'SUO~S~;)gp'ilu~uUBjd lOJ 'sgnss~

uoddns

;)Hqnd

'z
'I

oqqnd

uo

saopt

pUB UO~lBUllOJuI

.sseoord 'ilu~uUBjd oruua gql oi snjouoq gjq~'iluBl JO roqumu B oprxord UB;) UO~lBd~j~llBd UgZ!lD 'UOSBgl AjUO gql gq lOU poou s~ql 'UBOjlO lUBl'il B lOJ juourormbar B s~ l~ osnaooq oqqnd gql 'ilU~AjOAU~ JO SUO~lOUl oqi q'ilnolql o'il Aj'ilU~'ilpnl'il srouuatd AUBW -sscoord 'ilu~)jBUl-UO~Spgp oqi OlU~ uonersoim Sl~ g'ilBUBUl oi pUB g;)~jd lSl!J oqi U~
lUgUlgAjOAU~ glBjn~lS oi :jBlUgUlBPUnJ orour ATIBnsn S~19UUBjd jBUO~'ilgl 10 onns gql oi g'ilugIlBq;) gIn 'AjgA~pgJP lUgUlgAjOAU~ UgZ~lP g'ilBUBUl oi st 19UUBld IB;)OI

oqi JO )jSBl gql gHqA\ -sdnors poznmfiro 10 slu~odMg~A pgU~PP IIgM iuosardcr OqM spmpwrptn pglB;)~ls~qdos arotn Aq st Allunsn sPAgl osoqi lB 'ilu~)jBUl uotspop u~ uonedtonred lB idurone uy 'gJ~I ABPAlgAg S,UgZ!l~;) gql Ul01J PU~lS~p pUB ionnsqe orour oq oi puoi 'lgAgMOq 'SgpUg'ilB IBUO~'ilglpUB glBlS 'ilU~lU01JUo;) sonssj -pooisropun AUpBgl pUB ouroq oi gSOP ore Agql osneoeq SUO~S~;)gpuodn pgJP
UB 'ilU~ABqU~ AjSnOgUBlUods pgAIOAU~ gUlO;)gq UglJO SUgZ!l~;) 'PAgI lUBllOdUl~ s~ql 'ilU~pgl~P U~ lloddns OqM 'lgUUBjd 'pgl~nbgl 'SllOJP s~ gUOU glgqM
10

IB;)OI gIn lV 'Al~A~PB lOU ABUl

'g;)UBp~n'il ''ilU~U~Bll UgA~'il gq

IBUO~SSgJOld gql JO SpuBq

gql u~ pg;)Bld s~ UglJo U09BlUgUlgldUlI S~H9S U09Bd~;)~llBd ;)Hqnd JO UllOJ pglBU~~Ig 'IBlgpgJ Uggq gABq gSgql ssglluno;) gqllY JO lUgUl 'S0961-P~

UgAg lUgUlgAIOAU~ PUBUlgp SlS~A~PB UgZ~lP AUBUl pUB

'ilu~UUBld gIB;)S-g'illBjlSOUl U~ pgl~nbgl

gUlOS 'UO~lBllS~U~UlPY UB'ilBg"M gql 'ilu~mp pg;)npgllO JO AUBUl gUl(A\ -gl~nbgl 'SUlBl'ilOld jB;)OI pUB 'IBUO~'ilgl 'glBlS s,uosuqof B glB SlUgUlgl~nbgllUgUlgAjOAU~ JO 'ilu~uu~'ilgq gql

UgZ!lP 'gUl9 lUgSgld uopukllUgp~Sgld g;)U~S Ssg;)Old

gql U~SUlBl'ilOld AlgpOS lBgl!) SBM. l~ ';)~jqndg"M gql Al~unlloddo pUB gA~pgyg 'AlnlUg;)

ql~M pgZ!IBUO~lTIl~lS~ 'ilU~)jBUl-UO~S~;)gp;)~lBl;)O Ol

-Ulgp gql JO llBd IBUllOJU~ UB Uggq SBq l~ q'ilnoql

'SUO~S~;)gp;)Hqnd g;)ugny~

UB SUgZ!l~;)glBA~d Sgp~AOld q;)~qM Ssg;)Old B S~UO~lBd~;)~l1BdUgZ!lD ''ilu~AJS~lBS glOUl l~ g)jBUl Ol SABM ssms~p pUB 'glOl S,lgUUBld gql gq~;)sgp

qlg~lUgMl gql JO llBd 19l1Bl

gql U~ ssgu~snq

;)~Iqnd 'ilu~op JO ABM B SB l~ gql gpunslgd

ldg;);)B gM 'lgqlB"M

'Bg;)BUBd B S~ UO~lBd~;)91Bd UgZ~lP lBql 19pBgl gql lOU s~

Ol 19ldBq;) s~ql JO gsodmd

';)~ldg)js IB;)~UA;)lSOUl gql UgAg SllgAUOO UI 'pgllo;) glB gAOqB gql JO liB 'gsmo;) Ssg;)Old B ~

pUB TIgM AlgA S)jlOM Ssg;)Old gql 'SlgqlO SUg)j0l APlgUl gAg~pq lS~UO~Pnllsqo

JO 'SgSB;) AUBUl UI 'APBgllB gPBUl Uggq gABq SUO~Spgp gql HB glgqM Agql SUO~S~;)gpU~ g;)UglgpglU~ Aq pgZHodouOUl

glB Agql lBql lBgJ OqM 'SUgZ!l~;) Aq pUB ~gmlBU U~ IB;)~uq;)gl gq 01 lUgSgl OqM 'SlgUUBld Aq ~SlSglglU~ IB~;)~ g'illBq;) OqM 'Slg)jBUl UO~Spgp Aq glB Agql lBql

UlS~;)9dg)js ql~M pgMg~A glB UglJO SUlBl'ilOld UO~lBd~;)~llBd UgZ~l~;)'APlBunllOJUO 'SUO~Spgp ;)qqnd u~ g;)~OApgl~P B gABl( SUgZ!lP lBql gmSug gqllOJ MgN u09~U'il0;)gl Ollloyg UB S~lUgUlgAIOAU~;)~Jqnd 'dpq gUlOS lnoql~M "gldood

pUB' Aq 'JO" Alnll gq Ol glOUlgl OOl AldUl~S S~lUgUlUlgAO'il UB;)~gUlY 1Bl(l A1BlOdUlglUO;) B Spgygl lUgpUB SgpB;)gp OMl lSBI gql U~ qlM01'il Sl~ 'PUBI'il18 Ol pg;)Bll gq UB;) SlOOl Sl~ gHl(A\ 'ssg;)Old snoum B S~ UO~lBd~;)91Bd UgZ9D IB~UOIO;) pUB g;)ggl!)

'ilU~BUl-UO~S~;)gp ;)~lBJ;)OUlgp gql

U~ lUgUlgp

"Citizen Participation" by Arnold Cogan, Sumner Sharpe, and Joe Hertzeberg, Chapter 12 in the book: "The Practice of State and Regional Planning", edited by Frank S. So, Irving Hand, and Bruce D. McDowell, American Planning Association, Chicago, 1986

uOIJedIJIJJ~d uaZIJIJ

284 The Practice of State and Regional Planning

Alexis de Tocqueville on citizen participation The political activity that pervades the United States must be seen in order to be understood. No sooner do you set foot upon American ground than you are stunned by a kind of tumult; a confused clamor is heard on every side, and a thousand simultaneous voices demand the satisfaction of their social wants. Everything is in motion around you; here the people of one quarter of a town are met to decide upon the building of a church; there the election of a representative is going on; a little farther, the delegates

of a district are hastening to the town in order to consult upon some local improvements; in another place, the laborers of a village quit their plows to deliberate upon the project of a road or a public school. Meetings are called for the sole purpose of declaring their disapprobation of the conduct of the government; while in other assemblies citizens salute the authorities of the day as the fathers of their country. Source: Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Vol. I, Chapter XIV.

3. 4. 5.

Avoidance of protracted conflicts and costly delays. Reservoir of good will which can carryover to future decisions. Spirit of cooperation and trust between the agency and the public.

