|
<br /> ,. A-3
<br /> I The Harwood studv concludes that the "dilemma over At thc same time, 81 percent of local officials
<br /> how to become im,:ol\'cd _ . . lies at the corc of why many indicated that elected leaders show a \\"illingness to share
<br /> ('Americans feel disconnccted. . . ." leadership and decision-making responsibilities and that
<br /> One wav in v,,"hich citizens can feel in control is the decision-making processes in their communities are
<br /> by becoming involved in the day-to-clay decision making open to citizens.
<br /> of their comnmnities. i\:Iany appointed managers, Citizens also \vere much less optimistic ret:TarcIincr
<br /> ~ ~
<br /> I particularly those in council-manager communities, the le\d of influence they held in community decision
<br /> nave nelped their local gm"ernments create environ- making. Just over a third agreed that there are many wavs
<br /> ments that encourage citizens to make decisions on for them to successfully influence the choice of ser~"ice~
<br /> I levels of service and other communih: issues. This their local go,'ernments provide, while a third disagreed
<br /> good news needs to be shared and replicated. with that statement. The majority of local officials,
<br /> howe....er. agreed somewhat-ta-very strongly that there
<br /> ICMA'S Research into the are many \vaI's for citizens to influence service choices.
<br /> I Finally, more than a third of responding citizens
<br /> Issue of Citizen Involvement indicated that they do not know how often their local
<br /> The movement toward helping citizens feel empmvered gm'ernments provide open forums where the opinions
<br /> I to participate in community decision making-and the of residents can be heard, outside the regular channels
<br /> impact of this movement on appointed local government of eouncillboard meetings, study sessions, and legally
<br /> managers-has prompted the International City/County required public hearings.
<br /> i\'lanagement Association's research into the issue of
<br /> I citizen empowerment. ICMA has employed three Meetings of Citizen Focus Groups
<br /> methods of data and information collection: a \vritten To augment the written survey. staff conducted hvo
<br /> survey. foclls groups, and a review oflocal government citizen focus-group meetings in IC~IA's Northeast and
<br /> I resources. Southeast regions. Participant makeup varied behl,'een
<br /> the two focus groups. The Northeast group consisted
<br /> Community Research Survey primarily of older citizens \\"ho \verc knowledgeable
<br /> In March '995, ICIvIA developed a Community about and active in their communities. The Southeast
<br /> Ie Research Survey to compare the perceptions of citizens group, in general, \1/as younger, more diverse, and less
<br /> and local officials regarding community service.delivery knowledgeable. Both groups \vere surprisingly positive
<br /> issues and the level of involvement and participation about the ways in which their local governments
<br /> I available to citizens. operate. A number of interesting themes emerged from
<br /> Survey que~tions were based loosely on the 10 these discussions:
<br /> indicators developed by the National Civic League
<br /> I (NCL) as part of its Civic Index. i\CL had created the 1. The perception that government operations are
<br /> index to help communities evaluate and impro\/e "the too ovemhelming. Within both focus groups,
<br /> complex interaction of people and groups through citizens expressed a general feeling that "govern-
<br /> which decisions are made and problems resolved," and ment has gotten more complex and complicated,"
<br /> I this material provided an excellent framework for a that citizens are "inundated by the amount of
<br /> discussion of citizen empowerment issues. information they feel they must absorb," and that
<br /> ICt.,.l" mailed the survey to some 5,000 randomly this level of complexity "keeps citizens at bay." I
<br /> selected U.S. citizens. A nearly identical survey was 2. A lack of kno\vledge among citizens about hmv j
<br /> I administered to roughly 3.000 elccted officials and 2,500 local decisions are made. Citizens seem frustrated
<br /> appointed managers internationally who ,vere in service with the lack of unbiased, reliable information
<br /> I to local governments. Although the low response rate by available to them on the way in ,,,,'hich their local
<br /> citizens precludes acceptance of that data as statistically governments work. Among the 1\ortheast group I
<br /> valid. it is interesting to compare the results v'lith those participants, however, there seemed to be consenslls I
<br /> of the public officials. that \vhen questions arise. citizens should tum to the
<br /> , Citizens and local officials disagrecd about the manager, rather than to department heads or elected I
<br /> opportunities for participation and invol....ement available officials. as the most likely source of unbiased
<br /> to citizens. Fewer than half of responding citizens information.
<br /> I reported feeling that their local governments' elected 3. The emergence of the "single.issue" citizen. i
<br /> leaders are willing to share community leadership and Participants in both focus groups acknowledged that I
<br /> ,
<br /> decision-making responsibilities. Just over half perceived today's citizens foclls less on an m'erall yision for the !
<br /> ,
<br /> it that the decision-making process in their communities community th~m on specific issues affecting them I
<br /> is open to citizens. and their families. In short, citizens organize around I
<br /> ,
<br /> ,
<br /> ,
<br /> I ............................................................................................. !
<br /> i
<br /> i
<br /> - ,
<br /> .~i>~..,}. :.\ '. ','"_ " --------- ---.- .---.- .
<br /> --...---- -~---_.
<br />
|