View
121
Download
3
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Turning Tough Around: Skills for Managing Critics AICP CM 1.5 Critics. Tough crowds. We've all faced them! Imagine turning those critics into supporters -- or at least respectful, constructive participants in your projects. Learn how to set up your team for success by carefully structuring meetings and messages. Explore ways to manage difficult crowds and sticky situations while still building long-term relationships and agency credibility. Hear stories and strategies from people who've survived -- and even thrive on -- divisive public processes. Moderator: Allison Brooks, Director, Bay Area Joint Policy Center, Oakland, California Ken Snyder, CEO/President, PlaceMatters, Denver, Colorado David A Goldberg, Communications Director, Transportation For America, Washington, DC Salima (Sam) O'Connell, Public Involvement Manager, Metro Transit, St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Citation preview
Turning Tough Around: Skills for Managing Critics
It starts with framing and shared values
David GoldbergRail-Volution 2014
2
Lessons learned from surveys and focus group research, including…
• National surveys of voters conducted by T4America, the Rockefeller Foundation, NRDC and Ford Foundation 2010-2013
• Focus group research by T4America 2010-11• Millennials poll by Rockefeller and T4America
2014• State and Regional Surveys conducted in
Pennsylvania, Colorado, Oregon, Minnesota, Ohio, New Jersey and the Atlanta metro area.
3
4
In focus groups, voters across the political spectrum describe the “future of transportation” as one in which
public transportation plays a more prominent role.
“There will be trains everywhere..terminals where you
can get everything.” – Suburban Atlanta Democrat
“(I see) sleek, fast, quiet trains covering wide distances, going through the
countryside.” – Suburban Detroit swing voter
“There will be friendlier neighborhoods where you could
walk…not disconnected streets.” - Suburban Denver swing voter
“(Public transportation) would be a well oiled machine that would work smoothly and be reliable…you would
arrive when you’re supposed to.” – Suburban Atlanta Democrat
“If you build it, they will come. (People) will use it.”
– Richmond Republican woman
5
Only one in five Americans backs building new roads as the best solution for traffic.
2012 National Voter Survey for NRDC
201220092007
201220092007
201220092007
201220092007
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
42%47%
49%
21%25%26%
20%20%21%
17%8%
4%
Which of the following proposals is the best long-term solution to reducing traffic in your area?
Improving public transportation
Developing communities where people do not have to drive as
much
Building new roads
All/None/DK/NA
7
56%
31%
27%
22%
20%
19%
9%
16%
8%
10%
7%
9%
4% Ranked by % Combined Choice
Safer streets for our communities and children
More transportation options
Less money spent out-of-pocket on transportation
A faster commute to/from work
Less time spent in the car
High speed inter-city travel
More predictable travel times
First Choice – 42%
By a significant margin, Americans say safer streets should be the primary objective of increased
infrastructure investment.
8
Demographic Groups Safer Streets
More Options
Spend Less
Money
Faster Commute
Less Time In
Car
High Speed Travel
Men 46% 32% 27% 22% 23% 22%
Women 65% 30% 26% 22% 18% 16%
Urban Residents 50% 34% 22% 24% 19% 24%
Suburbanites 56% 30% 26% 23% 22% 18%
Rural Residents 64% 28% 34% 14% 17% 14%
Car Commuters 53% 33% 28% 26% 21% 21%
Non-Car Commuters 56% 39% 22% 25% 10% 28%
Do NOT Commute 58% 28% 26% 17% 21% 16%
And, while there are some percentage differences among demographic groups, safety still ranks at the
top of everyone’s list.
10
Americans believe expanding options is a key to our future.
53%
48%
85%
79%
Total Agree Column2
The United States would benefit from an expanded and improved public transportation
system, such as rail and buses.
In order for the United States to remain the world’s top economic superpower we need to
modernize our transportation infrastructure and keep it up to date.
*Data from a Jan/Feb 2011 Hart Research/Public Opinion Strategies Poll
11
Americans do not feel they have options now, but would like them.
73%66%
23%32%
Agree Disagree
Strongly Agree42%
Strongly Agree56%
Strongly Disagre
e17%
Transportation Statements
*Data from a Smart Growth America survey conducted February 27-March 2, 2010
12
Look at what people told us are the realities
of driving now.