There are real costs associated with public participation. Decision making becomes more involved. Additional financial allocations for staff training and implementation may be required, and there is a danger that one point of view may be allowed to dominate the citizen group. Careful planning is necessary if the planner is to realize the most benefits from citizen participation at the minimal cost. This chapter begins with discussion of the differences in citizen participatio at the state, regional, and local levels. A discussion of public involvement from both the citizen's and planner's perspectives follows. The next section describes techniques of citizen participation. Finally, criteria for an effective program are suggested.
State, regional, and local differences in citizen participation

Federal, state, regional, and local citizen participation programs vary in responsibilities and functions. Generally, federal and state governments develop policies and allocate resources, while local governments implement the resulting programs. Regional agencies most often assume neither legislative nor opera tiona; responsibilities but provide planning and coordinating functions. Of all levels .: government, they have the fewest direct links to the public. This creates spe . problems for those regional agencies which attempt to identify and devel r citizen constituencies affected by their land use, transportation, wastewater management, and other planning decisions.
Relationship to planning

In the broadest sense, the planning process involves a related series of actiors which include goal setting, policy identification and analysis, policy making administrative rulemaking, program operations, and evaluation. Implicit to a, these actions is the generation, appropriation, and allocation of resources. Within this context, public involvement opportunities range from substan . to minimal. Citizen participation is an appropriate goal for every part of planning process, but the potential contribution of the public varies for diffe

U;:)zP~;) 10J sonmruroddo SOOl;:)UlOU S;:)P~AOld snui pUB 'S;:)P~AP;)B P;:)W;:)~lO g~~ ;)~J~;);:)ds O~ W;:)UldoI;:)A;:)P ,brrod peorq Ul01J 1!U~1!UBl SUO~PUOJ suuojrod ;:)~BlS ;:)lU

S;:);)~Al;:)S l;);:)l~p P;:)P;:)I;:)S ;:)P~AOld O~ A~pOq~OB ;:)lB1S l;:)PUO ;:)~Bl;:)do 1;:);)~110 ;:)APO;);:)X;:)pUB ApOq ;:)APBIS~;:)I P;:)l;);:)I;:);:)SOqM '~;)P1S~a ;:);)~Al;:)SuB~rrodol1;:)W (U01!;:)lO) PUBIllOd ;:)q1 S~ uondooxo ;:)IqBlOU ;:)UO A;)rrOd ;:)lBP!U! 01 l;:)MOd ;:)q1 ;:)ABq iou op AIIB1;:)U;:)1!pUB 'siuom -Ul;:)A01! ;:)lB1S UBq1 odoos pUB osodrnd U~ ponmq orour ;:)lB S;:)!;)U;:)1!B IBUO!1!;:)~ 'sossaoord M;:)!A;:)l ;:)sooq1!U!1B;:)P '.1!.;:) 'S;:)P!A!PB ~q1!!Sl;:)AO 01 uopBd!;)!llBd uozup ~!Ul!I SUO!l;)UOJ ;:)s;:)q.r SW;:)Ul;:)l!ob;:)l IBUO!1!;:)l pUB ';:)lB1S 'IBl;:)P;:)J q~!M ~U;:)lS!SUo;) ;:)lB SUO!PB IB;)OI 1Bq~ ;:)1osu;:) O~ ;:)IOl ;:)SOOq1!U!1B;:)Pfii'UPBU!P1OO;)flI1!OOlq~SSBd B IT! ;:)Al;:)SpUB UOPB;)OIIB ;:);)1OOS;:)lpUB 1!U!UUBId IBUO!PUllJ U! P;:)AIOAU! ;:)lB OSIB A;:)q.r UOPB1U;:)Ul;:)IdUl~ 10J SUO!lOl!lSU! IB;)OI UO 1!U~AI;:)l'uopB;)!{ddB pUB 'UOPB1;:)lru;:)1U! 'W;:)UldoPA;:)P A;)~IOd UO Sl1011;:) 1!;:)q1 SO;)OJ AIIB1;:)U;:)1! S;:)!;)U;:)1!B IBUO!1!;:)l pUB ;:)lB1S

10J

PA;:)I IB1;:)P;:)J ;:)q~ 1B P;:)lB!l!U! SUlBl1!Old lSOUl 10J pormbor S! UopBd~!llBd uozup JO ;:);:)l1!;:)p ;:)UlOS 'l;:)A;:)MOq 'SW!B~S -UO;) 1U;:)1;:)qU! l!;:)q~ JO SS;:)IP1B1!;:)~ SUlBl1!Old IB;)!101!;:)lB;) UBq1 ;:);)u;:)ogU! IB;)OI 10J S;:)P!UOlloddo l;:)lB;:)l1! 1;:)110 SUlBl1!Old 1!U!1BqS-;:)OU;:)A;:)lpUB ~UB11! )[;)OIq pUB 'AlBA OSIB ;:)s;:)q.r P;:)P!11S;:)1 AI;:)l;:)A;:)S;:)lB U;:)ijO UopBd!;)!llBd U;:)Z!l!;) IB;)OI pUB IBUO~;:)l S;:)P!UOlloddo ;:)q1 'SI;:)A;:)I ;:)~B~SpUB IB1;:)P;:)J oqi 1B ;:)~BU!1!!10 S;:)!;)~Iod U;:)qA\.

SU;:)Z!~!;);:)q~ JO UOPB;)ps!qdos pUB SS;:)U;:)A~S -S;:)l1!1!B;:)q1 UO spuodop uaijo 1U;:)Ul;:)AIOAU! JO PA;:)I ;)y!;);:)ds ;:)q.r Sl;:)UUBId 10J S;:)I01 IB;)!Uq;);:)ll;:)lB;:)l1! pUB suopoq!11UO;) U;:)Z!l!;)10J S;:)P!UOlloddo l;:)M;:)J am ;:)1;:)q1 'potmn -roiop ;:)lB s;:)~;)rrod pUB SIB01! l;:)ijB 'IB1;:)U;:)1!Ul UOP!U~PP A;)!{od pUB UO~~BIOUllOJ IB01! JO S;:)1!B1S;:)q1 U~ ;:)A!l;);:)11;:)pUB creudorddn lSOUl S! 1U;:)Ul;:)AIOAU! ;)!{qod
-Ul;:)A01! JO SI;:)A;:)I1U;:)1;:)11~P 1B ssooord 1!U!UUBfd ;:)q1 U! sdois S00!1BA 01 SU;:)Z~l!;)JO uounquiuoo IBPU;:)lOd ;:)q1 SMOqS l-ZI ;:)101!!d 'snradtonmd 1!UOUlB SUOPB1;);:)dx;:) JO UO!lB;:)J;) oqi pUB s;:);)1OOS;:)lJO UOPB;)OIIB ;:)q1 q1!00lq11;:)UUBId oqi Aq p;:);)u;:)ogU! S! pUB OSIB S;:)!1BA UopBd!;)!llBd JO Al!{BOb ;:)q.r SI;:)A;:)IIB~U;:)UlUl;:)A01! pUB S;:)P!AP;)B

'ruour

MOl

al8JapO~

~ 0

~6!H ~ uo!~nq!)luo:J 18QU8jOd 0 0 0

U01j8n18f18

pU8

6U!JOjIUOVlj

UOlj8jU8W81dwi A:)IIOd

0 UOlj8n18f18

UOIj::J818S liollOd IiO!IOd 8f1lj8UJ8jll;l

UOljlUlj8P

IiOIiOd

8f1lj8UJ8jll;l

Sisli18U8

pU8

UOIj::J81100 8j8

O 8

UO!j8InWJOj

180

:ss800Jd

6U!

UU8 d I

84j

UI UOlj8dloljmd

U8ZIjlO

jO UO!jnqlJjUOO

181jU8jOd

uosueduioo 8 ~-G ~ 8m6!.:::J

286 The Practice of State and Regional Planning

participation. However, a few individuals have direct contact with their stare governments, and citizen participation tends to operate through traditional poli ical means-the electoral process and lobbying by professional, trade, and singlepurpose associations. It is necessary to develop additional involvement techniques if the full benefits of citizen participation are to be realized by the governrne as well as the governed. Members of the executive branch of most states respon . to this need through formal participation mechanisms, such as boards and commissions. Unfortunately, these tend to attract a narrow range of citizens wi specialized knowledge or well-defined interests who are known to the appointing bodies, i.e., governor or legislature. Regional agencies, most commonly councils of government (COGs), usually are composed of representatives of local governmental units. Most COGs have difficulty identifying their constituencies, since few people view themselves as regional citizens. The policy or technical advisory committee is the most common form of citizen participation at the regional level, though hearings and conferences are commonly used, as well. Individuals who serve are selected because of their knowledge, position, or constituency; they may be involved to protect a local governrnen interest, to support the concept of regional planning, or to share their particular knowledge in a functional area such as transportation or solid waste. Wi . these general parameters, the inherent roles and responsibilities of regiona... planning agencies constrain citizen involvement activities, even for the few regional agencies which have directly elected governing bodies. Most often, state an . federal regulations require a certain framework through which participatioc efforts must be organized. Regional agencies need to institute special means an . techniques if they want to expand citizen participation efforts beyond the adviso _ committee approach, because they usually do not have direct contact with the citizenry. This is due to several factors: Management responsibility for problems which may not be perceived by citizens as affecting their daily lives. Delegated responsibility from other authorities. or

Involvement of laypeople who have definite technical, experiential, ideological viewpoints, rather than general interest. Representational rather than direct citizen participation.

With state and regional agencies providing general policy guidance, administrative rules, or resources, the responsibility of operating programs commonly is passed on to local government. The former play an important oversight/evaluation role to ensure that these programs are managed in a manner consiste with their policies and administrative guidelines. Even if the development 0:;: their own policies lacked citizen participation, federal and state programs fr quently require such participation at the local and regional level. In summary, state and regional planning is more removed from the electora ? than local planning efforts. The former tend to be more functionally orient . and lack the ongoing type of citizen relationships more commonly found in local situations, e.g., wards or established neighborhoods. Federal and state policies often require functionally oriented citizen participation, e.g., criminal justice. solid waste, wastewater, and transportation planning, which require agencies confer with constituencies at various levels-political and technical representatives of local governments as well as informed citizens. Figure 12-2 identifies some of the key characteristics of the intergovernmen system and associated citizen participation issues and problems.

