|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
Examining USC's
Research on the Neighborhood Council
System
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Charlotte Laws,
a 912 Commissioner and Greater Valley
Glen Councilmember, makes the following
comments in response to a report issued
by a team of USC researchers who are
studying the Los Angeles Neighborhood
Council system. Their project is called
the USC Civic Engagement Initiative.
Before reviewing Dr. Laws' comments, you
may want to look at Mack Reed's article
called "USC:
Neighborhood Councils Are Not a Failure."
The researchers say they welcome input
from the community; they will soon be
compiling their final draft of the
report.
_____________________
Dear Los Angeles,
Below you will find my comments related
to the findings and recommendations
presented by USC researchers on
Saturday, December 16. I am specifically
concentrating on items of potential
disagreement or that I feel are in need
of further clarification ... |
 |
1. USC
conclusion: Neighborhood Councils (NCs)
are not descriptively representative of
the social, economic and educational
diversity of Los Angeles residents.
My question: Since these findings are
based on questionnaires from only a
portion of NC members, is it possible
the response rate was greater from
boardmembers in certain socio-economic
groups? Would the highly educated, for
example, be more likely to return
questionnaires? (In 2003, 66% of NC
members returned questionnaires; and in
2006, only 46% did).
My question: How do these figures
correlate with representation on other
political bodies (i.e. the City Council,
the State Assembly, the US Congress)? I
understand that minorities and the less
educated are under-represented with
respect to all political bodies. If so,
should neighborhood councils be held to
a higher or different standard? If so,
why?
* Acc. to CNN, minorities are
under-represented in political offices
throughout the nation. It is better in
California than in many states: 25% of
California Assembly members are Latino;
33% - 35% of the population is Latino.
My comment: The USC researchers only
compare the composition of neighborhood
councils with those of boards and
commissions. They find that boards and
commissions are more diverse, but this
is an unfair comparison. Boards and
commissions are appointed positions;
therefore, the mayor or city council can
guarantee the body is comprised of
different ethnicities, classes and
educational backgrounds. Neighborhood
council members are generally elected.
The people decide who will win the
position without any aim to create a
“mixed board.” It would be more
reasonable to compare NCs with other
elected bodies.
My comment: Descriptive representation
is desirable, but substantive
representation can be sufficient.
Example: there is no reason to believe
that a white, male City Councilmember is
unable to properly (and substantively)
represent the interests of women and
people of color. It is unfair to assume
that NC members cannot sufficiently
represent the interests of their
community simply because they may not
“look like” the community. The
better question is “Do they think like
the community and make decisions in an
impartial way, taking all interests into
consideration?”
Note: USC researchers say nothing has
increased “descriptive
representation.” Perhaps it is hard,
if not impossible, to achieve.
My comment: The fact that the highly
educated are serving on NCs need not be
viewed as problematic. By joining a NC,
the highly educated bring their
knowledge to the table in an effort to
help their community.
2. USC conclusion: Outreach has
increased, but neighborhood council
participation (and diverse
participation) has decreased.
My comment: Don’t studies show that
group participation tends to decrease or
stagnate after the first phase? Then it
tends to gain steam again? If so, are
NCs at the end of this first phase?
A paper called Limits to Citizen
Participation: The Decline of Community
Organizations by Marilyn Gittel may
shed some light on this.
My question: Are there other reasons for
a decline in participation? Could
infighting be a cause for the decline?
Are some people alienated or bored at NC
meetings, especially those unfamiliar
with meeting settings? Could better
translation services help with
diversity? Could standardized bylaws and
election procedures reduce conflicts,
thus increasing participation? When an
individual has a “personality”
conflict with another boardmember, he /
she often uses the rules (i.e, the
bylaws, the Brown Act, etc.) as
ammunition. Establishing a Dispute
Resolution Commission in each planning
area to arbitrate disputes could be
beneficial. It would allow NCs to
conduct business (without meeting
disruptions) while impartial
decision-makers rule on conflicts.
My comments: I like the USC
researchers’ suggestion that NCs could
focus on community projects rather than
(always) center their activities around
meetings. I think this will increase
diverse participation. A “project”
could be an issue (such as
mansionization, public safety or
transportation), or it could be an event
(like a holiday party or planting day in
the community).
My question: Community participation is
low at City Council meetings as well as
Board and Commission meetings. Should
higher expectations be placed on NCs? If
so, why?
According to Democracy and Citizen
participation in the U.S.: The Role of
Local Government, minorities tend to
participate more in decentralized
political organizations rather than in
centralized ones. Perhaps this suggests
that Neighborhood Councils should be
expected to have greater minority
participation than other political
bodies. In addition, NC meetings and
activities are more accessible to the
public, which means it is easier for
those using public transportation to
participate.
3. USC conclusion: There is an increase
in internal NC conflict, and elections
are increasingly being viewed as unfair.
My comment: When NCs first came into
being, many boardmembers literally
“walked into” positions on their
boards. There was a lack of competition;
and therefore few complaints.