“Trust me. I hate driving.”
“It is affecting my quality of life. We have all knocked our head
on the steering wheel…(driving in traffic congestion) is making
life really unpleasant.”
13
But keep in mind, this is an OPTION, not a replacement. Few in our focus groups can even imagine giving up having a car or multiple cars.
Having a car is too expensive and too much trouble I want to live where I
don’t need one as much.
*Data from a Ford Foundation survey conducted by Harris Interactive 4th quarter, 2010.
1414
Transportation Messages
Agree
Infrastructure spending on roads, trains, and buses create jobs and help the economy get stronger. 75%
The federal government should stop focusing only on car-oriented systems, and start balancing the funding more toward public transportation. 68%
We need to rethink the way we develop housing and transportation in this region. The way we have been doing it isn’t working for most people. 66%
Bikeways, sidewalks, and trails are as important as any other kinds of transportation routes. 64%
I would prefer to live in a lively town center or downtown area if it was safer and more affordable than it is now. 45%
Having a car is too expensive and too much trouble. I want to live where I don’t need one as much. 34%
© Ford Foundation, 2010. Poll conducted by Harris Interactive 4th Qt 2010
15
Another formulation of this message tested late last year was the second
strongest tested.
*Data from a Smart Growth America survey conducted November 16-22, 2010
Investing in transit options can reduce the number of miles driven in a community by as much as 58%. If we reduce the number of miles we drive, we’ll also reduce our dependence on oil.
47%Very
Convincing
17
In national polling the concept of “fix it” tests well.
Establishing a “fix-it-first” policy that focuses, as much as possible, on
maintaining our existing networks of roads, bridges, and public
transportation systems before building new ones.
49% 86%
Total Agree Column2
*Data from a Jan/Feb 2011 Hart Research/Public Opinion Strategies Poll
18
In the focus groups, voters clearly state that “fix it” to them should mean “fixing how people get
around” their communities, not just filling pot holes.
• “You’ve got to fix the pot holes, sink holes, and crumbling bridges. It’s a danger.”
• “But, we need to get bigger and bolder, too. We want to gamble on a huge benefit.”
• “We need to extend Marta, so it has more routes, make it accessible, so you could really use the system.”
• “We need a just do it attitude.”-Atlanta respondents discussing a ‘fix it” approach to transportation
19
Voters FAVOR maintaining existing infrastructure and funding public transportation
OVER building new roads
*Data from a Smart Growth America survey conducted November 16-22, 2010
Which one of these do you feel should be the top priority as your state makes its plans for how best to use its transportation funding in 2011?
Which one of these do you feel should be the top priority as your state makes its plans for how best to use its transportation funding in 2011?
This table has been ranked by the highest percentage Percent
Maintaining and repairing roads, highways, freeways, and bridges 51%Expanding and improving bus, rail, van service, biking, walking, and other transportation choices 33%Expanding and building new roads, highways, freeways, and bridges 16%
21
In the focus groups, we often run into a roadblock in imagination about how new options could alter their current
world experience.
• “Realistically, people will use their cars.”• “I would never use it, so I don’t know why I should pay
for it.”
24
“As I read each one, please tell me whether you agree or disagree with that particular statement. Transportation infrastructure funding decisions are based
more on politics than on need.”
Key Sub-Groups Strongly Agree
Men 62%
Women 62%
Urban Residents 58%
Suburbanites 67%
Rural Residents 54%
Car Commuters 60%
Non-Car Commuters 55%
Do NOT Commute 65%
Total Agree85%
Total Disagree
13%
Don't Know 2%
62% Strongly
Agree
Nearly everyone agrees that transportation funding decisions are politically driven.
*Data from a July 2009 Greenberg/Public Opinion Strategies Poll
25
Here are some statements made by those who oppose any change in Colorado’s system for transportation funding. For each statement, tell me whether it is very convincing, somewhat
convincing, or not very convincing argument.Q24: Existing transportation revenues would be sufficient if spent more
efficiently and with less waste.