;JU!P!lJUOJ U! roqiar mq SPUBWgp ;JU!lJ!lJuOJ U! lOU S! gJmOS sH 'gTqBP!OAB S! l! 'AnUBllOdw! lSOJl\I -sucznp pUB SlgUUBTd UggMlgq drqsuonejar gql 01 pUB 'sirojjo lUgWgATOAU!oqqnd orrunj 01 'sscoord ;JU!UUBTdoqi 01 ;JU!;JBWBp S! PillUOJ qJnS 'gyqBl!AgU! S! P!lJuOJ 'UO!lBTnd!UBW lOJ SUl!B 19UUBTd gql gT!qM UO!lB1TnsuOJ saoodxo UgZ!l!J oqi Po 10 'lgMOd JO ggl;Jgp gWOS SglBd!J!lUB UgZ!l!J oqi gT~M u09B1TnsuOJ siocdxo 19UUBTd gql J! 'lgAgMOH 'pgZ!TBgl oq 01 ATg)[H glB SU09Bl -ocdxo l!gql 'tIO!lB1TnSUOJ pUB U09BUllOJU! AT!lBUl!ld gATOAU! 01 ssooord gql ioodxo UgZ!l!J pUB 19UUBTd qioq Po 'gTdWBXg 1O.:{ 'TBW!U~W S~ Al!lBdS~p gql 'wBl;JOld [njsscoons B ul 'siuedtonmd UgZ!lP JO suondoorod ATg)[Hgql ql~M srqi oredurco pUB sosodmd S,WB1;JOld gql JO uoudoorod 19q 10 srq SSgSSB01 19UUBTd gql dpq UBJ 19PPBT gql 'SU09BJHdw! gA9BW10U snotxqo sn W01J gp!SV l'(S-ZT ';JH) srqi soian -snm "UO!lBd!J!llBd UgZ!l!J JO 19PPBT" UMOU)[-ngM S,U!glSUlV 'pglBTgl oq PTnoIIs SlgUUBTd pUB siundonrad JO suoueiosdxo oqi 'wBl;JOld pgUUBTd-ngM B 'WS!J9dg)[S pUB UO!lBllSnJJ JO Sggl;Jgp pgJ AnBmlBU SlgUUBTd lBrp OS AgUOW pUB oum JO SlU!BllSUOJ pUB SUO!lBJHdwOJ ATUOSgSnBJ lUgWgATOAlli oqqnd 'lgAgMOq 'UglJO oOl 'pnpOld pUB SSgJOld ;JU!UUBTdgql JO A1ITBnb grp SB TPM SB UO!PBJs9BS qof S,lgUUBTd gql 01, omqtnuoo UBJ WB1;JOld UO!lBd!J!l1Bd UgZ!l!J gA!lJgyg UB pUB 'rumrodun glB OSTBSU09BpgdXg UMO S,lgUUBTd gIll

u:r

'WS!Ug)[Ol IT! imscr UBJ TB1UgWnJ1SU!oqi ;JU!10U;J! ~lnoumq 01 PBgT PTnOJ J!SU!llU! gql ;Ju!1oilli'l 'wB1;JOld gql U! qroq glB10ruOJU! 01 iduroue pjnoqs SlgUUBTd '(AJHOd JHqnd JO ;JU!dBqS gql 01 omqtnuoo 01 Apunlloddo oqi W01J ;JUmnS;Jl) TB1U;JWllilSIT! 10 (UO!lBd!J!llBd JO PB Al;JA ;Jql W01J ;JU!A!l;Jp) lU;JW;JATOAU!;Jql 01 J!sU!llll! l;Jql!g gq ABW gS;Jql 'U;JZ!l!J ;Jql 01 SplBM;Jl JO Al;J!lBA B l;JYO UBJ UO!lBd!J!llBd ';JJU;Jl;Jy!P B ;J)[BW 01 ;JyqB ;Jq 01 ;Jdoq pUB ;JJU;J!1;JdX;J ;JU!AJS9BSB p;JdXg A;Jql gSnBJ;Jq ATqBqOld ;J1Bd!J!11Bd 01 gsooqJ STBnP!A!PUl 'UgZ!l!J ;Jql lOJ TBUO!ldo S! l! 'lguuqd ;Jql 10J lUgW;Jl!nb;Jl B S! U;JlJo lU;JW;JATOAU! ,JHqnd ;JITtIM.

WSllBUOIPBj /WSIIBllj:JOJBd S8:JU8J8jjIP IB:JljlIOd SPOOljJOQljBI8U/SpJBM SU8Zlj!:J IBnpll\lpul

UOljBJ8U8B

8:JJnOS8tJ

IiJ81\118P 8:JII\J8S UOljBjU8W81dwi 1i:J!IOd

jljBISJ81\0 S8nSSI jO 8JnjBU li:Ju8njljSuo:J IBJ8U88 Bu!u!j8O sdnoJB sUBI:JIUlj:J81 jS8J8jUI IBI:J8dS IB:Jol UOljB:J0IIB BUIUUBld

1i:JIIOd

8:JJnOS8tJ IBUO!pun:!

SjU8WUJ81\0B

UO!jBUIPJ00:::J

BUI'IBW8IntJ S8:JU8J8jjIP IB:Jol OJ Iijll\IjlSU8SUI SS8U8jOW8tJ jS8J8jUI SjSll\lPB IB:JljlIOd sdnoJB P8ZIUBBJO /UOljBJ8U8B UOljB:JIIB 8:JJnOS8tJ 1i:JIIOd

BUIII8S

UOljBnlBI\8

1i:JIIOd

BUI'IBW8IntJ S8:JU8J8jjIP IB:Jol Ojlijll\IjlSU8SUI SS8U8jOW8tJ jS8J8jUI SjSll\lPB IB:JljlIOd sdnoJB P8ZIUBBJO /UOljBJ8U8B UO!jB:JIIB 8:JJnOS8tJ 1i:JIIOd

BUIII8S

swalqoJd UO!led!:>!l.Ied uazm:>

,{:>uanmsuo:>

suo!l:>un~ 6u!UUeld

'UOljBdl:JljJBd

U8Zljl:J

jO S:JljSU8PBJBlj:::J

C;-C; ~ 8JnBI:!

L8Z

uO!Jvdp!J.lVd

UdZ!J!:J

288 The Practice of State and Regional Planning

Figure 12-3 The ladder of citizen participation.

expectations. The planner can help to guard against this conflict through hones: and clear communication at the onset of the process.
Citizen perspective

Models of public involvement at the local level are inappropriate for regional and state planning. Common situations in which neighbors organize to demand that city hall put a stop sign on their corner are not transferable or helpful in understanding participation in decisions about state and regional issues which often are more abstract and remote from the lives of most citizens. State and regional agencies themselves are more distant and less accessible to citizens. These factors usually discourage spontaneous grassroot involvement. There are dramatic exceptions where the agency's decisions do have a direct community impact, such as for landfills, highways, or other large-scale public facilities. In these cases, demand for direct citizen involvement should not be a surprise. In general, however, the state or regional planner often is confronted wi the problem of stimulating participation. A simple conceptual model is use in illustrating why citizens choose to become involved:
Instrumental factors Intrinsic factors

Perceived [ importance of issue Expected benefits

Expected] influence on outcome perCeived]

+ [ personal - inconvenience

Degree of participation

The more importance the citizen attributes to the issue, the more influence the outcome he/she expects to have, and the more satisfaction expected the act of participation, the greater the degree of participation. By the way i which the process is structured, the planner can influence every element in equation.

