UCUC Sounding Board - Febr. 27, 1999

University Community Urban Center
Sounding Board

University Heights Center for the Community
Saturday, February 27, 1999

----------------------

Comments by Kristie Langlow:

Replaying Saturday's discussion in my head brought these thoughts to mind:

Nobody took issue with the obvious need to provide public agencies with community views on the multiple major projects coming down the pike.

People who advocated separate groups arguing their case(s) independentlywere, in fact, contradicting themselves since they used that approach against the Plan and did not prevail (I regret not having curbed the tendency of those who do not like the Plan to rail against it.) People intent on searching out "legal" grounds as the only way to legitimitize particular stands or opinions are actually looking for avenues to make the City (or some other perceived gorilla) do what they want them to do.

Bridget's point that without talking to one another there is no way to prepare a comprehensive response to a project sponsor such as Sound Transit did not receive the attention it deserved. Similarly, Patty's suggestion that informal Sounding Board discussions be convened on a regular basis was not sufficiently explored. Both people were endeavoring to focus attention on a new model for community decision making. Instead, the group got mired in a circular discussion about which of the old models did and did not work.

In retrospect, I should have insisted that people focus on the future and new possibilities instead of picking at their old wounds!

Here are the models I heard:

Continue UCUCA:

Cons: This group is out of money and not organized to sustain itself over time. Too small. Too much old baggage left over from the planning process.

Existing Community Councils: use these entities to funnel community views to project sponsors.

Pros: these groups already exist, have legal status

Cons: these groups are not representative of the broader community, meet infrequently, may have old baggage that limits their influence.

Convene a Community Coalition composed of representatives from existing organizations:

Pros: wide representation of groups from Chamber through Partnership for Youth

Cons: who would convene. Is there a sponsor that would fund costs for outreach? (The City has no money for this.) Would such an organization have real clout? Would organizing such a group take too long to be effective with immediate issues such as station area planning.

Hold Sounding Board conversations similar to Feb 28th on a regular basis and invite anyone interested to participate. Whoever comes would constitute the community's voice.

Pros: Such a new model might allow expression of a greater range of viewpoint and encourage the presence of new faces.

Cons: Similar to coalition suggestion above. Sponsor would be needed. UCUCA co-chairs volunteered to produce and distribute a newsletter announcing another round for Saturday, March 27th. UHeights Board President proposed the possibility of sponsoring a community newsletter using its staff and capabilities but needs funds to cover costs.

On March 27th, a focus will need to be on creating a mechanism that makes participating in discussions on topics important to the community's future easy and accessible to anyone wishing to participate. You shouldn't have to sit on an advisory committee or commit to a year's worth of meetings in order to have an opportunity to influence civic decision making. A new model is clearly needed since in practice the old ones often polarize people and exclude many - sometimes accidentally, sometimes on purpose! Leaving behind those old knee jerk responses in favor of a more inclusive dialogue seems a worthy goal. The challenge: how do we get there?

If any of this analysis helps you define the purpose of the next session, you're welcome to use/adapt/edit as necessary. I see it as much more targeted and directed to defining what next than last weekend's was. Hope these thoughts are helpful.

*Continue UCUCA:*
Cons:	This group is out of money and not organized to sustain itself over time. Too small. Too much old baggage left over from the planning process.
*Existing Community Councils: use these entities to funnel community views to project sponsors.*
Pros:	these groups already exist, have legal status
Cons:	these groups are not representative of the broader community, meet infrequently, may have old baggage that limits their influence.
*Convene a Community Coalition composed of representatives from existing organizations:*
Pros:	wide representation of groups from Chamber through Partnership for Youth
Cons:	who would convene. Is there a sponsor that would fund costs for outreach? (The City has no money for this.) Would such an organization have real clout? Would organizing such a group take too long to be effective with immediate issues such as station area planning.
*Hold Sounding Board conversations similar to Feb 28th on a regular basis and invite anyone interested to participate. Whoever comes would constitute the community's voice.*
Pros:	Such a new model might allow expression of a greater range of viewpoint and encourage the presence of new faces.
Cons:	Similar to coalition suggestion above. Sponsor would be needed. UCUCA co-chairs volunteered to produce and distribute a newsletter announcing another round for Saturday, March 27th. UHeights Board President proposed the possibility of sponsoring a community newsletter using its staff and capabilities but needs funds to cover costs.