Website Home   or   Forum Home

Riverside Info » About Riverside

1. chrisrobling
   Member

   The winners won, and the other candidates did not. All had supporters. In each of the contested races close to Riverside, the village and districts 96 and 208, yesterday's winners will on entry into office join incumbents in mid-term. The ideas and positions articulated in the campaigns, even by the lone re-elected incumbent Nancy Jensen, now move to the official bodies with legal responsibility for their activities.

   What steps are best at this moment for reconciliation in our small town, and its nearby neighbors, to help build support for the important decisions that each of these public bodies must confront in this difficult economy?

   To start off, officials might pursue an ongoing open conversation with constituents.

   When difficult choices must be made, perhaps a guiding principle is to "table," in the British sense of the word, topics as soon as they appear, thus signalling to all an anticipated need for a public choice, and thereby eliciting comment.

   I think each of the three bodies can significantly involve the public and strengthen consensus by alerting it to their need for public consideration, ideas, alternatives, references to successes elsewhere, etc. Inevitably, sides will form, and debate will ensue. That's a blessing! It is nothing of which to be afraid. If people know their side has been briefed and argued with all relevant evidence and precedent, then theycan at least have confidence that the resulting decision was properly informed.

   This very site, to Kim's and Holly's credit, is one such appropriate forum. Importantly, it is independent, not owned or controlled by any of the public bodies. Community officeholders like ours can foster awareness, research, thought and conversation by joining in these discussions, or simply by initiating them and promising to stay tuned.

   By the same token, such conversations can take on added significance if, as elsewhere, they are captured as reords of independent public input with a bearing on an official vote, choice or act.

   Many of the volunteers on all of the campaigns have observed that our community, and our nearby neighbors, are possesed of extraordinary residents with many professional and personal accomplishments to their credit. The village has traditionally captured some of this expertise through the commission system. (Should school boards should consider analgous bodies?) But not everyone can take the time to volunteer, meet regularly, deal with ongoing case flow, etc., as commission members must.

   Does that mean we can now use technology to broaden the net, so to speak, for the public bodies to capture additional resident expertise?

   Anyway, it is an idea. I am sure there are many more. What's yours?

   Posted Wednesday Apr 8, 2009 09:57 #

2. idic5
   Member

   Yesterday, I had said something along the lines that you are speaking, chris, and it was even seconded by Fred.

   Jim Reynolds told me yesterday at the RCA party, without knowing about my suggestion, that 'we want to hear from residents.'

   Recall 'the suggestion box' at companies. Why is it anonymous? Because many times , the best ideas are ones that go against the corporate grain, and to do that you can get slapped. I had been wanting to make this suggestion to whoever gets in to run Riverside - a suggestion box for people to put in observations and ideas to improve things 'round town, whether to provide an efficiency, to add a short term bene, or to add something that provides a long term bene (more green, eg).

   This suggestion can be a website, www.il.us.riverside.suggestion.box.org. terms of use - serious suggestions, but no sarcasm.

   Previously, I had brought up to the RCA how i liked the corp. sponsorship of a discretionary area such as the rec dept that alex g. brought to the table, and asked them if they wd consider that idea? they replied , yes, they'd take a look at all good ideas where ever they came from.

   Posted 19 hours ago #

   Fred
   Member

   Idic5, I think you have struck pay dirt! If one party espouses "transparency" and the other party must try to defend the transparency of the status quo, nothing happens. After a long drawn out debate, concessions are made and voila webcasts. What if there was an anonymous electronic suggestion box? There would be no pride of ownership, no defensiveness. Good ideas would be recognized for their own worth. Elected officials could even float their own ideas without the stigma of having the suggestion come from "on high." A menu of ideas could even be presented for electronic debate, maybe even on this web site. I'll take credit for backing this great idea..oh wait I'm an anonymous poster. Never mind.

   http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/if-you-cant-put-your-name-under-it-dont-say-it/page/3#post-8749

   It was a 'suggestion box idea that I had proffered earlier when I made the observation that we as a Village can try harder to dot the i's and cross the t's to get the plan commission docs right or near right the first time. I learned that it cost $5,000 each time we run that drill. I learned that we are to be running this drill for the third time in a couple of weeks. To be honest, I heard someone say this who knows more about the process than I. It is something to consider.

