Friday, September 04, 2009

Guest Post: Reforming Mt. Lebanon Government

Mt. Lebanon resident and Blog-Lebo reader and commenter Tom Moertel read my post yesterday titled "Lebo High School Renovation: A Status Update" and was moved to respond at length. Rather than leave his thoughts in the comments, Joe and I agreed that Tom's thoughts belong here, as a guest post.

The following, then, comes from Tom:

In Mt. Lebanon, there is a surprising lack of public participation in policy decisions that ought to be of great interest to the community. While some on Blog Lebo and elsewhere have characterized this apparent lack of concern as apathy, it is more likely the result of a deeper problem, a communications problem that makes public participation impractical for most residents. The ongoing planning process for the high school renovation is a perfect example of this problem.

The problem: The important stuff isn't getting communicated to the public

We residents of Mt. Lebanon may disagree about many aspects of the proposed high school renovation, but there is one thing we can all agree on: waste is bad. And if you examine the available evidence dispassionately, you are likely to conclude that the high school renovation, as proposed, will be wasteful.

That waste has three sources. First, we are proposing to build more high school than our community genuinely needs. Second, for what we are proposing to build, we are proposing to overpay. Third, for what we are proposing to pay, we are proposing to overpay, again, on the financing. (If you are unconvinced of any of these points, please share your answers to the questions I ask later.)

That we are proposing to do these things, and that more residents are not outraged, suggests that most residents simply do not understand what is going on. Why not?

It's a communications problem. With the exception of James Fraasch, our school board has not communicated about the essential considerations of the renovation project clearly or succinctly, and this failure is the root of our community's apparent apathy. Like Mike, I believe it is the school board's responsibility to encourage meaningful public participation in decisions about our schools. But the public cannot be expected to participate without having the information necessary to do so. If, then, the school board wants to fulfill its responsibility to the public, it must communicate clearly about what is really going on. And by clearly, I don't mean dumping data on a disorganized web site, and I don't mean tossing out details now and again at public meetings, where the details lack the context necessary for interpretation. I mean the board should publish and keep current an easily accessible distillation of the most important information about the project, and it should publish and keep current a concise, cogent argument for what it believes is the best plan to date. Only then will the public have the information it needs to participate meaningfully in discussions about the renovation project.

Instead, the information that truly matters is buried within a mountain of minutia, where the average resident has no hope of making sense of it. Consider the High School Renovation web site. To understand how unhelpful this web site is, try using it to find clear and complete answers to the most basic questions about the proposed renovation project:

Why do we need to renovate the high school? Why won't less-ambitious repairs suffice? Why do we need to pay this much for what we are getting? Are there no other reasonable options? If there are, what makes our chosen option better? By committing so much money to this renovation now, what resources will we be unable to afford later, and why does it make sense to forgo them for this renovation?

These basic questions are what most people ask themselves when contemplating any large purchase. Why, then, does the public lack a clear understanding of the school board's answers to, or at least thoughts about, these questions? Why aren't the board's answers front-and-center on the High School Renovation web site, where everybody could find them easily?

I do not mean to suggest that the members of the board are being coy about important financial matters. As far as I can see, the board members are all decent people, trying to do their best at a difficult, thankless job. If I am to fault the board, it is only for failing to perceive that the planning process was a confusion machine and that part of their duty was to overcome its effects and make sure the public understood what was really going on.

A proposal: do it ourselves

Whatever its cause, the problem exists: the job of communicating clearly with the public about important community decisions is not getting done. If we cannot count on our elected representatives to do this job, and if the news media have likewise proved ineffective at filling this void, what should we, as responsible citizens, do?

Here's what I think: We the People should take ownership of this problem. We should mine those mountains of minutia, extract the useful information, and place that information in context. Then We should communicate that information clearly and succinctly, directly to the public. In short, we should form a grass-roots "Mt. Lebanon Accountability Office" and start issuing reports on important community issues.

The effort would not be easy, and it would not be without controversy or challenges to its credibility. But it is within our reach. Heck, with the Blog-Lebo regulars, we have a head start on fact-finding and analysis. All we need are a little organization, an emphasis on clarification and presentation (think Edward Tufte or New York Times infographics), and then a touch of get-the-word-out (not all Mt. Lebanon residents live on Blog Lebo). Together, we could do something about our community's "apathy."

What do you think? Is the idea crazy, or is anybody up for discussing it over coffee, maybe getting something started?

Labels:

Bookmark and Share

20 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good idea, but doubt it will do any good. Willing to join in.
Dean SPahr

September 04, 2009 11:33 AM  
Anonymous Bill Lewis said...

Suggest some dates, times and places.

September 04, 2009 11:57 AM  
Blogger Tom Moertel said...

