What is a Public Participation Plan?URBS 300Wednesday, March 11, 2015

James Ring Scholarships• $1,000; 2 awarded

• Requirements• URBS Major• 60 units completed by end of spring semester• Not a graduating senior• Essay of 500 words on how scholarship will help

for career objectives• Attend ceremony

• Strong candidates• Cumulative GPA >3.2• URBS Major GPA >3.5• Service activity in campus or community

organizations

• Due March 13, 2015 to Prof. Henrik Minassians• http://

www.csun.edu/social-behavioral-sciences/urban-studies-planning/james-ring-scholarship-awards

California Planning Foundation Scholarship• $1,000• Excellent academic record• Senior in 2015-16 academic year• 500 word essay why planning is important to you,

how scholarship will help, short- and long-term career goals

• 2 letters of recommendation• Demonstration of financial need• Due March31, 2015 • http

://www.csun.edu/social-behavioral-sciences/urban-studies-planning/california-planning-foundation-scholarships

Railway Association of Southern California Scholarship• 2 undergraduate scholarships or $3,000• Enrolled in Fall 2015 in degree program related to

rail transportation industry• Minimum GPA of 3.0• Interest in profession in rail transportation industry• Need a letter of recommendation and personal

statement• Due March 30, 2015

• http://www.railwayassociation.org/scholarship.html

WTS: Ava Doner Memorial Undergraduate Scholarship• 2 awarded: $4,000 or $6,000• Open to women only• Due in October, awarded in November• http://www.wtsinternational.org/losangeles//schola

rships/

Association for Women in Architecture Foundation• $1,000• California resident or accredited California school• Due April 22• Application form, transcript, 2 sealed

recommendations, personal statement, portfolio• Can be senior year• http://awaplusd.org/scholarships/

Pacific Water Quality Association• “Major of Study Related to Potable Water Quality

Scholarship” • $1,000

• Proof of enrollment• Essay on usefulness of education and how money will

help• Transcripts• Application• Letter of recommendation

• http://www.pwqa.org/images/shared/scholarship_application.pdf

• Mail-in, must be received by April 1, 2015

California Transportation Foundation: Bimla G Rhinehart Memorial Scholarship

• $2,500• Dues April 1, 2015• Application, Essay, Letter of Recommendation,

and Resume• Will post to URBS website

Public Participation Planning

Decision Analysis• Clarify the decision being made• Specify the steps and schedule• Decide need and purpose of

public participation

Process Planning• Specify anticipated

accomplishments of each step• Indentify stakeholders

• Identify techniques for each step• Link techniques into a plan

Implementation Planning• Plan implementation of each

activity

Public Participation Planning

Decision Analysis• Clarify the decision being made• Specify the steps and schedule• Decide need and purpose of

public participation

Process Planning• Specify anticipated

accomplishments of each step• Indentify stakeholders

• Identify techniques for each step• Link techniques into a plan

Implementation Planning• Plan implementation of each

activity

Six Steps of Decision Analysis• Decide who needs to be involved• Clarify the decision-maker• Clarify the problem• Specify stages and their schedule• Identify constraints• Decide need for and type of public participation

Who Needs to be Involved• Identify the decision-maker• Others in your agency involved with plan• Public affairs• Governmental affairs• Graphics & layout • Publications• Contracting• Local office managers• Identification and inclusion will help increase success

(they will identify with the plan)

Clarify Decision-Maker• Difficult to identify• Low level: decision overridden• High level: not involved

• Involve them early, ask them to:• Identify potential controversial issues• Identify stakeholders who will influence senior management• Identify participants to provide credibility• Determine frequency of reviews• Identify boundaries and constraints to apply to the process• Indicate desire to review the public participation plan

• Create partnerships with those who can “veto” results

Clarify the Problem• What is the problem?• Planning team (your agency) should identify• Frequently conflicting points-of-view• Resolve conflicts to focus the plan

• Is the project needed?• Is the problem value-oriented (not technical)?• Are many technical decisions catalyzed from

public input?• Are innovative solutions allowed?

