...until the break of dawn

I am always disappointed by public meetings. We hold public meetings for people to give us comment, and we never get the kind of comment I hope for. I keep hoping some guy will stop in and say “Why, that problem looks like one we solved for a tricky transportation issue! You might not think so, but I think the underlying structure is the same. Have you thought about this algorithm, which worked for us?” And then I would say, “That just might work! Maybe you could show me how you derived it over dinner tonight.” And he would say “Only if I can take you out for dessert after, so we can talk about other potential applications. But it will have to be in Midtown, because I rode my bike here.” And then I would start blushing and fanning myself, because I would be thinking impure thoughts.

But that isn’t what we get. We get professionals who are there on behalf of an organization to protect an economic interest. Those folks give sophisticated, one-sided comments, which is probably fine. As long as we get professionals from all sides, we can hope an advocacy system will flush out the major points; it is our job as experts to balance them. And then we get private citizens.

I go to Parks Advisory Commission meetings as a member of the public from time to time. They’ll move through their agenda, on the ratios of playing fields to naturscaping for new parks and proposed parks fees for new developments. At the end, they’ll ask for comment. Someone will invariably stand up and tell us that his house is right across from that basketball court and the vibration from the constant dribbling is shaking the mortar loose from his house walls, and is the City going to fix that or is it going to let his house fall down on him? ‘Cause his neighbor is a lawyer, and they know what is happening, and how would you feel if your house were about to fall on you? Well?!? Well?!?

When you’re up in front of those meetings, you can spot ‘em. Your heart just sinks as they approach the microphone. There is so much wrong, and you don’t even know where to start. This meeting is expensive to hold, what with the consultants and staff on overtime, and you can’t spend people’s time discussing this guy’s problems. You don’t even know how to have this conversation with this guy, ‘cause you’re a park planner but you vaguely know the rangers from park enforcement, who might tell the basketball players to cut it out after 8pm. You think you remember that park, but it was designed thirty years ago when the fad was to put amenities on the periphery but that caused exactly these problems, and what the hell are you thinking, ‘cause the basketball court is not making this guy’s house fall over! So you look at this guy, who found a meeting with the word “Parks” in it and made his problem your problem, and you think to yourself, for the hundredth time, that the people are freaks and should never ever ever be allowed near an important decision.

And this is how I know our meetings are broken. Our system is broken when the people it was created for can’t figure out where to bring their problems. Our meetings are broken when a snide bureaucrat sits in front of the room wishing the people away. The meeting format itself is part of the problem. People come to the meeting with a problem that has bothered them for ages (noisy basketball!), and they sit there, not understanding the abstract and technical agenda items. When they get up to speak, they have three precious minutes to make their problem seem important enough to get attention, so of course they’re going to stretch it. Then, as they are finally talking about whatever thing was important enough to get them out of the house, they can see all the people up in front checking out, so they have to talk louder and wilder. Three minutes later they sit down, hating bureaucrats even more. It is broken.

I honestly don’t know what to offer. Ombudspeople for City Hall and state agencies? They probably already have some. More education for citizens? Dude, the system is for them. It should be designed for the users' constraints. A different style of meetings? Well, since you begged, I’ll talk about that next post.