The Community Board: Opportunities for Change
From BeyondVoting
| The BeyondVoting Wiki |
| - key pages - |
| Preface - what's a wiki? |
| BeyondVoting - overview |
| Opportunities for Change - summary of possibilities |
| New Tools for Democracy - plugging Plato into the net |
| Impact on Existing Institutions - from local civics to city hall |
This page presents 30+ Opportunities for Change that might improve the operation of the city's planning and govrnance processes, with some Opportunities linked to more focused discussions. Four groupings of improvements are presented:
- Institutional Changes
- Board Membership Development
- Operational Changes
- Technology, Training, and Support – "Board 60"
|
Links within each group connects to more innovative and experimental ideas.
[edit] Institutional Changes
Until fifteen years ago, seven organizations provided local representation and access opportunities for New York City’s residents: the Mayor, Board of Estimate, City Council, Community School Boards, Public Advocate, Borough Presidents and Community Boards. By 2004, judicial mandate and state and city legislative action, had reduced the number and effectiveness of these governance channels by nearly half: the Board of Estimate and Community School Boards were eliminated, the Public Advocate and Borough Presidents staffs were reduced by half, and the Community Boards were maintained on near-starvation budgets.
To raise Community Board visibility, increase functionality, and reverse the 15 year democracy down slope, the following structural changes should be evaluated.
[edit] Lower Chamber
With member empowerment measures, planning budgets, and other changes as outlined below, the Boards will come to be seen as an initiating and activating chamber to the more contemplative, expert, and decision making City Council. The Community Boards' role will be elevated to that of a 'Lower Chamber' in partnership with the City Council, with the boards seen as the entryway to the democratic process.
Technologies like RSS can readily provide the Council with access to the fruits of Community Board deliberations, the Boards with access to Council issues, 311 statistics, and administrative materials that relate to their districts.
[edit] Decentralization
When the Bronx is under 12" of snow and Staten Island barely sees a flurry, NYC acts as a single unit in making decisions like suspending its Street Cleaning Regulations. As a result, tens of thousands of cars are forced to move unnecessarily. More decentralized decision making and effective local communication systems will enable a more resident-friendly city. Enter suggestions on other local decision making opportunities here.
[edit] School Participation
Schools in the community district should have two dedicated seats on Boards, chosen by local parent organizations (possibly through entities like the Presidents’ Councils). This will facilitate public participation in shaping school issues and integrate schools into the broader community planning process. School Participation Discussion
[edit] Youth Participation
Engaging youth in a meaningful way in the governance process will provide long term benefits for society. Student Organizations in the district should select a student to fill a seat at the community planning table. Furthermore, it would be useful to monitor student online resources and blogs that cover areas of interest to the government. One could easily make a collection of links to youth voices that deal with issues of interest, and also attempt to draw these people into the discussions going on at the government. Thus we achieve not just a situation where one student is the 'official representative', but where a pluralism of voices can be heard and responded to.
[edit] Planning Budget
The city charter directs the Boards to develop plans for community improvement. Boards should be provided with budgets to hire the professional staff needed to develop such plans.
[edit] ULURP Teeth
With the elimination of the Board of Estimate in 1987, a key local check on the Uniform Land Use Review Process was eliminated. The city charter should be modified to rebalance the ULURP process. The following modifications should be made.
- Upgrade the community boards’ planning and ULURP roles by requiring the City Planning Commission and Board of Standards and Appeals to abide by a community’s 197a plan, giving override power to the council.
- Flexibility (an additional 60 days) should be given to community boards on scheduling ULURP hearings.
[edit] Redraw City Organization Chart
Community Boards are independent governance entities like the mayor, city council, and borough presidents. However, the city’s current organization chart shows them existing beneath the Borough Presidents' office. With the city council playing a key role in the Boards’ operation – as ex-officio board members, partners in member selection, and budget providers – the city's organization chart should be reworked to show dual lines of empowerment for the boards, one from the borough presidents and another from the council. A structure like the following would present a clearer picture of their origin and raise the Boards’ stature in the eyes of board members, the public, and other city entities.
[edit] Elections
While currently appointed, many have suggested that board members be elected to their positions, or that better representation be added in the selection process. Here are some ways to improve inclusiveness and the quality of decisions:
1. Increase the size of community boards: 100 – 500 members.
2. Elect community boards.
3. Have appointed and elected members.
4. Provide for online memberships.
5. Have 50 appointed members and an unlimited number of online members with online members self-selected.
6. Have 50 appointed members and an unlimited number of online members with online members elected.
7. Have 50 appointed members and an unlimited number of online members with online members appointed by virtue of 25 hand signed signatures presented to the community board chair, with acceptability determined by a community committee and 100% perfection of signatures not required, just a preponderance.
Other changes to improve inclusiveness and quality of governance:
1. New members can be added quarterly.
2. All documents are available online - transparency.
3. All public meetings are available on the web. (See NYS Governor Spitzer’s Executive Order 3 of 2007.)
4. Voting is completed by close of monthly board meetings, i.e., onliners must vote before close of monthly meeting. Can also vote in-person.