Denver Arapahoe, Douglas, Jefferson
Adams, Broomfield, Boulder
Greeley, Ft. Collins Colorado Springs, Pueblo
Western slope, plains0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80% 77% 77% 78% 79%76% 78%
21% 22%18% 18%
21% 19%
1% 1%4% 2% 2% 3%
Convincing Not Convincing Unsure
26
AccountableGovernment officials must be held accountable for how our transportation tax dollars are spent. We cannot afford to build more roads, while existing roads are in disrepair.IncomeExpanding and improving our transportation options will help those of poor or modest incomes or those without cars have a way to get to their jobs, training programs or school.HealthA better network of roads and trails that are safe for walking and bicycling would help Americans stay active and healthy. Kids could walk or bike to school, families and workers would have better transportation options, and those who choose to walk or bicycle can be healthier.ProgressIt has been 50 years since government really looked at our transportation needs. We need our leaders to have their eyes on the future and invest in modern transportation options, including public transportation. We cannot rely on yesterday’s transportation options in our 21st century economy.
52%
48%
44%
41%
% Very Convincing
26
84%
85%
81%
81%
% Total Convincing
Americans over-estimate what their state spends on public transportation…
If you had to guess, what proportion of every dollar your state spends on transportation would you estimate currently goes to improving and maintaining public transportation – like buses or trains?
0-10%11-20%21-30%31-40%41-50%51-60%61-70%71-80%81-90%
91-100%
DK/NA/Ref0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
35%14%
8%3%3%
1%1%1%
0%0%
36%
16.2%Average amount among those offering an opinion
2012 National Voter Survey for NRDC
…and still would like that proportion nearly doubled.
If you were in charge of your state’s transportation budget, what proportion of every dollar would you spend on improving and maintaining public transportation – like buses or trains?
0-10%11-20%21-30%31-40%41-50%51-60%61-70%71-80%81-90%
91-100%
DK/NA/Ref0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
21%11%11%
6%12%
2%1%1%
0%1%
34%
28.1%Average amount among those offering an opinion
2012 National Voter Survey for NRDC
However, even after citizens hear how little their state actually takes in in gas taxes, they remain averse to an increase.
How acceptable would you find a proposal to increase gas taxes by $.05 per gallon to fund improvements to roads, highways and public transit in your state?
Very acceptable
Somewhat acceptable
Not too acceptable
Not at all acceptable
DK/NA
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
18%
21%
18%
39%
4%
TotalNot Too/At All Acceptable57%
TotalAcceptable39%
2012 National Voter Survey for NRDC
For focus group participants a gas tax was a clear non-starter.
The immediate and overwhelmingly negative reaction to a gas tax – evident also in recent polling – cannot be over-stated.
One Philadelphia area woman burst out “Oh dear God!” upon being queried about a gas tax, and the immediate reaction was immediate and negative across all the groups.
“There’s no alternative to gas at the moment. Once you have this beautiful transportation infrastructure in place and driving is purely
optional, then you could put a significant tax on [gas]. But for now there’s no choice.” - Raleigh
male
There was a strong sense that the timing for a gas tax increase is wrong -- when the price of gas is already so high and many feel it will go higher.
32
First of all, Americans are saying that higher gas prices are here to stay.
Rising Gasoline Prices
“Here are a series of events that have occurred recently. For each one please tell me whether you see this as an isolated event that is happening at this time or part of a larger
change that will continue for some time to come?”
*Data from an NBC/WSJ survey conducted March 31-April 4, 2011.
Isolated/Happening At This Time
Larger Change/Will Continue
Voters have far more confidence in local government than state or federal government.
Voters will support public spending that will benefit them in tangible, local ways.
Most voters view transportation infrastructure as an economic investment.
So why did 3/4 of transit funding measures pass last November?
Though concerned about the economy, voters are becoming more confident about their personal financial situation.
Concern about tax rates remains relatively low.
Stress the economic benefits of the measure in terms of job creation – both direct and indirect.
Make low per-household costs clear.
Highlight specific, flagship projects that are locally important.
Strategies for Local Revenue Success
Emphasize that funds will be spent locally – not at the state level.
Highlight fiscal accountability provisions – audits, oversight, public disclosure, sunset provisions, etc.
Data Collected by NALEO
Latinos, for example. Though their voting rate has lagged their population share, it is growing dramatically.
