Effective Public Involvement Using Limited Resources (2010)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

16 INTRODUCTION This section provides a summary of synthesis findings and is organized as follows: • Context • Findings • Conclusions • Suggestions for Research. CONTEXT The passage of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1950 created formally defined “public involvement,” albeit limited to noti- fication and information. Over the past 59 years, this narrow definition has been expanded legislatively to increase empha- sis on effectively engaging the public in all phases of trans- portation decision making to integrate their issues, values, and preferences. Just as the process has changed, so have the racial, cultural, language, age, income, mobility, and other demographic characteristics of the public, and the infor- mation access provided by a myriad of communication technologies and social networks. These changes and con- tinuing trends will challenge the abilities of large and small transportation agencies to provide a level of public involve- ment that ensures equity and inclusiveness for all. As the respondents in this survey showed, many have found what they consider to be creative ways to provide successful, effective, and cost-effective public involvement using lim- ited resources. FINDINGS Based on the literature review, the 26 interviews conducted, and the best practices that respondents identified, there are several key findings: • The literature review of publications and websites high- light processes and provide examples for identifying the public, tailoring an approach to that public, and imple- menting a plan that reflects the abilities and constraints of that public to participate in public involvement. • Included as among the most effective were: – A mixture of personal, face-to-face encounters with the public by piggybacking on events sponsored by other organizations; – Going to other organizations and making presenta- tions; – Holding a variety of small or one-on-one meetings; – Utilizing a mixture of print and electronic media, on- line activities, and visualizations; and – A mixture of print, electronic media, and websites. • The surveys show that there are similarities and differ- ences in conducting public involvement among depart- ment of transportation (DOT) respondents, among met- ropolitan planning organization (MPO) respondents, and between DOT and MPO respondents; however, most agree that the definition of successful public involvement means getting informed consent from the public, provid- ing equitable access to decision making and offering opportunities to provide input that is carefully considered when the transportation decisions are made, acquiring a better decision than what you set out to do, touching a typical set of the population, and getting meaningful input that results in a plan that reflects the priorities of the community. As to the definition of effective public involvement there is some difference; however, on the definition of cost-effective public involvement there is substantial difference, as DOT respondents noted that it cost whatever was necessary, and MPO respondents reported that it is money spent on human resources. The survey also shows that few of the respondents quantify the cost of doing public involvement or develop mea- sures of effectiveness for public involvement. • The best practices (tools, techniques, and examples of their use) show that some agencies are creatively engaging in effective public involvement using lim- ited resources, and many of the examples identify the processes and examples that the literature review iden- tifies, including: – Utilizing the Internet and intranet; – Using visualizations; – Holding the meeting in the right place, on the right day, at the right time; – Leveraging relationships; – Playing interactive games; – Taking the time to sit and listen; and, – Using public involvement programs. CONCLUSIONS Based on the literature review and survey responses from the 26 agencies interviewed, the following areas stood out as CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS

17 being among those needing to be addressed to achieve, main- tain, and improve successful, effective, and cost-effective public involvement. These included: • Approaching public involvement as more than the logis- tical requirements that surround a public hearing and as a continuing process that is woven throughout every project. • Adding a public involvement specialist who has the appropriate professional background and/or work expe- rience necessary to identify the demographic character- istics of the population, understand the implication of those characteristics on the public’s abilities and con- straints to participate in public involvement activities, design a public involvement plan tailored to that popu- lation, and estimate the cost of implementing that pub- lic involvement plan. • Designing measures of effectiveness that focus on out- comes such as reflecting the community characteristics and values as opposed to process issues such as sending out a certain number of newsletters. • Outlining staff training needs and including them through internal and external training, attendance at conferences, utilization of webinars, in-house mentoring on a con- tinuing basis, and building a library with publications, guidance, plans, and manuals that foster best practices. • Adding the capacity to create and utilize visualizations, videos, the Internet, the intranet, and social networking. • Developing and coordinating relationships with commu- nity-based organizations, faith-based organizations, citi- zen advisory committees, etc., to improve piggybacking opportunities. • Developing industry standards for public involvement consultants. • Implementing public involvement activities to help aid decision making and ensure the best use of resources. • Evaluating the transferability of programs that have been created, tested, and used by others. SUGGESTIONS FOR RESEARCH The following topics were identified for future study: • Skill set necessary for a public involvement professional. • Skill set necessary for consultants to be certified or prequalified to perform public involvement outreach. • Internal and external training needs for public involve- ment staff members. • Process to quantify the cost of public involvement. • Ways for agencies to adapt to emerging changes and con- tinuing trends in socioeconomic demographic charac- teristics and communication technologies. • Public involvement process to identify, understand, and accommodate the public or publics within a given study area. • Transferability of “successful” processes and strategies used by others such as Effective Transportation Deci- sion Making and Community Characteristics Program. • Consequences of not defining effective and cost-effective public involvement.