SlUBd~:)91Bdousmsnqiuo mo urnq ABUlAIqB~UllglU~ UO 0;3 01 SUlggS q:)~qM ssooord B 'punq 19q1o gql uO 'uo 19lBI SUgZ9~:)parsoronn Aq pgUlIgqM.1gAOgq ABUlSgllB1SAPBg gql u~ glBd~:)~llBd 01 gUOAUBllU~PU~J A1ITI:l~W.P peq gABq ABUl oqM 19UUBId gql, ogSBgl:)U~01 spuoi ootreuodun pgA~g:)lgd gql 'soqoeordda UO~S~:)gp 10J oum gql sy ogUl~l JO pouod 110qS B UgAg 19AO AIIB:)~PBl glluBq:) ABUlonssr UBJO ooueuodun pgA~g:)lgd oqi lBql gZ!UllOJgl pjnoqs 19UUBId gqJ, UlBlllOld lUgUlgAIOAU~ oqqnd B llU~dOIgAgp u~ lUgUlgIg Ag){ B st llU~~l, SgAPSUlgql 01 199Ugq IB:)9!IOd 10 'IBUO~SSgJOld'IBUOSlgd JO suuoi U~U09Bd~:)~11Bd Mg~ASIBnp~A!PU~ 19q1O SgnSS~ gql JO coueuodun gql JO U09dg:)lgd l~gql Ul01J simsor ArqB~lBAU~ sdnorf rsorenn IB~:)gdS19q1o pUB 'SU09BZ -~UBlllO IBlUgUlU01~AUg'SU09B!:)OSSBopan llU~lUgSgldgl gIdOgd Aq U09Bd~:)~l1Bd 'gIdUlBXg 10d Slgqlo gql qll~gMlllO ABUl101:)BJgUO 'UgZ!lP lBITI:l!llBd B 10J pUB 'pgAIOAU~ouroooq OllgqlgqM llU!P~:)gpU! SlOpBJ gSgql Sg:)UBIBqIBnp!A~pU~ gql, UOpBd!:)!llBd l~gql 10J A1BSSg:)gugq ABUlSgp~ -IT:)BJ IBn;3Uq!q 10 'SSg:):)BpgddB:)~pUBq 'Sg:)UBMOIIB IgABll 'glB:) PI~q:) 'SIBnP!A!PU~ gUlOSlOd Sg:)UB1S~p ;3UOIIgABll 01 gABq lOU lITMSUgZ!l~:) lBql os U09B:)oI gUO usqi glOUl U! SllU~lggUl pjot] 01 UBId pjnoqs scnns pUB SUO~;3g1 glllWI 'sourn pUB SUOp -B:)OIlUg~UgAUO:) lOJ pgInpgq:)s oq pjnoqs SllU~lggUlpUB SgdOIgAUg urruar p~Bdgld gpnpU~ PInoqs Sgl!BUUOpsgnb pgI!BUl 'gIdUlBXg 10d SlUBd~:)91Bd10J gIq~ssod SB lUg~UgAUOJ SBlUgUlgAIOAU~ g){BUlPInoqs 19UUBIdgql, lloddns JO SUllOJ 19q1O pUB 'llu~AdOJ010qd 'SlgqUlgUl YB1s 01 SSg:):)B pgp~AOld gq PInoqs Sggn!UlU1OJ AlOS!APY oglgqdsOUllB pgXBIgl B 01 glnqpluo:) OSIBSlUgUlqSglP"H Sllu~punOlmS gIqBlloJ -UlO:) u~ s~ llUpggUl B P 19n9q PUOdSgl gIdOgd gUO gAp:)BlnBUn pUB IInp B 01 uBql AgAlnS UgW1M-IIgM 'gAp:)BlnB UB 01 PUOdSgl 01 AP){!I glOUl glB SUgZ!lD SUgZ!lP 10J gA~llOddns 10 'lluqBgddB 'gIqBllOJUlOJ S~SSg:)old Al01Bd~:)~UBdgql JO lUgUlgIg q:)Bg lBq1 ggS PInoqs 19UUBId gql, opgfOld IIBlgAO gql JO SSglllOld gql uo U09BUllOJU~AIg~l q1~Mpgp~AOld gq p[noqs SUgZ!l~:) gSgql 'U09~PPB UI o:)P 'SgnbBId 'SglB:)~JPlg:) 'SlgngI SB q:)ns U09BpglddB JO SUO!SSgldXg 19q1O 10 'SIB~:)~YO lUBuod~ ql~M SUOpdg:)gl 'SgSBg[gl SMgUJO UllOJ gql g){B1ABUl s~ql, UOmUllOJgl gAlgSgp SllOyg llU~UUBIdU~ AlllgUg pUB gUl9 l~gql 1991UnIOA OqM gSoql, SUgZ!l~:) JO lnoumq A[lBg JO gSnB:) lUBllOdUl! UB S! lUgUlgAIOAU~ Aq pgp~AOld SlggUgq IBUOSlgd 01 uopUgnBuI lgUUBId gql Aq Ap:)gl~P glOUl UgAg pgdBqS glB glBd~:)P1Bd 01 uo~s~:)gp S,UgZ!l!:) gql U! SlOl:)BJ :)!SUP1U~gql, sgnss~ :)~Iqnd u~ pgAIOAU!gUlO:)gq 01 1UBpnIgl gm SUgZ!l~:) AUBUlUOSBgl gUO s~ UlS~Ug){Ol JO lBgJ gql, lSTIllS~Ul pUB lITMlIT01 PBgI UB:)SUO~PBqloq ~UO!Spgp IBU~Jgql 01 g){BUlOll:)gdxg UB:)SUgZ!l~:) u09nqPlUO:) gq1 glB1SlgAO lOU lsnUl OSIB19UUBId gql 'UgZ!l!:) gql JO gnIBA gql glB~lSglgpUn lOU PInoqs gqSjgq gglIA\. IBPUgSSgglB lSTIll IBnlnUl pUB lOpUB:) SSg:)old llU~UUBIdIIBlgAO gql U~gIOl 1~gq1 SUgZ!l~:)01 llU~U~BIdXg lOJ gIq!suodsgl s~ OSIB OqM 19UUBId gql JO spUBq gql u~ A[glllBI s~ gUlOJlno gq1 UO g:)ugngu! S,UgZ!l~:)gql 'Apugnbgsuo:) UO~Spgp IBug gqlllU~dBqS u~ gIOl Ag){ B SABIdq:)~qM ssg:)old lUgU1gAIOAU~ :)~rqnd B llU~Ull!Sgp10J grq~SUOdSgl Ap:)gl~P S! 19UUBId gql, og:)UBllOd~ s,gnss~ gql JO UO~ldg:)lgd s,:)qqnd gql g:)UBqUg OSIB1nq UOPBUllOJU~ :)~Iqnd 19lBgl;3 glBlg -Ugll AIUOlOu PInoqs slloyg gSgql, u09:)gS lXgU gql u~ pgSsn:)s~p s~ lUgUlgAIOAU~ UgZ!lP u~ UOpB:)npg :)qqnd JO gIOl gql, ogn[BAl!gql glBllSUOUlgp 01 slloyg UOpB:) -npg :)qqnd gl~nbgl Slgqlo gI!qM 'lUBllOdUl~ AIsno~Aqo glB sgnss~ :)qqnd gUlOS

gnSSI IB~APlB UO g:)ugngu~ IBpuBlsqns SPlO:):)Bq:)~qMssg:)old B u~ glBd~:)91Bd 01 glBl~Sgq lITMAgql 'AIgSlgAUO:) UO~Spgp IBU~Jgql uo g:)ugngu~ ou gABq M Agql gzqBgl Agql J~ ssg:)old llU~UUBIdgql U! glBd~:)~UBdlOu lITMSUgZ!l~:)'g:)uBUOdUl! s,gnss~ UB JO SSgIP1Bllg"Hd!qsU09BIgl gSOP l~gql SglB:)!PU~s~ql, ogA9~PPBllU~gq AIdUl~S uBql 19q1Bl g:)UBllOdUl~u~ sgqdpInUl gUlOJlno gql UO g:)Ugngu! pgpgdxg gql pUB gnSS~gql JO g:)uBuodUl~ pgA~g:)lgd gql UggMlgq d~qSUOPB[gl gql 'IgpOUl gql UI

290 The Practice of State and Regional Planning

Planner perspective Public involvement provides incentives and disincentives for the planner as well as for the citizen. These should be carefully considered, since many planners seem to be at least as skeptical concerning citizen participation as the public. Advocates of citizen involvement often reject the concerns of reluctant planners as merely "protecting their turf." Although many of these objectives should not be taken seriously, some must be recognized. There is no doubt that public involvement complicates a planning process and requires additional time, budget, and staff. However, attempting to save time and money by avoiding public involvement often represents a false economy. It also exposes the agency to criticism and possible obstruction to which it need not be vulnerable. Lack of participation may increase the possibility of obstruction through the courts or ballot box. On the other hand, the so-called dilemma of citizen participation- may arise; opportunities for involvement sometimes fuel opposition rather than result in cooperation. The planner should view this as an opportunity rather than a problem. Opposition expressed in the context of a public involvement program can be addressed. more effectively than opposition expressed in political and legal arenas. It is far less costly in time and money to resolve differences as part of the planning process rather than later in protracted lawsuits, administrative delay, and political battles. An open process confers on the outcome a degree of legitimacy which may be very important to ultimate implementation. It remains true that public involvement complicates the agency's planning process and increases the cost. While savings in time and money if there is no public involvement may represent false economies, the costs of public involv _ ment are nevertheless real. A second major concern of many planners is that public involvement is noappropriate for problems with technical solutions. As John Friedmann points out in Retracking America.' the nature of classical allocative planning tends separate the role of planners as technicians from the citizens and elected officials as people who impart values to the process. In his analysis, Friedmann identifi these two areas as processed knowledge and personal knowledge and suggests the inherent potential for conflict. Because planners perceive this danger, the: often delay citizen involvement until technical solutions are developed, and thez, seek only citizen concurrence. In these instances, it is not uncommon for citizer; groups to emerge in opposition to the recommended technical solution-res _ ing in angry confrontation and long delays. An obvious solution is to expand the planning process to consider both pe _ sonal and processed knowledge views in the formulation of goals and objectiv and the selection of recommended solutions. A politically unacceptable techni solution may not be "better" than a less perfect but politically supportab ~ resolution. The open public involvement process provides a means for identifyinz solutions which are technically and politically acceptable. A third issue for planners is the confidentiality and objectivity of informatio . Certain types of data, such as personal interviews, cannot be shared. This raises the issue of credibility and trust between planners and citizen participants. The cloaks of confidentiality or objectivity need not be used to separate citizens frorz information needed to make a decision. Planners often view citizens as incapable of understanding technical issues believe that citizen views may "pollute" their inherent objectivity. Planners also can develop a proprietary interest in data; this may limit their Willingness share it with citizens and block the level of their interaction. Whenever possible. information should be shared with citizens, who can be expected to understand where confidentiality needs to be guarded.