Specify Stages and Their Schedule• 5 generic decision-making steps• Define the problem• Establish evaluation criteria• Identify alternatives• Evaluate alternatives• Select a preferred alternative

• Why is this useful?• Determine appropriate public participation stages• Explain to public and get buy-in

• Time-frame with back-end date

Identify Constraints• Agency already committed• No need for public participation

• Internal opposition to public participation • Schedule or resource constraints• Constraints on release of information

Decide Need for Public Participation• Questions to consider to determine need• Is public participation required?• Is the decision likely to be controversial?• Significant impacts• Decision has uneven impacts• Impact existing vested interest or use (rights)• Already controversial issue (or tied to)

• Is there a trade-off of values?

Decide Type of Public Participation

Goal Type of Program

Better-informed public Public information program

Fulfill requirements Minimal; lose credibility if controversial issue

Opportunity for public to voice opinion, no interaction expected

Public hearing (1-way)

Support or informed consent Collaborative problem-solving

Full agreement Defined negotiation process, parties with ability to make binding commitments

Public Participation Planning

Decision Analysis• Clarify the decision being made• Specify the steps and schedule• Decide need and purpose of

public participation

Process Planning• Specify anticipated

accomplishments of each step• Indentify stakeholders

• Identify techniques for each step• Link techniques into a plan

Implementation Planning• Plan implementation of each

activity

Eight Steps of Process Planning• Decide on planning team• Identify stakeholders and potential issues• Assess controversy• Define public participation objectives• Analyze necessary information exchange• Identify special considerations• Select public participation techniques• Prepare a public participation plan

Decide on Planning Team• Group may change from decision analysis step

Identify Stakeholders and Potential Issues

• Stakeholders• Make sure none are

left out• Target the program• Assess controversy

levels

• Indicate if internal/external• Internal may have

significant power

• One identification tool• Economics• Use• Mandate• Proximity• Values/Philosophy

• Other tools• Self-identification• Prior documents• Ask interested people• Staff knowledge• Past participation in

similar issues

Determine Stakeholders Roles• Unsurprised Apathetic• Provide them with information

• Observers• Read papers and reports• Only get involved if something is upsetting

• Commenters• Too busy to be more involved than a meeting or two

• Technical Reviewers• Required assessment methods

• Active Participants• Committed• Need to include

• Co-Decision Makers• Start early so they are committed

Identify Potential Concerns• Need time to address• Resolve studies• Policy decisions• Develop informational materials

• Releasing information is time-consuming• Writing and editing• Require many internal reviews

Assess Controversy• Indicators of controversy• Significant impacts• Prior controversy• Related to major issue or power struggle• Local politics• Stakeholder group existence based on controversy

• Helps to identify timing and involvement

Define Public Participation Objectives

• What do we want from the public at the end of each stage?

Stage Objective

Define the problem

•Obtain an understanding of view of all significant interests•Identify level of public interest

Establish evaluation criteria

•Identify a complete list of possible criteria•Agree on evaluation criteria

Identify alternatives

•Develop a list of all possible alternatives

Evaluate alternatives

•Develop understanding of impacts•Assess relative merit of alternatives by interests

Select a course of action

•Determine most acceptable alternative

Analyze Information Exchange• For each public participation objective• Identify information provided to stakeholders• Identify information needed from stakeholders

Identify Special Considerations• Timing (or lack thereof)• Technical complexity• Level of interest

(numbers)• Importance to Groups• Public Awareness• Hostile or apathetic

public• Divided or united public• Geographic extent

• Outside interest• Maturity of issue• Existing institutions• Organization

Credibility• Political Sensitivity• Pre-commitment• Resources

Select Public Participation Techniques• Activities for each stage• 6 months is a critical length for no communication

Prepare a Public Participation Plan• Why develop?• Determine how public

participation effects decision-making• Send for review to achieve

buy-in• Informs management of

progress and expected controversy• Shared with stakeholders

to assess interest and commitment• Demonstrates rationale for

decision if later controversy

• What’s in it?• Description of consultations

with outside groups• Key issues and

controversies• Key affected people and

their perceive controversy• Level of interest• Decision-making process• Planned public participation• Review points for planning

process• Budget and staff resource

requirements

Public Participation Planning

Decision Analysis• Clarify the decision being made• Specify the steps and schedule• Decide need and purpose of

public participation

Process Planning• Specify anticipated

accomplishments of each step• Indentify stakeholders

• Identify techniques for each step• Link techniques into a plan

Implementation Planning• Plan implementation of each

activity

Implementation Planning• Involve many people to

make meetings work• Jointly develop the plan to

develop buy-in• Who?• Spokesperson• Technical Experts• Meeting Facilitators• Graphic Artist• Publications• Publicity and Media Relations• Mailings• Logistics

