Community Engagement in Local Communities: Hearing the Voices of the Public

Abstract

Representative democracy is no longer enough for day-to-day governance as citizens demand more of their elected officials’ time and more attention paid to matters that concern them . Public hearings, open houses and other traditional means of engaging with citizens, especially at the municipal level, are not sufficient for true participatory democracy . Nor is going to the polls on a set date enough to satisfy citizens’ desires to interact more with elected officials . Done properly, engaging with the community can enable politicians to make better decisions . It can also broaden their perspectives on issues, offer opportunities for better communication and relationship-building with a diverse public and allow new ideas to come into play in the decision- making process . Although an Ipsos poll has revealed that just 20 per cent of Canadians have ever engaged in community engagement, those who did said they saw it as a positive experience . This paper examines the barriers to community engagement, including failure to reach people, time and place limitations, NIMBYism and the problem of strong voices dominating and making other people feel unheard . The City of Nanaimo offers a successful model of community engagement . When preparing an Affordable Housing Strategy, officials reached out to the public through pop-up events, workshops, surveys and one-on-one conversations . Follow-up included a white paper that incorporated the engagement process, public feedback and policy options . Later, a draft of the strategy was presented to the public during an open house which offered a question-and- answer period . Engaging with the public is not a small undertaking . However, this paper shows that problems such as divergent opinions, strongly vocal activists potentially hijacking the agenda, inevitable conflicts between factions and establishing the best times and places for engagement are not insurmountable . This paper offers recommendations for community engagement that can be adapted by both large and small municipalities . The key to successful engagement is advance preparation, including deciding which projects are best suited for this approach, public communication to ensure as many people as possible know about the opportunity to engage and starting the engagement process early . Taking the process to the people by going to popular local hang-outs and talking to citizens there helps mitigate the problem of inconvenient times and structured settings for many people . In smaller municipalities, officials can set up tables on Main Street, at libraries or local clubs . Combining online engagement with other efforts could help bring together ideas and perspectives from those more likely to engage online and those who prefer traditional methods of engagement, which will help to improve the quality of the whole process . Online engagement can supplement in-person connections and can help to set out rules around behaviour and enforcement of them . Municipalities can also partner with translators and cultural organizations to ensure that no one is left out of the process because of language or other barriers . Feedback and follow-up are two important parts of the engagement process as well . Citizens need to know that their input was valuable in determining final policies .