'L96 ~ "LP!lfIJ
-J8A!Un 'AUBdwoJ

'JoqJ\;f

UU\f

'SWllfOJ81lf1J AIlS '( 1768

S8SB8 unoo

UIBW ,SJ8UM08WOLj [OLjM]

8Ljl

Aq 811wIS8Bf

UI p8nssl8l:l

fO

8UO P8PB8LjJB8dS PIES"

'SJ8pUnBS

pUB UBIIIW8BlfIJ

:>jJO;_ M8N)

Ljd8S0r

'liB IB W8Ljl ISnJI I,UpIP 8SIOU AUB P8P818P 8U!l AI8JBq p8l:l IOU

isnl

8M

mq

8ABLj I" ' , , 'p8U8do P88110U U88q

8Ljl 88UIS

[S/811811 S,HMllln9] P/10M 8LfJ to SUO/J8N 8JOW8i::J /818118S ouu S/811811 'H!MS pausuqnd AIIBUI6uo '>j80J8
UBLHBUOr UI

SBLj SUIBJ) 8Ljl OJI8lf1J S\f

'::3

S81JBLjJ Aq In8

8UIl

'~J

'1786 ~ '17 J8q

:88Jn0S

WOJf 8SIOU 'P8P1P8Jd

SIBI8!ifO

-W81d8S

'JSOd uOJBUlLfS8M 8Lf1

'>j88M ISBI P8>jJBW8J 8Ljl

SJ8pUnBS

IBIO) 8Ljl 01 8SB8

,,'J8PIOLj8q

fO

S8A8 8Ljl U! liB S,II"

aLjI UI SIB8dd\f

'W8ISAS IISUBJI eui fO IS08 UOllllw OC: ~ $ inoqs p8PPB fO IJnOJ 's'n S8JnP880Jd 6UIUUBId

aLjI Aq p8J8pJO ,,' , , '8IqBUoSB8JUn J8A8U 8J8M 8M" WBLjBJ8 'M8IAJ8IUI UB UI P811d8J 8J8M A8Ljl 81BJOqBI8

8JOW 'M8U aLjI 'SIB!8!HO OJI8lf1J 'uollllw

01 6UlpJ088\f

9$
8Ljl

Aq IS08

SI! 6uI SBM

,,'8IqBUoSB8JUn

-SIBJ 'JB8A B UBLjI 8JOW JOf P8ABI8P , , , aU11ABMqns

118f I" (.188JIS BWn;._ UO SJ8UM08WOLj 8Ljl WOJf IU8J8H!P WILj 8PBW IBLjM

fO

UOl18nJISuOJ

'UBld 'ABMLj6ILj M8U B JOf SUBld P81llBq ,SJ8UM08WOLj 'f!IBJ 's6uudS 'SISIUOII -6uo S,OJI8lf1J 01 6UlpJ088B ' , , lIInq IBLjI 8J8Ljl UOIIBI80SSB B P8PB8Lj WIBd WBLjBJ8

IBUI SBM

, , , 18UUnl 8Ljl '8SIMJ8LjIO

SIOI IUB8BA 01

sqrno
-OPIA

WOJf p8AOW IJn08

8JaM SIU8A aLjI 'ssu JlaLjI

01 6UIJ!18J J8UB 'J8IBl SB dnoJ6

pUB SISalOJd

fO

IInS8J PlnoM

-oruisqo
8H

Bwn;._ 8Ljl P8IBUO:::JX8 ISJlf S,OJI8lf1J ' , , JI8Ljl

B S\f 'S>jIBM IUOJf JlaLjI 8Jn61fslp , , , SluaA JIB aLjl 8Ljl 'AllllnbuBJI JI8Ljl

'J86BUBW

IBJ8U86

'PIES SJaUMoaWOLj

'WBLjBJ8 ISOW 6uunp

UOS>j8Br SBM S81llBq

fO

qirnsrp
ABMqns

PlnOM

SUOII

80f f81Lj8 ,SJ8UM08WOLj

8Ljl

-BJqIA pUB asiou

,,'alqBAllun pjnov,

II a>jBW pUB la8JIS rno aZIIBpUBA"

,,'SILj6u JnO J8AO 8M 8J8M ABMqns 8LjllBLjl 'II

md

SJapB81 JlaLjI 01 S6UUB8Lj pUB SS8J6

6UIP!J 8J8M A8Ljll18f ABM 8Lj) U! 6UlPUBIS 'IUn088B

fO

suo

SB 'JB8f 8Ljl

ssardxs
6UIWWBf

'SS8J60Jd

pousubnoi fO

ouqnd
-UOJ 6Ullif '8JBfJBM

8aJLjl

8M pres A8Ljl ,SU8ZII!8

0IUI SUJ88U08 'II Op 01 pBLj UB ILj6nBI

arojaq

6U!AfI)Sal

'SllnSMBI [J'O

.no,
'UOI

8>jBI 01 8ABLj A8Ljl

APB81S p86BM

8M PUB 'UOSS81 8AISU8dx8

-6UILjSBM

UI]la8JIS

8q 01 pBLj OJI8lf1J >jUILjI I" 'OJI8lf1J ISUIB6B

aLjI SJBaA XIS JO:::l

auiru, fO SIUapIsaJ UMop-an OJlaw alU

292

The Practice of State and Regional

Planning

Another concern of planners is the difficulty of achieving agreement between the staff and their supervisors and gaining concurrence from the decision making body about the appropriate level and type of participation. In many state and regional agencies, staff planners responsible for public involvement receive little support from their supervisors. Such support, however, is essential throughout the involvement process in order to avoid false expectations and attendant conflicts. Compromises are required at every stage in the citizen involvement process, including the design of the program. Agreement concerning the role of citizens must be reached before the process is presented to the public. In spite of these concerns, citizen participation offers the planner a number of incentives. One of the most obvious is the necessity to meet requirements for citizen participation in nearly every federal or state funded planning program. Moreover, citizen participation as an end in itself can make the planner's job more satisfying and effective by means of the following: Reducing isolation of the planner from the public. Generating a spirit of cooperation and trust. Providing opportunities to disseminate information. Identifying additional dimensions of inquiry and research. Assisting in identifying alternative solutions. Providing legitimacy to the planning effort and political credibility of the agency. Increasing public support.
Techniques of citizen participation

Forms of public involvement

Numerous techniques are under the rubric of citizen participation. They range from simple regulations requiring open meeting to the sophisticated Delphi method of developing consensus; from commonplace public hearings to experimental cable television. With few exceptions, a successful public involvement program incorporates several techniques. Our purpose in this chapter is to provide the reader with an overview. Citizen participation techniques may be arrayed on a continuum based on the degree of passive or active involvement, ranging from publicity to public partnership. Publicity techniques are designed to persuade and thus gain public support: relating to citizens as passive consumers. Public education programs present relatively complete and balanced information so that citizens may draw their own conclusions. Public input techniques solicit ideas and opinions from citizens. They are ill effective when combined with feedback mechanisms which inform participants of the extent to which their input has influenced ultimate decisions. Public interaction techniques facilitate the exchange of information and id among citizens, planners, and decision makers. When these techniques are eff -tively utilized, each participant has the opportunity to express his/her views, respond to the ideas of others, and work toward consensus. Public partnership offers citizens a formalized role in shaping the ultimate decisions. More active citizen participation is not necessarily better in every situatioc While a program which includes only support building and information di -

p';):m;)!pnB P;)l;):31Bl oqi oi ;):3BSS;)W;)qllOpBl

-posn

S! q;)!qM umtpotn

oqi roj AITB;)y!;);)dS;):3BSS;)W;)ql u:3!S;)a

-sonbtmpoi U0!lB;)!UnWWm JO Al;)!1BA B ;)S[l

-oouorpna
U! pounnsuen

P;)l!S;)P ;)ql qoeor Oll;)P10

cq oi S! UO!lBUllOJU! q;)!qM Aq SpUUBq;) ;)ql P;)PS AnnplB:J :WB1:3Old

U0!lBUllOJU! oqqnd ;)A!P;)JP UB :3U!u:3!S;)Poi nrauodun

;)lB

sojnr :3U!MOHOJ;)Gl ';)Al;)S

A;)ql osoqi JO SP;);)U ;)ql oi ssouuodo l!;)ql ;)lBllSUOW;)P oi SWB1:3Old UO!lBW10JU! ;)Z!TIln UB;) ';)lOW;)l pUB X;)ldWO;) l;)P!SUm ABW oqqnd ;)ql q;)!qM 'S;)PU;):3B IBUO!:3;)l pUB ;)lBlS -uonndpured U;)Z!l!;) W01J l!PU;)q PlnoM q;)!qM SUO!S!;);)P pUB 'SWB1:3 -ord 's;)!;)!l0d IBlU;)Wm;)Ao:3 moqe oqqnd oqi UllOJU! UB;) snqi S;)PU;):3y 'sp;)fqns ;)y!;);)dS uo oqqnd ;)ql :3U!lB;)np;) JO SUB;)W ora s:3U!l;);)W ;)!lqnd pUB 'snnamq Sl;))JB;)dS 'sroiuco U0!lBUll0JU! 'S)J00qpUBq 'SMOqS ;)P!lS pUB S;)!1BlU;)WmOp 'Sl;)n;)l -SM;)U 'S;)P!llB l;)dBdSM;)U 'S;)SB;)Pl SM;)U 'S;);)U;)l;)JUO;) SS;)ld uomxmp ;)!lqnJ ';)A!P;)JP lOU S! AUcnsn ;);)!l0u IB:3;)1pormbcr AHB;)! -dAl ;)Gl ';)A!lBUllOJU! SB n;)M SB P;)u:3!S;)P APA!PBlllB oq pjnoqs A;)ql -uouounj AlP!lqnd ;)ql JO ired A;))J B ;)lB oSIB santururoddo uonedtonred JO S;);)!lN 'S;)!l!A!PB IBlU;)Wm;)Ao:3 :3U!z!;)!lqnd JO SUB;)W ;)A!l;);)Y;) raqio ore Slu;)w;);)UnOUUB ;);)!Al;)S ;)!lqnd UO!S!A;)I;)lpUB O!PBl Al!lBnb IBUO!SS;)JOld 'UO!lBUllOJU! ;)A!lUBlsqns ;)lOW inn -SUBll UB;)snqtqxo pUB 'SABlds!p 'somqoorg -onbnnpai S!ql JO ;)ldwBx;) [njsscoons lU;)U;);)X;)UB S! u:3!BdwB;) lB;)S: ;)ql A;))JOWS S,;);)!Al;)S lS;)l0tl ;)ql .spreoqjpq lO/PUB 'sinqs-j, 'suonnq 'Sl;))J;)!lS l;)dwnq 'Sl;)lSod 0l P;)ll;)JSUBll S! q;)!qM 0:30110 uB:31s ;)A!l;)U!lS!P B SBq;)ns ;);)!A;)P ;)ldw!s B q:3nolql ;)q ABW pUB PlBM.l0Jlq:3!BllS APA!lBPl ;)q lsnw P;)lBU!W;)SS!P UO!lBWlOJU! ;)ql 's;)pu;)nl!lSUm l!;)ql W01J S;)APSW;)ql :3U!lBIOS!)JS!l SIB!;)YJo IBw;)wm;)AO:3 'SllOY;) SUO!lBPl ;)!lqnd lnoql!M. S/P!1qnJ sCln/rful{;)ClI jo uoyd.wsCla