   Posted Wednesday Apr 8, 2009 10:11 #

3. chrisrobling
   Member

   I am all for suggestion boxes. But traditionally, they go one way. I hope for an iterative model in which the public chugs along with its concerns, and officials "announce" their anticipation that "X" will become an issue requiring action, perhaps long before it does. Next the public would brief issue "X" based on its knowledge, experience and expertise. From this public input the officials -- and their respective staffs -- would learn. And the public, in its turn, would know that its statements had been taken into account -- that it had "had its say." No guarantee of agreement, to be sure. Rather -- a guarantee of early and constructive involvement that welcomes public expertise and creates the possibility that officials will benefit therefrom in a timely manner.

   Thank you, Idic5.

   Other ideas?

   Posted Wednesday Apr 8, 2009 11:00 #

4. CuriousResident
   Member

   The one that pops into my mind is to revert back to including interaction with the constituents during the official meetings.

   When I moved here there used to be a "question/answer" portion in every meeting. It was at the end of the meeting to be able to inquire about the things discussed in that meeting. Then it was moved to before the meeting, so the questions had to be about prior discussions. Then it was tightened to "questions must be submitted before the meeting and it will be decided which can be addressed". IIRC it then went even tighter to "statements only" and then to nothing.

   There used to be (some) public involvement at those meetings. I stopped going because the only thing I got from them was a feeling of "us and them"...and I was not part of the "us".

   My recollection my not be 100% accurate, but the point is that public interaction in the meetings should be encouraged, not discouraged.

   Posted Wednesday Apr 8, 2009 11:40 #

5. Catherine
   Member

   Curious, this was a platform item for RCA. There will be regular town hall meetings, and natural interaction with trustees at meetings.

   Posted Wednesday Apr 8, 2009 11:54 #

6. spatny
   Member

   I would bet, Chris, that is all going to change immediately, along with a lot of other things.

   Posted Wednesday Apr 8, 2009 12:19 #

7. chrisrobling
   Member

   Meetings are terrific and nothing is wrong with meetings. Town halls are a great idea for all units of government, and elsewhere. However, this suggestion is in addition to such meetings.

   To participate in a meeting, one must turn up at the time and place. If officeholders focus on the web as a social utility, and the correlating understanding of the power of a network, then we can -- of course -- benefit from such meetings when they take place, but we will also realize an enormous benefit by providing residents a 24/7 interaction / input opportunity. By definition, the successful and knowledgeable person from whose expertise Districts 96 and 208, or the village, could benefit, is busy.

   Furthermore, there is a considerable degree of topic management, issue identification and curriculum (bibliography) building the conversations can employ to create a nearly encyclopaedic brief on any given prospective issue. (If you are in this area professionally then you know I am referring in part to cloud computing document management.)

   Underlying this idea is the fundamental belief that none of us is as smart as all of us, and the additional observation that a village of 9,000, with perhaps 1000 committed activists, or for that matter the respective districts of 96 and 208, are each well-sized for this kind of invitation and inclusion.

   I will toss out another reconciliation idea tomorrow. Please refine, ignore, improve or add. Thanks for these reactions.

   Posted Wednesday Apr 8, 2009 13:57 #

8. MikeT
   Member

   thank you, chris, for elaborating on the idea of interactive communication between the board and the citizens. Agreed, that one way communication of the 'suggestion box' is kind of 1950s corporate America, and we do have more robust technology that promises to do much that is not constrained by meeting times and places. I am sure many will agree that the internet is good for working whenever you have a slice of time.

