How do we deal with an “apathetic” public? Or is that the wrong question for us to be asking?
In the old days, most people thought you could not fight progress or City Hall. But after 20 years of high-profile development fights all over the country, every man and woman now believes they can fight back and win.
In the first of a three part series, Patrick Fox draws on results from his firm’s public attitudes survey on what Americans think of development and the planning process.
Stuart Andreason provides highlights from the “Technicity” course — about the good, the bad, and the unknown of using technology for public engagement.
Greg Dale explores why fairness may require more than the legal minimum.
If your planning commission truly makes decisions that affect the well-being of the entire community, it makes sense that its membership reflects that community.
Just who does the planning commission serve? — Applicants? Citizens opposing a project? The “public”? We resume our ethics & the planning commission series with a look at this question.
A scientifically conducted survey of residents brings in the voice of the public to bear on planning issues like no forum, newspaper straw poll, or focused discussion.
Local governments that are not actively engaged in listening and adapting their services to meet the needs and expectations of their customers and citizens are setting themselves up for disappointment and failure.
What can you, as a planner or planning commissioner, do about negative attitudes towards government? You can start by doing something as simple as examining the experience citizens have when they enter the planning department office.
Citizen participation is enough of a challenge in any city — but how do you deal with engaging citizens when 42% of your population is foreign-born, with people speaking many different languages?
Attorney Alan C. Weinstein provides an overview of how to avoid violating Open Meetings laws — including situations that are particularly troublesome: meetings in executive session, site-visits, “informal” meetings with staff, and electronic communications.
An introduction to the goals and structure of open meeting laws — including a look at the key question: what constitutes a “meeting”?