• Tricks of the Trade• Never take an elected

official by surprise• Publication approval

takes forever• Visit the meeting

room in advance• Have a technology

backup• Don’t outnumber the

public

BackgroundPreliminary ConsultationMajor IssuesIssues Management ProgramLevel of InterestInterested GroupsDecision-Making ProcessPublic Participation ActivitiesReview Points

Participatory Plan

Background• Existing landfill close in 1999 (Sunny Glen)• Groundwater contamination• 3-year temporary contract which will not be renewed

• Incinerator discussed in mid-1990s• Air quality opposition

• Approval• Department of Public Works lead agency• City Council to approve• Reviews by• Los Diablos County Solid Waste Division• California State Dept. of Health Services

Preliminary Consultation• Interagency Group

(staff)• Sunny Glen • Department of Public Works• Planning Department

• County of Los Diablos • Solid Waste Department• Planning Department• Environmental Compliance

Department

• California Department of Health Services• Engineering and

environmental consultants

• Consultation with:• City Council members• League of Women

Voters• Neighborhoods

Against Garbage (NAG)• Presidents of three

neighborhood homeowners’ associations

Major Issues• City’s credibility: old facility not safe as city claimed.• Health risk and groundwater contamination: neighbors of

any landfill will be extremely concerned.• Land use compatibility: landfill compatible with existing

and future land uses?• Stigma: threat to property values and image of their

neighborhood. • Traffic: Noise, dust, and traffic safety from movement of

trucks. Expressed as a concern for children en route to or from school.

• Reduction of waste stream: Environmental groups may oppose siting the landfill to force greater reduction of waste generated.

Issues Management Program• City’s credibility: Openness and visibility of entire process.• Health risk and groundwater contamination: Landfill impacts on

groundwater involves major technical work. To ensure credibility:• Technical advisory committee will develop scope.• Citizen advisory committee will review scope.• Members of technical advisory committee help select engineering

consultants.

• Land use compatibility: During Stage 1, the members of citizen advisory committee were taken on a field trip to a modern sanitary landfill. Subsequent trips for neighborhood leaders scheduled as needed.

• Stigma: Assess property value impacts from siting comparable facilities in other communities. Conclude by the end of Stage 1, before site identification. Discuss study design with both the citizen and technical advisory committees. If the study shows negative property value effects, mitigation to be identified and analyzed during Stage 2.

• Traffic: Traffic studies for each site. Scope and consultant selection reviewed by both the citizen and technical advisory committees.

Level of Interest• With the history of the old landfill and the

potential for neighborhoods to become organized in opposition to proposed sites, the level of citizen and group interest is expected to be very high, justifying an extensive public participation program.

Interested Groups• Neighborhood groups (notably NAG)

• Organized during the closure of the old landfill: quite active. • Each possible host neighborhood is likely to organize.

• Developers and owners of large parcels of land • Interested and concerned. • Future growth depends on solving the solid waste problem• Landfill location influences areas of future city development.

• Environmental groups • Concerned with reducing the waste stream. • Concerned with groundwater contamination. • Select site with fewest environmental impacts.

• City Council members• Potential controversy, want to be kept fully informed of all activities,

particularly within their electoral district.

Decision-Making ProcessStage Completion

Stage 1: Informing the public about the need for a landfill

December 2004

Stage 2: Identifying alternative sites April 2005

Stage 3: Evaluating alternative sites February 2006

Stage 4: Selecting a site June 2006

Stage 5: Construction planning January 2007

Public Participation Activities: Stage 1Informing the Public about Need for Landfill

• Main objective: Make the public fully aware of siting emergency. • Second objective: Gain acceptance of proposed study

methodology and public participation plan. • Public participation activities during this stage

• Newspaper insert describing need for new landfill. Signed by influential community leaders.