'SMOnOJ ;)nb!uq;);)l JO ;)dAl q;)B;) JO uo!ssms!p ;)A!l!U!PP ;)lOW Y 'M;)J B 0l uO!lBdP9lBd Sl!U1!1d!qSl;)UllBd ;)!Jqnd ;)pqM 'B!P;)W SSBW ;)ql q:3nolql SU;)Z!lP JO spuBsnoql q;)B;)l UB;) SllOY;) SUO!lBPl ;)!lqnd 'lU;)W;)AIOAU! ;)A!PB JO I;)A;)1 ;)ql Ol P;)lBPl Al;)Sl;)AU!S! SS;);)Old AUBU! P;)AIOAU!;)q UB;) OqM SU;)Z!l!;)JO l;)qwnu ;)ql 'UO!lB;)!UnWWO;) ABM-OMl ;)lBl!P;)BJ pUB UO!lBW10JU! ;)lBU!W;)SS!P 0l SUB;)W B ;)q ABW OSIB :3U!1B;)q ;)!lqnd B 'UO!lBW10JU! p;)nm Ol AITBdpU!ld P;)U:3!S;)P S! l! ;)1!qM ';)ldwBX;) lOti 'Alo:3;)lB;) ;)1:3U!SB OlU! AHB;)U lY lOU op s;)nb!uq;);)l AUBW 'WB1:30ld P;)u:3!S;)P AIP1Bq S! UO!lBU! AUnJlq:3noql B JO llBd ;)q Plnoqs SlU;)W;)I;) qlOq 'AlOlBd!;)!llBd

so.... luawaAIOAU! aA!l:>V UOIII%lIUnWWOD , ~BM-OMI 6u!dolaAaa UO!l:>eJalU! :>!lqnd UO!IBWJOfU! 5U!lOaIiOO UO!IBWJOjUI 6UIIBU!WeSS!G luawaAIOAU! aA!ssed IJoddns o!lqnd 5ulpi!nS

uOljBd!DIWBd wnnUljuoJ 17-(:. =-

= v==

luasuo:> pUBaO!lIpB 5upmeS d!4SJaUlJed :>!Iqnd

UO!le:>npa :>!Iqnd

294 The Practice of State and Regional Planning All materials should be understood easily. If the information is too technical or relies extensively on professional jargon, the public may misinterpret the message or become suspicious of the sponsoring agency's motives. A citizen advisory committee may be useful in reviewing the materials to assure that they are clear, concise, and understandable. Timing also is critical; citizens must be given ample time to absorb information before decisions are made, especially if the issues are unfamiliar or complex. Public information techniques are essential to a comprehensive citizen parti ipation program. Used with other elements, they can provide a foundation 0: public trust in state and regional decision making.
Public input

Information about the characteristics, needs, and attitudes of the citizenry is essential to effective governmental planning and political decision making. Far too often, planners assume that they know what the public needs and wants. Public input programs encourage citizens to express their own opi ions and possibly influence public decisions. These efforts can be formal or informal, designed either to gauge the attitudes of a cross section of the population or provide concerned citizens a chance ~~ voice their opinions. Like most citizen participation techniques, they are valua ;:" because they both contribute to decision making and create a spirit of mu ~ trust. If the information collected from such efforts is not analyzed and utilized effectively by the agency, the exercise is futile for citizens and an unneces~ burden for policy makers. Any controversial issue is likely to generate some expression of public opinion, through direct communication with the agency, letters to local newspapers, ra c.; and television talk show discussions, petitions, participation at public meeting or demonstrations. While public hearings are a common means of respondirz to an aroused citizenry, they rarely are entirely satisfactory to either citizens officials. (Public hearings are discussed at some length below.) The opinion poll can provide an opportunity for interested citizens to exp their views and permit decision makers to formulate an accurate profile of pu attitudes, although complete fulfullment of either function requires some sacrifice of the other. A broad opportunity for individuals to express their opinions is provid through simple questionnaires widely distributed through mass mailing, the prin media, or handouts. It is important to note that in this type of survey responde represent a self-selected and biased sample who are likely to have higher incomes and be better educated than the general population. Seniors, young adults azz; minorities are likely to be underrepresented. A disproportionately greater n ber of persons with strong views will respond to a questionnaire than their acruz, representation in the population justifies. If these biases are recognized, ' surveys still can be useful in eliciting broad public response; they do not pe precise statistical inferences. If the planner's goal is to develop an accurate portrait of public opinion, rno ::c sophisticated polling techniques are required, such as a survey administered a carefully selected sample of the targeted population. Selected citizens a:= interviewed by telephone or in person, or questionnaires may be sent thro _themail accompanied by prepaid return envelopes and perhaps followed _ reminder postcards. Careful design ensures the polling of a representative sam from which inferences about the population may be drawn. A survey can accomplish one or more of the following: Collect data on the demographic characteristics of the population. Invite citizens to express their needs and concerns. Present new ideas and elicit citizens' reactions.

Citizen Participation Assess the public's knowledge, attitudes, or opinions at a point in time. Measure changes in attitudes and opinions over a period of time.

295

Polling techniques offer the potential for reaching all segments of the population, including those who customarily do not attend hearings, meetings, and workshops. Furthermore, surveys alone can provide representative information about the entire population, although ensuring statistical validity can be costly and time consuming. However, because of the quality and quantity of information which can be gathered, the well-designed survey is often a cost-effective technique. Respondents to surveys may doubt their effect on the decision making process unless the purpose and uses of information gathered are described clearly and the results disseminated widely, particularly to the respondents themselves. Other more simple polling techniques may be used to foster citizen involvement. For example, written questionnaires may be distributed to persons attending hearings, meetings, or workshops, thus providing decision makers with a written record of citizens' concerns and impressions. A specialized public input tool is the Delphi technique, a complex reiterative survey process. Respondents are anonymous. Initially, a group of individuals representing diverse positions and information on specificpolicy issues is selected. Each participant completes and returns by mail a detailed questionnaire. The results are incorporated into a second questionnaire which also is sent to each respondent, along with a summary of the group's responses to the first round of questioning. In some cases, participants meet at the end of the process to discuss results. The Delphi method results in a set of thorough, thoughtful, and tested opinions, and can involve thousands of people. In the state of Washington, for example, a three-round Delphi questionnaire format was used to obtain the opinions of 2400 citizens regarding current and future trends affecting the state's development. The results were incorporated by a state-wide task force into its Alternatives for Washington futures program. Public input techniques are a valuable foundation for decision making. They provide opportunities to obtain contributions from carefully selected respondents, and invite active-though not interactive-participation. While a great deal of information may be disseminated and collected, only limited opportunities are provided to exchange and synthesize different viewpoints. All the techniques discussed above involve one-way communication. Interactive techniques encourage citizens and planners to share ideas, react to one another's views, ask questions, and formulate and test alternatives. The key to effective public interaction is the elimination of the "we/they" dichotomy often present in public meetings and hearings. A number of techniques foster cooperation rather than confrontation. For example, the Florida Division of State Planning utilized a participatory public hearing format to develop the state's comprehensive plan. In a series of two-day meetings, staff presentations of pertinent issues were followed by quesion-and-answer periods. An extensive publicity campaign resulted in the participation of approximately 1200 citizens. In Oregon, the workshop technique was used successfully to formulate stateide land-use planning goals and guidelines. Twenty-eight workshops were conducted around the state. In addition to mailed invitations, television and radio stations carried public messages from the Governor to all citizens inviting them to attend the workshop in their area. In all, it is estimated that more than 3000 citizens participated directly in the process. A public workshop offers citizens the opportunity to interact directly with
Public interaction