To keep it simple, let me propose two Saturday-afternoon options for a get-together:

1. The strike-while-the-iron-is-hot option: This Saturday, 5 September (tomorrow), at Aldo Coffee on Washington Road, 1 PM.

2. The after-the-holiday-weekend-option: Next Saturday, 12 September, at Aldo Coffee, 1 PM.

For practicality, I'm leaning toward the second option, but if most people would prefer to meet tomorrow, option 1 is fine by me. Meeting on a weekday evening would also work for me.

Cheers,
Tom

September 04, 2009 3:19 PM  
Anonymous Bill Lewis said...

Option #2..Sat.9/12/09, Aldo's 1:00 p.m. See you there.

September 04, 2009 3:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sounds interesting. Just not sure why it has to be necessary! Where is the leadership?

By the way, anyone else feel that some are treating the President like a pedophile for reaching out to school kids? This seems crazy! I remember watching Reagan in school and never thought anything of it. Besides, couldn't teachers/parents just use it as teaching tool one way or the other with their kids?

Anyone know what our school district is doing?

Nick Jones

September 04, 2009 5:59 PM  
Blogger Tom Moertel said...

I'm going to rule out option 1 on the grounds that it won't leave enough time for word about the meet-up to get out. Let's tentatively plan on option 2: Saturday, 12 September, at Aldo Coffee on Washington Road, 1 PM.

Cheers,
Tom

September 04, 2009 8:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree with Nick. This should not be necessary. Were Bd Members Remely and/or Silhol at First Friday tonight? If so, can anyone tell me whether they posed the question of the day to them - "what is your comfortable spending level for a new school?" Would appreciate any info.
Stu Getz

September 05, 2009 12:18 AM  
Anonymous Liz Huston said...

The only board member that I saw last night at First Fridays was James Fraasch. I saw nobody else, candidates included.

The only reason that I can see for Remely and Silhol to be there last time was to hand out the survey. I guess now that the survey is done, they don't care much.

Next Saturday might work out well for us. Hope to see some folks there.

September 05, 2009 11:23 AM  
Blogger Tim Nolan said...

James Fraasch and Jo Posti were both at FF. I also saw Mary Birks.

On Primary day, I put this question to one of the school board members: Why is Penn Hills building a brand new school for approx $70 million, but ours costs $115 million. Their response: "Well that's because it's Penn Hills". And then they went off to speak to other voters. Not much of an answer.

Whether you are for or against the project, I found this response from an elected official very troubling, clumsy, and arrogant.

While Directors Fraasch and Posti have very different views on the project, I have appreciated their willingness to discuss their reasoning in as much detail as I wanted to go into.

September 06, 2009 1:36 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr. Nolan - Who was the board member? That reply from an elected official is unacceptable. Stu

September 06, 2009 8:22 AM  
Anonymous Pam Scott said...

Another troubling and clumsy argument offered for needing the $115 project is that the district stores gasoline-powered snow-fighting equipment in the boiler room close to a main electrical panel. This from Master Design Committee member Rick Marciniak during a tour of the high school.

A clumsy and troubling argument that seems to be bizarrely accepted without question as a justification for new building is the "wayfaring" argument of how long it takes to get from one part of the high school to another. Yet our high-performing students have successfully been navigating this horror for over a quarter century, have they not?

Perhaps a "Mt. Lebanon Accountability Office" report could contain a Q&A listing of the most clumsy and troubling arguments offered to date. I'll help.

September 06, 2009 6:37 PM  
Blogger James Cannon said...

I am not sure what is sillier, Mr. Madison’s angst about being ignored, or Mr. Moertel rallying the troops to “do something”. The fact that the board does not respond to anything in this blog, is because it is irrelevant. To suggest that this is a serious news disseminator is the height of egoism. I seriously doubt that more than 10% of the population of Mt. Lebanon even knows of its existence. This has become the on line equivalent of the town meetings, where everyone gets up and screams at each other, and just about as effective. I guess the real point that I am missing is the suggestion that by being outraged and massing at Aldo’s, the High School renovation project can be curtailed. It’s a done deal. The vote was taken. The High School will be renovated. The only discussions still taking place are minutiae, like the placement of the basketball courts or the allocation of parking places. This blog has a certain entertainment value, like the comics or the horoscope, but certainly cannot be taken seriously.

September 07, 2009 9:26 AM  
Blogger Tim Nolan said...

James,

It's truly ironic that you took the time to post that.

September 07, 2009 9:55 AM  
Anonymous Bill Lewis said...

I would hope that Jo Posti does not agree with her father, James Cannon.

September 07, 2009 12:15 PM  
Blogger Tom Moertel said...