As time has passed, competition has
increased. Competition naturally leads
to complaints. Many losers complain
about the winners.
How many voters in America think the
election process for any office
(president, congress, city council) is
fair (with special interest campaign
donations, an exclusive two-party
system, electronic voting machines,
etc.)? Remember the Florida Supreme
Court? I think there is a widespread
perception that all elections are
unfair. This issue goes well beyond the
NC system.
Because NCs are local, there is a belief
that election results can be overturned.
Some people are vocal in an attempt to
oust the winner from his / her seat.
With a national, state or city election,
the feeling is one of defeat. No one
believes his / her complaint will be
heard. No one believes he or she could
overturn an “unfair” election, so no
one tries.
It would be interesting to analyze
whether there is greater dissatisfaction
with the elected or selected seats on
NCs. Selected offices by their very
nature create an aura of unfairness.
Some will say, “Why did she get picked
and not me? Was there some special favor
or pay out?” With respect to my NC,
the selected offices have generated
complaints, grievances and outbursts at
meetings. I think it is important that
all board positions be elected.
I also believe that much of the
perceived election unfairness is
centered around “definitions of
stakeholder.” Many get upset when
“outsiders” are “bused in” to
vote. A change in the definition of
stakeholder could resolve the problem.
It should also be noted that much of the
infighting is related to a prior
election / selection. When these issues
are cleared up, the fighting may
substantially end.
4. USC recommendation: Neighborhood
Councils should put funds into
activities that appeal to the
under-represented.
My comment: This is a dangerous,
bordering on racist, recommendation,
although I know this is not what the
researcher intended. What exactly is the
preferred activity of someone who is a
minority or who is not affluent? I do
not believe people of certain races or
economic levels have “preferred
activities” based upon their group. To
say they do is to generalize or
stereotype.
If a male were to say, “We need more
women to join the NC system, so I
recommend putting funds into female
activities,” I would call this sexist.
What exactly is a female activity?
Knitting and cooking? Women enjoy the
same activities as men, as far as I
know. All depends upon the individual,
not his or her sex.
After the presentation at USC, I
inquired further about this
recommendation. I asked, “What is an
under-represented group?”
I added, “On my council, we have
tremendous difficulty getting people to
fill the business owner seats. They are
almost always vacant. Is this an
under-represented group? If so, what
would be a preferred ‘business owner
activity’?”
Dr. Musso answered that she was not
talking about business owners; she was
referring to “the poor and
minorities.” I asked, “What is a
preferred activity of a poor individual
or someone deemed a minority?” She
replied, “Maybe going to the park.”
I replied, “As far as I know, everyone
enjoys the park.”
If Dr. Musso meant NCs should make an
effort to put time and funds into issues
(rather than activities) that impact the
poor and minorities, then I would say
this makes more sense. For example, our
council passed a motion to help those
who ride the bus. (No one on our council
rides the bus). * However, I must also
note that no one from the bus rider
group have attended any of our NC
meetings since.
5. USC conclusion: NCs are disconnected
from the general public on issues and
should align themselves better with what
interests the public. They found that
NCs are more interested in land use,
public safety and transportation while
stakeholders are interested in
education, jobs and public safety. In
fact, they stated that NCs are
interested in “land use” but not
“housing.”
My comments: First, land use and housing
are the same thing! Secondly, the USC
data on this topic was obtained from NC
agendas, which are often written in an
unclear manner. Land use / housing items
often have nothing more than a street
address and an indication that it is
some sort of real estate project. The
agenda item could be describing a
low-income housing project or something
altogether different. There would be no
way for researchers to tell without
further inquiry. It is likely false
assumptions were made.
In addition, land use projects tend to
affect the community in numerous ways.
Developers present “density bonus”
and mixed-used projects. These may be
called “land use” by some, but they
most certainly affect housing and
affordability.
Land use / housing projects affect
construction jobs and businesses in the
area. They affect the environment and
public safety. They may affect the
safety of school children (with parking
congestion and dangerous traffic
conditions). In fact, the safety of
children who walk to school is
repeatedly discussed on my council with
respect to land use projects. Maybe the
USC researchers should have classified
these agenda items under their
“education” category.
My comments: How much control does a NC
have over jobs and schools anyway? Very
little. It is arguably easier for NCs to
affect change when it comes to land use
/ housing, public safety and
transportation, and this may be why they
expend their energy in this direction.
The City Council can better bring about
change with respect to jobs and
education. I would suggest a survey of
their agendas to determine exactly how
much time they spend on these particular
issues since these are supposedly the
issues their constituents care about.
My comments are meant as constructive. I
have only focused on problems and / or
disagreements that I have with the
research presented at the meeting on
12/16/06.
I am not mentioning those items with
which I agree.
The USC researchers have presented
interesting and important data. They
have made some excellent suggestions,
some of which I am certain the 912
Commission will adopt.
____________
Posted by: Stephanie (Office of
Charlotte Laws)
Comments written by Charlotte Laws and
presented at a 912 Commission Meeting in
December.
|
|
|
|
|
|