• Feature newspaper stories to describe problem.• Speakers’ bureau to make presentations at civic clubs, homeowners’

association meetings, and other local gatherings.• Talk shows with city council, city managers, and other recognized leaders.• Both a citizen advisory group and a technical advisory group (with

technical representatives from agencies). Hire a facilitator.• Review the study methodology and public participation plan with both

advisory groups.• Newsletter 1 describing (1) project need, (2) the establishment of the

advisory group, (3) the study methodology, and (4) the public participation plan.

Public Participation Activities: Stage 2Identifying Alternative Sites

• Technical studies to identify potential sites. • Public participation objectives

• Ensure public is satisfied all potential sites are considered • Agreement on criteria to evaluate sites.

• The public participation activities include:• Series of public workshops. Public asked to • Propose alternative sites • Review the study methodology and public participation

process.• Series of meetings with advisory groups to get agreement on

evaluation criteria.• Series of coffee klatches with homeowners’ associations to

discuss proposed evaluation criteria.• Newsletter 2, describing proposed evaluation criteria and process

and announcing a town meeting.• Town meeting for final comments on evaluation criteria.

Public Participation Activities: Stage 3Evaluating Alternative Sites

• Screening out unacceptable sites and identifying final alternatives.

• Public participation objectives • Ensure public is satisfied with alternatives screened out • Ensure public is fully informed about remaining alternatives.

• The activities are:• Series of screening workshops with both advisory groups to

screen out clearly unacceptable alternatives.• Series of meetings with homeowners’ associations to review

screening decisions.• Newspaper insert 2 to describe alternatives dropped and

remaining. Announce upcoming public workshops.• Paid advertisements to announce public workshops.• Series of public workshops to review remaining alternatives.• Newsletter 3 describing public comment on remaining

alternatives.

Public Participation Activities: Stage 4Selecting a Site

• Preferred site identified and recommended to City Council. • Primary public participation objective: Develop consensus• The public participation activities:

• Final evaluation workshop with the technical advisory group.• Evaluation workshop with the citizens’ advisory group.• Neighborhood workshop with remaining neighborhoods with potential sites.• Citizen advisory group retreat to develop recommendations for a preferred site.• Briefings with elected officials to announce the advisory group

recommendation.• Meetings with neighborhood homeowners’ associations to explain the advisory

committee recommendations.• Series of meetings with the neighborhood of proposed site to identify

mitigation.• Newsletter 4 to announce advisory group recommendation and final public

meeting.• Final public meeting to discuss the advisory group recommendation.• Newsletter 5 to announce the site and describe city council’s review process.• City council holds public hearings, as required by city regulations.• City council makes a decision.• Newsletter 6, announcing city council decision.

Public Participation Activities: Stage 5Construction Plan

• Primary public involvement objective: Finalize mitigation measures and minimize construction issues.

• Public participation activities:• Series of neighborhood coffee klatches to discuss construction process and

to identify neighborhood issues.• New advisory group consisting, primarily of neighbors plus one or two

members from previous advisory groups.• Work with the new advisory group to develop alternative approaches for

addressing neighborhood concerns and reducing construction impacts.• Handout describing approaches to addressing neighborhood concerns and

inviting people to a series of neighborhood meetings.• Series of neighborhood meetings to get neighborhood reactions to

approaches for reducing construction impacts.• Work with the neighborhood advisory group to evaluate the alternative

approaches for reducing construction impacts, and develop a proposed plan.

• Handout summarizing the proposed plan, and distribute it along with an invitation to a final round of meetings.

• Series of neighborhood meetings to review proposed plan.• Brochure describing the plan to minimize constructions impacts, and mail it

to every home in the neighborhood.

Review Points• Meeting to review plan• End of Stage 1 (Dec 2004)• End of Stage 2 (April 2005)• End of Stage 3 (Feb 2006)

Assignment for Monday

Background and Preliminary Consultation &Powerpoint Introduction

• Background and Preliminary Consultation• What is the history of this project or area?• Identify why it is important for the public participation

plan• Should be short and succinct but address all relevant

inssues

• Powerpoint Presentation• 3-minutes long• Present the topic and background• Get relevant pictures and maps to show location and

provide information