to solve.

For instance, is it a systemic problem, or one of those far-to-common bureaucratic over-reactions to an isolated problem?

We know that the report was triggered by the fact that at least one neighborhood council president misused some of his council’s funds. We don’t know whether better oversight by those in charge should have caught the problem early on.

We aren’t told how the department will be able to provide the promised greater level of scrutiny when it admittedly doesn’t have enough people to properly monitor the program now, and when half of the program’s staff positions will soon be vacant during a time when the city’s hiring freeze may make it impossible to fill the vacancies.

More correctly, it needs to be said that our neighborhood council system is about promoting “deliberative democracy.”

When City Hall’s community planners hold public meetings with everyone sitting in a circle to discuss the reshaping of a community plan, they are all practicing a form of deliberative democracy. All views are respected, and value is added to the product that will be presented for a final decision.

When BONC and DONE design rules while shut away from the public, they are saying that they find little value in the public’s involvement. They are ignoring the core value that created them. And they are doing nothing to encourage other city agencies to embrace the deliberative democracy concept.

It’s not too late. During the next 90 days, town hall meetings could be held with interested neighborhood council leaders and treasurers. It all needs to begin with the DONE publicly defining the problem.

But it may not happen at all unless neighborhood councils stand up for the reason they were created.

(Greg Nelson participated in the birth and development of the LA Neighborhood Council system and served as the General Manager of the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment. Nelson now provides news and issues analysis to CityWatch.) You can reach Greg Nelson at gregn213@cox.netThis email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it ◘

CityWatch
Vol 6 Issue 52
Pub: June 27, 2008

NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS IN LOS ANGELES: A MIDTERM STATUS REPORT

The following report is an evaluation of the progress of the Neighborhood Councils established in the city of Los Angeles beginning in 1999 in order to alow more citizen participation in municipal government and planning. Click on the link below to read the full report, and visit the D.O.N.E. (Department of Nieghborhood Empowerment) website for more information. - Editor

NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS IN LOS ANGELES: A MIDTERM STATUS REPORT

Urban Initiative Policy Brief

By Juliet Musso, Christopher Weare, Terry L. Cooper

Source: http://urban.usc.edu/main_doc/downloads/nc_midterm.pdf

Reporting on a study supported by the James Irvine Foundation, the National Science Foundation, the USC School of Policy, Planning, and Development, and the USC Urban Initiative

In June 1999, Los Angeles voters enacted charter provisions creating a citywide system of Neighborhood Councils (NCs). The charter states that the broad goal of the reform is “to promote more citizen participation in government and make government more responsive to local needs.” Three years have passed since the City Council approved a plan for charter implementation, and the 2006 charter-mandated review of the Neighborhood Council system is approaching.

Other cities required many years to implement fully a Neighborhood Council system, suggesting that the Los Angeles system is still in a formative stage. This briefing considers whether midstream corrections are in order, and suggests benchmarks against which to evaluate outcomes over time.2 The criteria applied in this evaluation include democratic legitimacy, the extent to which NCs provide meaningful input on city decisions (relevance), and the extent to which NCs appear to have the potential to influence City policies and develop relationships that bring together diverse groups within and across communities.

We find that:

• Democratic legitimacy requires policy reforms to ensure that Council elections are fair and inclusive:


• Policy relevance necessitates development of avenues for systematic participation in City governance;


• While it is too early to evaluate their long-term input, we suggest several benchmarks, including the quality of NC activities and impacts, the development of social and political relationships, and the impact of the system on political efficacy and attitudes toward City government.

To Read the full report click HERE...

See also the D.O.N.E. website:

http://www.lacityneighborhoods.com/page2.cfm?doc=home