Citizen Participation

Citizen participation in Arizona government is available in almost any form imaginable. For example, the City of Mesa's website states that any citizen "... can take an active role in shaping Mesa government policies, programs and decisions". Some examples of citizen participation listed on the website include voting in elections, volunteering for an advisory board, volunteering to help out in different city departments, speaking at council meetings, being a neighborhood representative, or even seeking elective office. With so many options, it is likely that an interested person would find at least one of them to be appealing. The City encourages such participation to ensure that any decisions they make will correctly reflect the will of the people. Additionally, having such participation can help to ensure that small groups with special interests do not make all the decisions that affect the entire community.

With the current economic situation, there is a vital need for citizen volunteers to support City programs. Individuals can volunteer at either of the City's museums, with the options of working in the museum store or leading guided tours of the facility. The libraries are always looking for volunteers to shelve books, staff the Friends of the Library book sale desk, or to deliver books to the homebound. The cemetery is looking for people to help with the maintenance of markers, the cleaning of vases, and arranging flowers. These are just a few of the opportunities available. There are so many more. According to Mesa's website, in 2007, volunteers provided almost 270,000 hours of service. Estimates are that the City saved more than $5,000,000 because of their help.

While volunteering is critical to the City, participation through advisory boards may be more so. Mesa's website lists more than 20 boards to choose from. These can vary from design review boards to personnel appeals boards. Citizens participating on the design review board can offer their opinions and recommendations based on their area of expertise, such as architecture, engineering, or contracting. Those on a personnel appeals board are expected to be objective third parties conducting hearings and making recommendations about employee disciplinary actions. These boards are important because the City needs checks and balances to ensure fair treatment both to its employees and citizens.

The article by Irvin and and Stansbury discussed the pro and cons of citizen participation. The point they are trying to make is that citizen participation isn't always the path to the best results. They list the advantages and disadvantages that are involved when citizens participate in policy-making endeavors. One of the advantages is the benefit of knowledge. As mentioned above, citizens can bring their specific knowledge, experience, and expertise to help governments make good decisions in the process of adopting laws, making budgetary decisions, or even in planning the design and location of a park. Another plus is the fact that participation brings ownership. When people are involved in the decision making process, they feel they have contributed to a satisfactory solution and are more likely to buy in to it. Also, and maybe most importantly, having citizen involvement keeps the lines of communication open. This prevents the appearance of secretive or dictatorial behavior.

Disadvantages are more related to appearance and opinion. Apathy is probably the worst. People simply don't believe that they have the authority to assist in any decisions, or that their opinion is important enough to count. Or maybe they feel that someone else will stand up for them. Also, if they don't believe that there is a concern, they just aren't interested enough to even take part. Another problem is dealing with special interest groups. They get a small following all whipped up about a specific subject, and then they dominate the debate and poor decisions may result. Another problem is cost and implementation of decisions. It may be that there is a difference between what the citizens want and what the City can afford. This problem can lead to disillusionment, which can result once again in apathy. Irvin and Stansbury identified some indicators that can help with making the decision whether to invite citizen participation or not. When citizens are involved, the authors stress the need for regular meeting, clear lines of authority, trust, and the availability of sufficient financial resources for implementation. If governments follow these recommendations, they have a good chance of success in their final decisions.

Public administrators need to be clear on the pros and cons of citizen participation, and to know how to deal with challenges as they occur. The ability to interact diplomatically with the public is a skill that should be sought by any who are interested in entering the public service.

References:

City of Mesa website: cityofmesa.org.

Irvin, R.A., & Stansbury, J. (2004). Citizen Participation in Decision Making: Is It Worth the Effort? PAR, Vol 64, No 1, 55-65.