296

The Practice

of State and Regional

Planning

agency staff and elected officials. A cross section of citizens can be expected to attend if time and location are convenient, the topic affects them or is of direct interest, and they are notified and invited personally. Small group discussions in which every participant has an opportunity to express ideas and opinions promote interaction and discourage the domination of a few vocal participants. A conference is another means of fostering interaction among concerned citizens, agency staff, and decision makers. Typically lasting one or two days, this technique includes speeches, presentations, general and small group discussions, and workshops, frequently concluding with the adoption of recommendations for future action. Although they require substantial planning and coordination, these meetings promote cooperation and mutual understanding, command media attention, and may result in regional or national recognition. Public partnership In most cases, citizens involved in ongoing state and regional planning serve in an advisory capacity. We use the term "advisory committee" to include several types of groups: General advisory. Technical and scientific. Research commissions. Special clientele, e.g. industry, consumers. Special task forces. Advisory committees usually are composed of 10 to 15 individuals selected either from a cross section of professions, interests, and geographic locations. or from a more narrow special purpose range. The use of advisory committees is especially common in regional planning. Frequently, in highly technical areas such as transportation or solid waste, regional agencies involve citizens in both policy and technical advisory committees. Such committees serve an importan role, especially in an agency which has a tenuous relationship with its constituency. An advantage of the advisory committee is that lay individuals work together over a period of time and learn to know each other and the particular issues which they are addressing. They also can provide fresh perspective to the more technical staff. Single-purpose committees or task forces should be disbanded after their assignment is completed. It is unwise for the agency to perpetuate the group's existence by finding other projects. The advisory committee can function as a sounding board for the agency and help bridge the gap between government and the public by sponsoring workshops and hearings. To ensure state or regional representation, individuals appointed to these bodies should have a broad range of interests or represent specific constituencies. Clearly defined objectives and agency/committee roles are necessary to assure the successful fulfillment of the committee's functions, which can be educational. advisory, program development, or support building. An interesting variation is the futures program, such as developed in a number of states, which involves citizens and governmental officials in forecasting and shaping future development. Participants set goals and objectives and explore medium- and long-range implementation strategies. Unlike most other involvement techniques, the futures concept has gathered momentum without any particular impetus from the federal government. These commissions generally have larger memberships than the typical advisory committee, and in some cases they are constituted and funded privately. They use a variety of techniques to involve the broader public in their work, including media presentations, questionnaires, and conferences.

Citizen Participation

297

Additional techniques The public hearing is the technique employed most often to include citizens in the planning process. Often required by federal or state legislation, public hearings are used in both the legislative and executive branches. They are scheduled usually in the last stage of decision making, just prior to the announcement of a new or modified public policy. Because citizens may sense that they have little real opportunity to affect the outcome, hearings often erupt in hostility, anger, and bitterness. Rarely do decision makers have a real opportunity to evaluate public testimony judiciously. They may be confronted with a seemingly endless parade of people who appear to be ill-tempered, irrational, and unrepresentative. Even wellintentioned citizens and public officials may have difficulty rising above the constraints of the circumstances. In the typical agenda of a public hearing, the sponsoring agency presents its proposal and then allows for public testimony. The customary physical arrangement of the hearings chamber, with officials on a dais and the audience at some distance in rows of chairs accentuates the distance between officials and the public, promoting rigid communication and an adversary relationship. The traditional hearings process has inherent limitations, which include the following: Inhibiting two-way communication. Providing inadequate opportunity for citizens to express their goals, values, and opinions when they can have an effect on the planning process. Not allowing extensive exchange of information or providing equal opportunity for each participant to be heard. Fostering emotionalism and hostility. The underlying atmosphere of a hearing often is one of basic mistrust: citizens do not trust officials to respect their views; officials do not trust citizens to distinguish the public interest from their own narrow self-interest. Individuals may have to wait hours to speak and then find they are limited to a few minutes; officials may have to sit through hours of testimony which drains their energy and patience. The hearing format is not conducive to discussion in depth or to resolution of conflicts. The most serious obstacle to improvement in the hearings process is the attitude of many planners and public officials who believe that the least public participation is the best. This attitude is narrow, though understandable if their experience with citizen participation has been limited to acrimonious and unproductive public hearings. Because they involve minimal expenditures of time and money and are required by law in many cases, public hearings will continue to be the most widely used technique of citizen involvement. Therefore, within their limitations, agencies should strive to improve them as much as possible. For example, an agency may schedule hearings at an early stage in the planning process when public opinion can have a meaningful impact on decisions. Careful summaries and analyses of the hearing record, along with clear statements of resulting actions, also are constructive. However, a program which includes only public hearings and perhaps some publicity or public information activity invites citizen participation only in the narrowest and most legalistic sense. Cable television deserves special note because of its potential for expanding and enhancing the nature and extent of citizen participation. Cable television can revolutionize the public education process. Unlike commercial television, it makes available to communities a considerable number of channels with few programming limitations. Public meetings, presentations, discussions, speeches,

298 The Practice of State and Regional Planning and debates may be televised for interested citizens to view and evaluate conveniently in their own homes. In addition, the capability for viewer response is available. The use of this technology as a component of public decision making in Columbus, Ohio, has elicited both praise for broadening the political process and criticism for limiting participation to citizens who subscribe to pay TV.s These experiments may be the forerunner of citizen participation efforts elsewhere.
Selecting program components

As noted earlier, usually a successful citizen participation program requires a combination of techniques. While legal requirements for public involvernenr must be met, they should be considered minimum guidelines. For the most pan, federal and state laws and regulations require specific details such as a hearing agenda and specific committee composition but rarely provide guidance regarding approaches. A successful citizen participation program must be: integra] the planning process and focused on its unique needs; designed to function within available resources of time, personnel, and money; and responsive to the citizen participants. A number of efforts have been made to relate specific techniques to the objectives they serve most effectively. 6 Figure 12-5 summarizes our assessment of the purposes served by selected techniques.

Figure 12-5

Objectives

served by selected

public involvement

techniques

(J)

~ :a
::J
(J)

.2
::J Q_
(J)

g
QJ QJ :;:;

t::

:J

:J

0 UI
Q_ X QJ

iz:

~
CI)

>

CI)

E
::J

QJ Q_
(J)

o 0

Q_

.2
E
::J

'iii
t5
E
::J

'" :a
.S!
D 0

.S!

.'"
::J Q_

Q_

:g
c
QJ

QJ

co
t:: 0
Q_ Q_ ::J
(J)

(J)

:a
.S! '0
QJ Q_ (fJ

3:

.12 '2 0
(5
(J)

ii co o o co
QJ

0.

~ ~
C

E
::J

Techniques Mass media Open meetings Public meetings Surveys Delphi Workshops Conferences Advisory commissions

:c

E x co 2

s: o co

::J Q_

a:
0

QJ

~
-

'c

'c
2 -

2
-

.'"

cu
c
QJ

QJ

co

ill

:g
rn
::J

>

QJ

co 0
CJ)

(J)

cD
-

('J

a:
0

QJ

Q)
(fJ

(5
Q.

:-e

co o

<:

0 0 0

::

0 0

'.
t:

Public hearings Cable TV*

-
0

"Based on assumed general availability and acceptance Strong potential for meeting objectives o Some potential for meeting objectives -Limited potential for meeting objectives

Citizen Participation
Criteria for an effective citizen participation program

299

Each citizen participation program must be designed to fit the unique needs and resources of the sponsoring agency. While we cannot offer rules which are applicable in every circumstance, in this section we identify the elements of a well-designed participatory process and suggest evaluation criteria.
Elements of an effective program

Although citizen participation efforts vary greatly, experience indicates a number of common elements which characterize successful programs. The program must do the following: Meet legal requirements. Clearly articulate goals and objectives. Command political support. Be an integral part of the decision making structure. Receive adequate funding, staff, and time. Identify concerned or affected publics. Delineate clear roles and responsibilities for participants. Citizen participation efforts frequently are required by federal or state legislation and may be accompanied by detailed regulations. The first criterion, of course, is to comply with these guidelines. However, these requirements are viewed too often as definitive rather than minimal. For example, a program has not necessarily succeeded because its advisory committee has the required number and proportion of minority, elderly, and low-income members. Each citizen participation program should be designed to meet its particular situation, integrating legal requirements into the overall goals and objectives of the agency's planning process.
Meet legal requirements

The public involvement program should be related as closely as possible to the goals of the overall planning process. Its specific role may be derived by identifying the nature and extent of public information, support, or input required to meet these goals. For example, if one goal is to develop a profile of general public opinion on an issue, a survey may be in order. A conference or advisory committee may be more appropriate if the goal is to understand the specific needs of identifiable interest groups.
Clearly articulate goals and objectives

Just as citizen participation is part of the overall planning process, both are components of the larger political system and are effective only to the extent that they command political support. Effective citizen participation provides decision makers with information about public needs and attitudes, permitting the adoption of plans, policies, or programs which are politically feasible, economically desirable, and socially acceptable. Thus, public involvement can be a valuable political resource. Each program must gain the support of the necessary political leaders, who should be identified and involved in the process as early as possible. On the state level, the attitude and position of the governor can be critical to the effective involvement of citizens in decision making. Support from other elected officials and agency administrators also is important, since they often have the authority
Command political support

300 The Practice of State and Regional Planning to allocate needed resources and determine whether citizen input will be incorporated into agency policies. Finally, successful citizen involvement requires the support of influential members of the public, particularly if the participation of organized interest groups is necessary. To ensure a sense of identification and commitment, these individuals should be included in the earliest stages of the process. As previously noted, citizen participation is valuable not only for its own sake but also for its contribution to the planning process. A well-designed program allows political leaders to make more informed, responsive, and justifiable decisions. For this reason, the needs of decision makers should be taken into account as the program is designed. For example, public input can help them define problems, establish priorities, or improve communication with citizen groups. A program designed to meet needs such as these will command support. The program's techniques, as well as its purposes, must command support. Some decision makers may be skeptical of surveys, advisory committees, or workshops. To ensure the acceptance of the results of citizen participation as an integral part of the planning process, such misgivings should be addressed prior to the program's implementation. Planners should expect to have to change or modify some program elements if these elements are objectionable to decision makers.
Integral to decision making structure

Citizens must be assured that their efforts are integrated into the planning process and linked to the decisions that result. They can contribute to the decision making process at every stage including the investigation of facts, formulation of goals, development and evaluation of alternative courses of action, and selection of the optimum alternative. However, if citizen participation efforts are tangential to decision making, opportunities for creating public goodwill and adding a valuable dimension in planning are lost. This occurs when the findings of an advisory committee are ignored or a public hearing is held after a decision has been made. Every step should serve the planning process, and citizens should be informed explicitly how their participation contributes to the final outcome. Although citizen opinions should be considered seriously, it should be made clear that other factors also will influence the final decisions; tradeoffs and compromises are part of the political process.
staff, and time These are valuable resources which must be budgeted carefully. Although some agencies appear to espouse the goals of public participation in the planning process, the resources they allocate for implementing programs are limited or nonexistent. A successful citizen participation effort usually requires a substantial investment of staff and calendar time to permit citizens to formulate and incorporate their ideas into the planning process. Specific program elements must be commensurate; with time constraints. For example, a brief telephone poll, which may be completed more quickly than a more sophisticated survey, might provide sufficient information. Moreover, the planning and management skills required for effective public involvement programs often are underestimated; either experienced personnel should be hired or existing staff should be trained to deal with the public. These skills include knowledge of the following:

Adequate funding,

Role of public involvement in planning. Group dynamics and human relations.