   The image I get when utlizing the internet to a greater degree is more than even bilateral, or two way communication. I read back your vision of many people interacting back and forth more like a 3-D sphere - a little like this forum, but with savable , sharable documents. Of course, with broad band, one could put graphical and video up , too , to assist in the communication. +

   You say this is in the realm of 'cloud computing'. Just so we all have a better idea of what this is, can you provide a link to a place that might flesh this out more for our edification? I have heard of the concept, but do not presume to be conversant on this subject.

   However, having made the praises of the interactive hitech, I do believe there is still a spot for the plain old 1950s style of the smart observant 'Vermonter' who sees some commonsense way of doing something better, and who makes a suggestion, whether thru a cloud on the internet, email, or scribbled on a note to the board/VM.

   Please excuse me if 'Vermonter' is vague, it is the image I have of the independent sort of small town guy from Norman Rockwell. As I stood on the town hall corner with the palm cards on election day, I saw one older gentlemen walking from the first division, with rough looking attire. I told my palmcard mate that this guy is either homeless or JD Salinger coming out for his weekly foray into town. I was told he was a retired controller from the Tribune. He was coming to vote. That is Riverside.

   .

   +[PLs also note that I believe the board meetings will be going up on the internet for free via bliptv, thus increasing the availability of board info; while I know it is in the library, I sheepishly confess that I have never gone there to borrow a dvd of a board meeting, and I do not have cable, so getting the meetings on the internet is a great advance in transparency; ]

   Posted Wednesday Apr 8, 2009 15:11 #

9. chrisrobling
   Member

   Open source and hardware neutrality mean a lot in the cloud computing world, so I am not going to provide a commercial vendor's link about cloud computing. Rather, here is the Wikipedia entry, which I read last night and think is a suitable introduction:
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computing

   If anyone decides to go further, which of course I hope they will, then in about twenty keystrokes I think they will have an idea of which vendors are leading the way in this area -- both about cloud, open source and hardware neutrality.

   Thanks, MikeT, for asking.

   I said I would put out another idea today for our friendly three bodies, village, and districts 96 and 208. It builds on Idic5's line: the virtual trusteeship.

   Above, MikeT mentions Riverside's evocation of a Rockwellian era, of a "Vermonter's" common sense problem solving.

   A virtual trusteeship applies contemporary capabilities to the essential element of that ideal. The New England Town Meeting form of government (from which, by the way, Yankee transplants to these plains crafted into Illinois' village caucus, but that is another story), built on shared knowledge of issues, focused attention, discussion and joint decision making.

   This process is now called a knowledge network, application communities, communities of practice or adaptive/responsive networks. People around the world interact with each other about use and functions of any number of software, hardware and other issues so that all can increase knowledge and improve productivity.

   Whether with other Vermonters at the annual town meeting, or with other Genevans under Rousseau's shady oak, or in a user group forum, the predicate for participation is shared information.

   Here in Olmstedia we might try the same approach.

   I had a great experience for five years at the Regional Transportation Authority in the 1990's. It is not particularly well known, but RTA is in fact a unit of municipal government. It has directors, who come from appointing authorities, a chairman and a staff. The head of the agency, the board of directors, meets monthly, with additional committee meetings usually clustered around the main board meeting. Each month, staff prepares packets for the directors' committee and board meetings. The packets go out usually one week before the meeting to give the directors a weekend over which to read their material. This is nearly identical to how Riverside and the school districts operate.

   RTA to this day provides the board packets, with all of their contents, to anyone who signs up to receive them.

   It is by this process that the Tribune and the Sun-Times know what to expect at the meetings, it is how the beloved Jackie Leavy at Neighborhood Capital Budget Project knew what was happening, how cranky critics of CTA and RTA could plan their sniping, how vendors knew if awards were being announced or contracts renewed, etc. Obviously, RTA observed Illinois law strictly and withheld all privileged items from public disclosure. Apart from those items -- which were handled separately for executive session -- everything went out to the public as it went out to the directors.