5. Non members are also allowed to vote online, as “un-verified community sentiment”.
Remember that the boards are part of a process. Their opinions are advisory. But the more considered the opinions, and the larger the community to have considered them, the more weight they hold.
Opportunities that might arise through the development of the .nyc TLD should be watched.
With GIS coding, community Districts and community statistics need not be linked. Therefore, communities are flexible.
Join the elections discussion.
[edit] Add Your Suggestions Here
This document is a wiki designed to encourage public participation. To add an idea or make a change, click an "edit" located at the top of the page or at each section. This will bring you to a page with editable text from which the server produces the webpage. For detailed wiki editing help see here.
[edit] Board Membership Development
As public officials, community board members assume a responsible position without remuneration, little training or public recognition. To attract a larger pool of candidates for board membership and increase member capabilities, the following changes should be made.
[edit] Create Appointment Commissions
To improve representativeness of the boards and transparency of the appointment process, Appointment Commissions should be created in each borough. The Commissions will review applications from individuals or recommendations from civic organizations for community board positions. The seven member commissions should be appointed by the borough president (4), mayor (1), comptroller (1), and public advocate (1).
[edit] Dollar-a-Year
Community Board Members are public officials who, like the mayor, borough presidents, and council members, dedicate a good part of their lives to promoting public good. And like the other public officials, Board Members take an oath of office to that effect. To acknowledge their contribution and raise their perceived stature above that of volunteer, they should be paid one dollar-per-year. NYC has a long tradition of paying prized participants in the governance process a dollar-a-year to acknowledge their contributions, with the mayor and a deputy mayor currently serving in this capacity.
[edit] Member Page
Provide each member with an online office like that being developed by Queens Community Board 3. The Member Page will enable those appointed to the Board to more readily communicate their views and receive resident opinions on issues and opportunities.
[edit] Professional Staff Support
Member initiatives should be supported by planning, engineering, legal, and other professional staff, with resource allocation determined by democratic rule of Board members.
[edit] Member Independence
Voting Board members (as contrasted to Ex-Officio members) are now appointed to 2 year terms of office.
To provide a level of independence from the appointment process, the term should be extended to 10 years. (For an excellent article on a related issue, term-limits, see Mark Berkey-Gerard's article in the Gotham Gazette.)
Reducing the number of appointees each year to 5 will increase the visibility of both the appointees and the appointment process. It will enable the local media to report on who was appointed and by whom and provide the public with a window to the selection process.
[edit] Member Accountability
Independence and accountability are complementary to the extent that independence without accountability is an illusion. Independent power is entrusted only to those who give an account of its exercise. Checks and balances and separation of powers must be built into the system to assure that longer member terms don't negate responsiveness to community will. Here are a few possibilities: place voting records online; place a "responsiveness button" on member pages; highlight the rules for removal from office. (Currently a majority vote of members for an undefined "cause.")
A thorough discussion of accountability, as it relates to the operation of the European Central Bank, is available here.
[edit] Permanent Ex-Officio City Council Seats
Charter revision should provide city council members with permanent ex-officio seats on the community boards they represent. Currently, council members are limited to 8 or 10 years in office (depending upon their initial year of election) with their expertise potentially lost to the community thereafter. Other political systems maintain the experience of outgoing officials through such ex-officio positions, for example, the French confer a high court seat to ex-presidents. Permanent Ex-Officio City Council Seats Discussion Here.
[edit] Add Your Suggestions Here
This document is a wiki designed to encourage public participation. To add an idea or make a change, click an "edit" located at the top of the page or at each section. This will bring you to a page with editable text from which the server produces the webpage. For detailed wiki editing help see here.
[edit] Operational Changes
How the community board governs itself is a prime determinant of how the public and other governance units will react to its actions. The non-profit ICANN recently reviewed its governance guidelines. The report might prove instructive for community boards. And following the recent scandals in Corporate America, the Securities and Exchange Commission required changes in corporate governance that might fulfill a parallel need at community boards. Here are two changes Charlie and Warren implemented at Berkshire Hathaway.
[edit] Accountability & Review
How well is the board organized and how well does it achieve its goals? This is the subject of the IOG publication.
[edit] Executive Board Meetings Sans DM
"The first involves regular meetings of directors without the CEO present. I’ve sat on 19 boards, and on many occasions this process would have led to dubious plans being examined more thoroughly. In a few cases, CEO changes that were needed would also have been made more promptly. There is no downside to this process, and there are many possible benefits."
[edit] Whistleblower Line
"The second reform concerns the "whistleblower line," an arrangement through which employees can send information to me and the board’s audit committee without fear of reprisal. Berkshire’s extreme decentralization makes this system particularly valuable both to me and the committee. (In a sprawling "city" of 180,000 – Berkshire’s current employee count – not every sparrow that falls will be noticed at headquarters.) Most of the complaints we have received are of “the guy next to me has bad breath" variety, but on occasion I have learned of important problems at our subsidiaries that I otherwise would have missed. The issues raised are usually not of a type discoverable by audit, but relate instead to personnel and business practices. Berkshire would be more valuable today if I had put in a whistleblower line decades ago."