Citizen Participation Involvement techniques. Meeting facilitation. Conflict resolution. Resources required for effective public involvement.

301

Individuals who possess these skills cannot function at maximum efficiency without adequate material and staff support. For this reason, some training in these areas is important for program administrators and technical staff who may be required to make public presentations. The inclusion of a public involvement program as a line item in a budget may be nearly as important as the amount appropriated. A budget category to which time and expenses associated with the program are allocated is a useful means of evaluating the cost effectiveness of different involvement techniques, such as expensive media productions versus publications prepared in the agency print shop. The amount of resources allocated should reflect the scale of the program and goals of the agency. A modest program with an adequate budget is preferable to an ambitious program with an inadequate budget. The likely failure of the latter may jeopardize future citizen participation efforts. However, a large budget alone does not assure a successful citizen participation program.
Concerned or affected publics Although some situations require involvement of the public at large, frequently it is necessary to identify groups particularly affected by a proposed decision. Citizen participation efforts should be designed thoughtfully to suit the special needs of these groups. As stated above, convenience is a critical factor in facilitating participation. For certain groups, the noon hour is best for meetings, while others are not available until evening. The availability of child care is important to some people, while others can participate only if provided with honoraria, transportation costs, or per diem allowances. In large regions and most states, finding meeting sites convenient to a majority can be a serious problem, but care must be taken not to exclude any known groups. For example, public transportation and/or adequate parking facilities should be convenient and nearby. The method of presenting technical information should fit the sophistication level of participants. While sufficient material should be provided so that citizens can understand issues and make informed judgments, some technical information should not be oversimplified. The level of understanding required for effective participation will determine the range of techniques used in the participation program.

In order to avoid conflicting or unfulfilled expectations on the part of citizens, planners, and decision makers, the program agenda and roles and responsibilities of participants must be defined clearly. This includes clarification of the planning context, the nature and extent of citizen involvement, and the manner in which public input will be integrated into the final decision. Effective participation programs demonstrate to citizens that government is accountable and responsive. However, since it is impossible to please everyone, the process cannot be expected to be entirely free of conflict. Nevertheless, if decision makers demonstrate that publicly expressed concerns have been seriously considered, the goals of the process have been satisfied. Even those opposed to the final outcome may acquiesce in the decision if they believe it has been formulated in a fair and open manner.
Roles and responsibilities of participants

302
Figure 12-6 Citizen participation can take many forms. The challenge is to stimulate citizen interest without provoking a war. The swastika painted over a U.S. government car is a crude reminder of the stormy reaction to the initial planning work of the National Park Service in the Upper Delaware River Valley that separates New York and Pennsylvania. Negative citizen reaction may also take the form of angry testimony at public hearings, seldom a productive kind of citizen participation from the planner's point of view. The third picture shows a more positive form of participation, a commuter Ride Match Fair arranged by the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments.

The Practice of State and Regional

Planning

Citizen Participation
Evaluating a citizen participation program

303

While it is an important dimension of every planning effort, program evaluation is especially necessary for citizen involvement. Participants need and deserve feedback regarding the impact of their involvement. Moreover, a successful program helps create a favorable climate for future public involvement efforts. From our discussion of the elements of an effective citizen participation program, a number of evaluative criteria can be suggested, including the following:
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Legal requirements: Did the program meet all legal rules and regulations? If requirements constrained the program, were these constrained unavoidable? Goals and objectives: Is there widespread support for the final decision? Has public understanding of the issue increased? Does the final decision meet the agency's or program's articulated goals and objectives? Were significant conflicts aired and resolved? Did planners and decision makers receive an accurate portrayal of public opinion? Were all interested parties provided access to the process? Political support: Were important individuals and groups identified and contacted early in the planning process? Was their input considered in designing the involvement program? Were these individuals informed of all developments in the program? Decision making: Was the program an integral part of the planning process? Were the form and timing of its outputs compatible with the requirements of decision making? Were the outputs of the program used in the decision making process? If not, why not? Adequate resources: Was sufficient time given to each step of the process? Was sufficient staff assigned? Were staff members adequately trained for their roles? Were sufficient funds allocated for support services and materials? Publics: Were concerned public groups and individuals adequately identified? Were they all notified of meetings and offered opportunities to participate? Was participation convenient for targeted publics? Did the targeted public(s) participate fully? What could have been done to encourage fuller participation? (Note that "body counts" are inadequate. The evaluation must analyze the breadth of participation as well as the number of persons and groups participating. ) Roles and responsibilities: Were participants given adequate information upon which to base their expectations of the process? Were these expectations reasonably met? Did participants influence the process and/or ultimate decision? How? In addition to these elements of the program, the satisfaction of participants

304 The Practice of State and Regional Planning

also should be measured. Involvement may be rewarding to participants even when they are not particularly influential in the decision-making process. By measuring levels of satisfaction of participants through discussions, interviews, or questionnaires, these efforts themselves will contribute to the participants' satisfaction with the process. Opinions of planners and decision makers also should be assessed. As we have noted, a frequent obstacle to meaningful citizen participation is the negative attitude of some public officials. A final measure of program success concerns the degree to which results of the process have been reported fully and accurately to the public: 1. 2. 3. Did interested citizens receive an accurate report of the program's results? Were they made aware of how these results were used in the overall planning process? Did these reporting mechanisms help build agency credibility?

The most important measure of success will emerge in the political arena. An effective program may encourage the governor or local executive to take a strong leadership role in the implementation of a policy or facilitate controversial legislative action. In some cases, the ultimate measure of success will come at the ballot box, as voters express opinions which may be based largely on information or impressions derived from the public involvement process. The outcome may affect tax levies and bonding measures essential to the agency's operation, as well as the future of elected officials. Conclusion There is a tendency for planners to view their professional roles as purely technical, and therefore removed from the public whose input they judge to be value laden and political. One of our purposes in this chapter has been to demonstrate that this dichotomy is false and counterproductive. Not only is planning far from an objective science, but the public often has opinions and insights which can be helpful to the planning process. Moreover, people will become involved in issues which affect their lives, regardless of what planners do. Citizen participation should be welcomed as an opportunity for productive cooperation rather than angry confrontation. While it can be argued that public involvement is desirable in a dernocrati society, it is more to the point for our purposes that it provides practical benef to the planner and the planning process. Citizen participation can be a source of information, ideas, public support, and goodwill; it sometimes can prevent costly legal and political delays; and it can help to transform the siege mentality unfortunately present among many planners into a spirit of cooperation and trust. While an effective public involvement effort demands time, money, and specialized skills, it also requires a climate of-flexibility, candor, and mutual respect. That is not possible if planners approach citizen participation as a threat a burden, or an unnecessary impediment to technical planning activities. The planner who is committed to public involvement as a constructive par.: of the planning process must begin by understanding why individuals volunteer to participate in oftentimes arduous and thankless jobs; it is important also to ensure that there is consistency between the public's expectations and his or her own. There is no recipe which can be used in constructing an effective program, though we have provided a list of essential ingredients. The most critical elernen;

Citizen Participation

305

is the commitment of the planner to an open, cooperative, and constructive planning process.

Sherry Arnstein, "A Ladder tion," Journal of the American 35 (July 1969):216-244. 2

of Citizen ParticipaInstitute of Planners, 5

Transportation Research Research Council, 1975). See Robert Jacobson, Leo Murray, "QUBE (October 1980):3-4. 6

Board

of the National Fuzzy Image" and

Robert Seaver, "The Dilemma of Citizen Participation," in Citizen Participation in Urban Development, Vol. 1, ed. Hans B. C. Spiegel (Washington, DC: Center for Community Affairs, N1L Institute for Applied Behavioral Science, 1968). John Friedmann, Retracking America: A Theory of Transactive Planning (Garden City: NY: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1973). Transportation Decision-Making: mental Research Board,

"Cable's

Answers Back,"

Planning 46

Two notable efforts may be found in Judy Rosener, "A Cafeteria of Techniques and Critiques," Public Management 57 (December 1975):16-19; and Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, Citizen Participation in the American Federal System (Washington, DC: The Commission): chap. 3. Our own effort these. in Figure 12-4 owes much to

Tranportation
DC:

A Guide to Social and Environ(Washington,

Considerations