   In no way is it a criticism of anyone operating at Riverside or the school districts to suggest that for reconciliation and progress purposes, as well as for public information and knowledge sharing, as well as for public involvement and desirable contributions from the public to the respective public bodies, as well as to promote better understanding of the issues facing all of us, that all of Olmstedia's board packets be provided online -- less non-disclosable items, of course -- one week before the relevant public meeting.

   I have been to meetings of several public bodies here at which members of the public were unable to receive an agenda, let alone an agenda item memorandum. I think it is fair to say that in some quarters there has been an operative, not to say stated, presumption against providing board packets to the public. That presumption should be shifted 180 degrees to a practice of disclosure unless privileged.

   The idea of providing packets to the public seems quite in line with the openness and transparency calls we have heard in the campaigns from various candidadates, which is terrific. But some of these new officeholders may have to insist to staff that these steps be taken, lest they be abridged for staff convenience.

   In a difficult economy, public disclosure to leverage public expertise and further equip the public with baseline knowledge of emergent issues is a money saving step, in addition to fulfillment of an ideal of common sense participation, be it at a town meeting, under oak branches or in cyberspace.

   Please add, subtract, refine, improve -- and most of all please toss in any reconciliation / progress ideas.

   We are all in this together.

   Thanks for reading.

   Posted Thursday Apr 9, 2009 09:37 #

10. idic5
    Member

    chris, you noted rouseau and his image of people under an oak tree which is similar to Rockwell's Vermont town. Isn't Olmsted's parks in the same 'family photograph' as these images? I read somewhere that Olmsted imagined his parks, the triangular affairs or the big ones, as places for people to discuss politics. He wanted his design to encourage this , I think I read. True? Hey, let's go wireless across town,and bring the computing cloud even to those parks (!), a natural progression of technology from his 19th century to our 21st century.

    I found this quickly

    For him, a park was a hypothesis, an experiment in democracy.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1997/02/28/arts/sunday-in-the-park-with-fred-visualizing-olmsted-s-legacy.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

    I hope that how-the-telephone-works description of cloud computing does not turn people away. This is for a more complete view of what we are talking about. But the how-it-works- details are probably not the important concept to get. The ability to have a more effective conversation between the governed and the governors, the voters, and the elected, is what should be understood as the goal...since the internet is a tool that is around now, might as well leverage it to its fullest.

    I like the 'communities of practice' and 'open source' phrases that can be helpful for us in Riverside. It might be wise to poll other *similar* communities and see what they are doing to combat budget woes, eg. To use a technical analogue, I regular get good info from the internet to resolve all sorts of technical problems with my computer or with video editing by finding similar practitioners and seeing how they resolved the problem.

    I guess it like, there is 'no owner of truth'. Obviously we all have to use our low tech old fashioned noggins to vet and filter info and apply it to our context. The 'cloud computing'/virtual townhall model might aid this process also.

    Here is Norman Rockwell painting the essence...

    

    .

    

    .

    something on virtual town hall..
    http://www.kevincraig.us/townhall.htm

    making it better
    http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vvvv/2009/03/26/engineering-a-better-virtual-town-hall/

    http://techpresident.com/user-blog/engineering-better-virtual-town-hall

    looks like obama wants to do this, too
    http://news.aol.com/main/obama-presidency/article/obama-virtual-town-hall/396575

    from The Nation

    "We're actually going to have some live stuff," explained President Obama, "instead of some virtual stuff."

    http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090413/melber

    ..

    a closing quote, found while looking up olmsted, parks, and democracy....

    Democracy is the only system that persists in asking the powers that be whether they are the powers that ought to be.

    Sydney J. Harris
    (1917 1986)

    http://www.nycgovparks.org/sub_your_park/park_page/parkrss.php?rsst=news&parkId=X045

    Posted Thursday Apr 9, 2009 11:58 #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.