Engaging the Public: Not a "Nice" Idea!
Having a discussion with the public, around the budget or for the new school effort, is not a matter of being nice, or inclusive, as if it were merely the right thing to do, given that we live in a democracy, or a democratic republic.
It is those things -- nice, inclusive, the right thing -- of course. But engaging the public is above all a matter of pragmatics -- it's the practical and necessary first step in the process of winning the public over to the idea of a new school.
To build a new school, the voting public must approve the effort. So it's necessary for those who advocate a new school to win an election. There's no way around it; they must go through the public to get a new school. There are no shortcuts.
To win in the court of public opinion, they need to listen, respond, answer questions, and get back to people with information. All this happens as part of a process that has its own pace. It doesn't happen overnight and it cannot work according to a pre-arranged schedule.
To win, there needs to be deference to the public -- not pandering, but respect. The District needs to demonstrate clarity, not just about its goals, but why its goals should also be those of the public. On the flip side, fear of the public will not win an election. Neither will ignoring the public.
A new school can be a positive for the community. People can get fired up about what can happen in a new school and what it can mean for the students and for the community. You've seen a taste of that in the interest expressed in this forum in discussing a possible performing arts center.
But the public needs information, they need discussion, they need to take ownership. Such a process is overdue. With pressure from the State, there may be a tendency now to try to push this end of the process too quickly.
The District and the people of the District need to begin the discussion and follow it wherever it leads.
Do we have the courage?
It is those things -- nice, inclusive, the right thing -- of course. But engaging the public is above all a matter of pragmatics -- it's the practical and necessary first step in the process of winning the public over to the idea of a new school.
To build a new school, the voting public must approve the effort. So it's necessary for those who advocate a new school to win an election. There's no way around it; they must go through the public to get a new school. There are no shortcuts.
To win in the court of public opinion, they need to listen, respond, answer questions, and get back to people with information. All this happens as part of a process that has its own pace. It doesn't happen overnight and it cannot work according to a pre-arranged schedule.
To win, there needs to be deference to the public -- not pandering, but respect. The District needs to demonstrate clarity, not just about its goals, but why its goals should also be those of the public. On the flip side, fear of the public will not win an election. Neither will ignoring the public.
A new school can be a positive for the community. People can get fired up about what can happen in a new school and what it can mean for the students and for the community. You've seen a taste of that in the interest expressed in this forum in discussing a possible performing arts center.
But the public needs information, they need discussion, they need to take ownership. Such a process is overdue. With pressure from the State, there may be a tendency now to try to push this end of the process too quickly.
The District and the people of the District need to begin the discussion and follow it wherever it leads.
Do we have the courage?
posted by PP | 6/07/2006 05:23:00 AM
1 Comments:
The "discussion" as you describe it should have been happening in 1999! Mel, Art and Butler did LITTLE to get the district into a new building. I think they stifled progress. Intentionally? Maybe.
I don't recall ANY public discussion of a new school for MSAD 46 until December of 2004, FIVE YEARS AFTER OUR DISTRICT WAS APPROVED FOR A SCHOOL. I checked and Howland is the only other district approved for a new school in that year that isn't in a new building. All the other districts have been in new buildings for a least a couple of years.
The District under Mel and Art didn't move forward. What public discussion occurred during their reign?
Post a Comment
<< Home