49% of voters of color report using transit, biking or carpooling in the past month, compared to 32% of whites.
51% of voters of color support increasing transit as the best solution to traffic, compared to 41% of whites
84% of voters of color support their local government investing more to improve transit – including buses, trains, and light rail – compared to 65% of whites
This is good news for transportation, as communities of color evidence stronger support for public transportation.
2012 National Voter Survey for NRDC
MetLife Market Institute
Millennials are changing the equation: The largest cohort, and most diverse
25%
All others
75%
Share of Population
White60%
His-panic19%
African-American
14%
Asian/
Pa-cific Is-
lan-der4%
Other3%
Racial Distribution
Millennial
Millennials are more likely than others to want more transit and less driving, but are less likely to say it is not convenient.
2012 National Voter Survey for NRDC
Statement % Agree – All Voters
% Agree – Millennials
My community would benefit from an expanded and improved public transportation system, such as rail and buses.
64% 71%
I would like to spend less time in my car. 55% 66%
I would like to use public transportation more often, but it is not convenient to or available from my home or work.
61% 53%
Millennials changing the equation4 in 5 want to live where they have a variety of options to get to jobs, school or daily needs;
3 in 4 say it is likely they will live in a place where they don’t need a carApr 2014 survey Rockefeller Foundation and Transportation for America • 18-34 year olds• 10 U.S. cities (Chicago, NY, San Francisco, Charlotte, Denver, LA,
Minneapolis, Nashville, Indianapolis, Tampa-St. Petersburg• 95% confidence with a ±3.7% margin of error
Millennials changing the equation
66% say that access to high quality public transportation is one of the top three criteria for deciding where to live next.
Apr 2014 survey Rockefeller Foundation and Transportation for America • 18-34 year olds• 10 U.S. cities (Chicago, NY, San Francisco, Charlotte, Denver, LA,
Minneapolis, Nashville, Indianapolis, Tampa-St. Petersburg• 95% confidence with a ±3.7% margin of error
Turning Tough Around: Skills for Managing Critics
David Goldbergdgoldberg@T4America.org
THANK YOU!
45
Turning Tough Around:Skills for Managing Critics
Sam O’Connell, AICPRail-Volution 2014
Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota
46
Transit Projects Are Complex• 5 Cities, 1 County• 17 new stations• 16 miles of track
47
• Project Elements Guideway Stations and station access Park and ride facilities Pedestrian/bike facilities Connecting bus facilities Roadway facilities Operation and maintenance facilities System elements Public space/art Landscaping
Transit Projects Are Complex
48
Pre-2013: Feasibility Studies, Alternatives Analysis, Federal and State Environmental Documentation
•Project Development
2013•M
unicipal Consent
2014
•Engineering, Supplemental DEIS, Final EIS
2015
•Full Funding Grant Agreement
2016
•Heavy Construction
2016-18
•Passenger Operations
2019
Transit Projects Take Time
49
Transit Projects Engage Many Stakeholders
Cargill
50
Many, Many, Stakeholders
51
Earning and Keeping Public Trust
• Transparent
• Responsive
• Accountable
• Collaborative
52
Fail to Plan, Plan to Fail
• Elements you control You
Your purpose
Your setting
Your resources
53
You
• Center yourself
Stance
Voice
Gestures
Eye Contact
54
Your Purpose
• Purpose
• Goals
• Outcomes
• Participant’s Goals
55
Your Setting
• Location
• Layout
• Format
• Time
56
Your Resources
• Staff
• Research
• Materials/Equipment
• Lifelines:• Open ended questions• Meeting agenda• Flip charts• Facilitator• Community representative
57
Tough Crowds: Moving Forward
• Way-off topic rants
• Audience does not engage
• Your facts, their facts
• Managing agenda and time
• Real threat to safety and security
58
More Information
Online:
www.SWLRT.org
Email:
sam.oconnell@metrotransit.org
Twitter:
www.twitter.com/southwestlrt
PlaceMatters is a non-profit think tank for civic engagement and process in planning.
Today’s Topics
What is participation? Turning Tough Around
– Key concerns raised today– Tactics used to disrupt meetings and processes– Tactical and authentic responses– Key ingredients of a low conflict meeting
Communicating with complexity
What is participation?