[edit] Non Profit "Friends of Community Board"
As pioneered by Borrklyn Community Board 6, the nonprofit supports the Board in several ways.
[edit] Add Your Suggestions Here
This document is a wiki designed to encourage public participation. To add an idea or make a change, click an "edit" located at the top of the page or at each section. This will bring you to a page with editable text from which the server produces the webpage. For detailed wiki editing help see here.
[edit] Technology, Training, and Support – "Board 60"
As 59 independent, geographically separated organizations, each with 2 to 4 paid staff (and 50 pro bono members), individual Community Boards are incapable of running their own Information Technology (IT) shops. What's needed is a central support unit to assist the Boards with their administrative responsibilities and their technology acquisition, training, and support needs. This "Board 60" would provide the following services.
[edit] Technical Expertise
Provide expert IT staff to evaluate, select, acquire, install, operate, and replace ever changing information technology. Supported technology should include collaboration, conferencing, database, email, GIS, networking, presence, servers, spreadsheet, websites, and word processing software.
[edit] Board Member Training
Ongoing training in parlimentary procedures is essential. Board members also need basic internet literacy training, website navigation, publishing, conferencing, and collaboration software competency.
[edit] Staff Training
Provide Board staff with the skills necessary for a digital era: training with office software (word processing, databases, and spreadsheet), conferencing, GIS, graphics, listserves, presentation, and managing websites.
[edit] Support
Provide board members and staff with ongoing technical support for the operation and maintenance of their office and online activities. Support should include access to a 24 hour help line to assist with using these various technologies.
[edit] R & D
Boards need an ongoing association with a research and development organization to assure that new technology is evaluated and made available on a timely basis and that specialized needs are addressed. An arrangement should be made with CUNY, possibly the CUNY Institute for Software Design and Development, to provide this R&D support.
[edit] Internships
Board 60 should make arrangements with city's department of education, CUNY, and other local colleges for intern recruitment, training, and assignment to Community Boards.
[edit] Best Practices
A listing and ongoing discussion about best practices for community board and district office operation should be maintained. Located here might be documents like By Laws and District Manager Assignments.
[edit] Public Engagement
Provide Boards with the ability to promote their new capabilities and engage the public in the governance process.
- Snail Mail - Board 60 should arrange an annual mailing about the Boards' duties, services, and contact information to all district homes.
- Education - Boards should promote civic education in local schools and provide life lessons for students as observers, interns, and participants in the governance process.
- Games for Governance - The Great Tree Hunt Competition outlines one project that will involve youth in a Community Board awareness project. Other games like Plan Your Future Park provide some insight into the level of engagement necessary to attract the public into the governance process.
[edit] Creating Community
With the succssful implementation of the "Opportunities for Change," community boards will become more potent and representative bodies with enhanced administrative, technical, and planning capabilities. What ‘state building’ activities should we take to make residents aware of the boards’ existence and role as centers of local governance? How might we encourage residents to participate in analysis and the tough decision making that will give the board’s efforts credence in the eyes of the city council and mayor? Read Creating Community District DNA for some proposals on ways to overcome the "identity" problem of Community Boards and districts. Also helpful is analysing the definition of community. See What is Community? for a base article.
[edit] Add Your Suggestions Here
This document is a wiki designed to encourage public participation. To add an idea or make a change, click an "edit" located at the top of the page or at each section. This will bring you to a page with editable text from which the server produces the webpage. For detailed wiki editing help see here.
[edit] Board Accountability
How can the boards themselves be evaluated? How can one tell if a board is effective? Who is to do the evaluations? One suggestion has been the public advocate. Another possibility is community residents.
Here are some parameters for evaluaing the effectiveness of community boards.
[edit] Number of Public Members
Public Members are local residents that serve on community board committees. The more public members serving on board committees, the more represented the community.
[edit] Number of Block Associations Operating in the Community
The number of block or civic organizations operating within the district are a measure of public engagement in the governance process. Boards should provide resources to facilitate their creation and support their operation.
[edit] Number of Community Events Posted on the Community Calendar
The more community events posted on the community calendar, the more events in the community, and the greater the opportunity for residents to discuss communty affairs.
[edit] Email Addresses & Mailings
How many email addresses have the the boards accumulated? How many emails have been sent out? (With suitable controls for SPAM.)
[edit] Rounded Membership
Each board shall report annually to its council members and the borough presidents on the economic, social, and demographic changes to its community and how these changes might be reflected in it membership.
[edit] Add Your Suggestions Here
This document is a wiki designed to encourage public participation. To add an idea or make a change, click an "edit" located at the top of the page or at each section. This will bring you to a page with editable text from which the server produces the webpage. For detailed wiki editing help see here.
| The BeyondVoting Wiki |
| - key pages - |
| Preface - what's a wiki? |
| BeyondVoting - overview |
| Opportunities for Change - summary of possibilities |
| New Tools for Democracy - plugging Plato into the net |
| Impact on Existing Institutions - from local civics to city hall |