Public engagement is any process that involves the public in decision-making
Includes the promise that the public’s contribution will influence the decision
Why bother?
Democratic principles
Mutual learning
Better decisions
Greater buy-in to final decision
Enhanced relationships, social
capacity
Core principles
Clearly define roles, responsibilities and expectations (e.g. observers, reviewers, advisors, deciders)
Consider the needs and interests of all participants, including decision-makers
Provide the information needed to participate in a meaningful way
Communicate to how input will be used, and how it affected the final decision
Key considerations
What is the decision to be made? Who makes the decision? Who has a stake in the outcome of
the decision?
Concerns and interests that can be
addressed in this process
Universe of concerns and interests important to various stakeholders
Key considerations How will decisions be made Different roles in the process
inform consult involve collaborate empower
Civic Engagement Spectrum
Source: International Association for Public Participation
i nfl uence ove r dec i s i ons
http://www.iap2.org/
Public participation goal
impart informationseek information or feedbackengage as participantswork as partnersplace final decision-making in the hands of the public
InformConsultInvolve
Collaborate
Empower
The participation promise
we will keep you informed
we will implement what you decide
InformConsultInvolve
Collaborate
Empower
The participation promise
we will work with you to ensure your concerns and aspirations are reflected in the alternatives developed
InformConsultInvolve
Collaborate
Empower
The art and science of engagement
Selecting the right level of engagement How much can the stakeholder
influence the decision? What input from stakeholders will
help inform the decision? What resources are available? At what stage in the process will
input be most helpful?
Selecting the right level of engagement (example)
Define problem
Gather info
Establish
criteria
Develop options
Evaluate Decide
Inform X X
Consult X X
Involve X
Collaborate X
Empower
Selecting the right set of tools
Level of engagement
Cost/benefit analysis
Tailored to multiple audiences
Layered opportunities to engage
Keeping the participation promise in the face of disruption
Dynamics of Group Decision Making
NEWTOPIC
DECISIONPOINT
DIVERGENT THINKING CONVERGENT THINKING
FAMILIAROPINIONS
DIVERSE PERSPECTIVES
✓GROAN
ZONE
DIV
ER
SIT
Y O
F ID
EA
S
TIME
From: Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory Decision-Making
Turning Tough Around
Examples of disruption tied to concern
Discussion points
What tactics are being used to disrupt meetings?
What are some genuine concerns being raised?
For the organizer, what worked and what could have been done differently?
Putting yourself in the shoes of others, what might be some appropriate changes to process to accommodate different opinions?
Lessons learned
A few things to know about Agenda 21
Understanding the history behind concerns
Process & timing can save or kill a meeting
Responding accordingly– Preparations ahead of time– Things to do at the public meeting– What worked and areas for
improvement
Be Prepared
Know what is being said on local blogs, local meetings, and in the media
Find out if there have already been meetings with elected officials, public or private, with disruptions or polarized confrontations
If so, what are some of the key concerns?
Building Local Constituencies
Recruit people what are respected in the community for having balanced opinions to help with key components of the process
Dealing with Orchestrated Attacks
While some participants are genuinely concerned about the consequences of the process on their property rights and local autonomy and are there to learn, others maybe there primarily to disrupt and discredit the process.
Ingredients of a low conflict meeting
Ground rules Structure of meeting Transparency techniques Capacity building
Staying on top of the game
Denver Schools Example
Source: Denver Post Online
Contingency plans
• What to do when one or more individuals try to disrupt the meeting with confrontational questions but remain respectful of the process
• What to do when several individuals repeatedly disregard the ground rules and demand a different process
• What to do when the meeting is impossible to get back on track (Worse case scenario)
Additional Resources
APA materials Smart Growth America Orton Family Foundation R.B. Hull, a professor at VA Tech PlaceMatters
Communicating with Complexity
Tools and Techniques
Working with Different Stakeholders within Different Contexts
Interactive meetings
Brainstorm ideas online
Neighborlandvisit neighborland.com
Brainstorming with translation
“Go to them” techniques
Portable Walk-the-line, Denver
Experimenting with place making
Pop up designTactical urbanism
Ken Snyder303.964.0903ken@placematters.orgwww.placematters.org
Recommended