James,

Thank you for your criticism. You're right: It may be too late to reign in plans for the high school renovation. But I am not suggesting that concerned residents of Mt. Lebanon meet once, make some noise, and then expect the school board to change its plans. Rather, I am trying to solve a larger problem, of which the TIF and the HS renovation are merely examples. And, thinking about that problem, I have come to the same conclusion that you have: that writing on blogs and speaking at town halls isn't going to work. We have already tried those things, and we have already seen that they are not enough.

Therefore, I am suggesting that we change our strategy. Instead of pointing out the foolishness of proposed policies on blogs and at public meetings, I want to help the residents of our community understand the implications of those policies for themselves. Then, if a policy is foolish (or good), the people will see that it is foolish (or good) and, confident in their knowledge, be motivated to act.

I am convinced that the reason so few people participate in community decisions is not that they are apathetic to the community's welfare or because they believe that "the fix is in" and that nothing they do can make a difference. Rather, I am convinced that most people are dissuaded from participating because they believe that participating is impractical: it will require too much effort and provide too little benefit in return.

My proposal, then, is to cut the costs and raise the benefits of public participation. I suggest that we can accomplish both goals by removing the wall of confusion that separates the people from our community's decision-making processes. In this way, the people won't have to climb that wall to participate: they can step directly into the process. In this way, the people won't have to wonder about the payoff for participation: they will see clearly when our community's resources are being squandered, and they will be motivated to act.

So that is my plan: a long-term effort to make public participation more practical.

Thanks again, James, for your criticism. If this plan that I am proposing is to have any meaningful effect, we who undertake it must see the obstacles before us clearly and not delude ourselves into thinking that we have an easy path to walk. And to see clearly, we will need the benefit of candid criticism. In that regard, your comments have been most helpful. Keep 'em coming.

Cheers,
Tom

September 07, 2009 3:56 PM  
Anonymous Matt Kluck said...

What about hose of us who have an interest and have to work on Saturdays?! I would enjoy the debate and learn a few things.

I spoke with Alan Silhol and Mary Birks at FF.

The evening works best for most.

Thank you for your consideration.

Matt Kluck

September 07, 2009 11:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr. Cannon:
I wonder if Ben Franklin, John Adams, or Thomas Jefferson would have been participants on BlogLebo or dismissed it as easily as you do, had it existed in colonial America.
One example:
When Benjamin was about 14, his brother began publishing The New England Courant," only the second newspaper to appear in America. "After composing the Types & printing the Sheets, [Ben Franklin] was employed to carry the Papers thro' the Streets to the Customers," as he wrote in his Autobiography.
James Franklin often printed pieces written by his friends, and Ben desperately wanted to see his own work in the paper. When he was 16, he devised a plan. "Being still a Boy, and suspecting that my Brother would object to printing any Thing of mine in his Paper if he knew it to be mine, I contriv'd to disguise my Hand, & writing an anonymous Paper I put it in at Night under the Door of the Printing House. It was found in the Morning & communicated to his Writing Friends when they call'd." The men read it, and Ben Franklin had "the exquisite Pleasure" of listening as they praised it.
James's friends were not likely to have guessed the identity of the author, for that piece and 15 more "letters" that followed over the next six months were written in the voice of a woman — a widow with a charming, witty, and satirical style and the name "Mrs. Silence Dogood."
The letters were a delight. In her own dignified way, "Silence Dogood" managed to mock Boston manners and mores. She lampooned Harvard College, suggesting that the only thing its students really learned was how to be conceited. She commented on Boston's drinking habits, the absurdity of certain fashions — and, with delicious irony — Bostonians' tendency to reserve judgment on an opinion until they knew who had expressed it. She was free with her advice, particularly on the way women should be treated.
"Silence Dogood" completely charmed Boston. In a city where the old-school Puritan elite rarely sanctioned public criticism of one's betters, the letters were acceptable as social satire.
Are Mike, Joe or fellow bloggers 21st century Foundering Fathers... doubt it! But penning comments and public criticism is as American as apple pie and BlogLebo may be the modern day equivalent of The New England Courant.
Hope to join in on Saturday.
Dean Spahr

September 09, 2009 1:30 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So is Aldos on for Sat. 12th at 1 p.m.?
Dean Spahr

September 11, 2009 3:45 PM  
Blogger Tom Moertel said...

Yes, Saturday (tomorrow), 1pm, Aldo Coffee.

See you there!

Cheers,
Tom

September 11, 2009 10:30 PM  
Blogger Tom Moertel said...

Here's an update for everyone following this story. Today, as planned, a number of residents met at Aldo Coffee to talk about our community and, in particular, what we can do to make it easier for residents to get involved in local government. We actually had more people show up than I had expected. (We eventually claimed 3 tables.) It was a fun bunch, and for about 3 hours we enjoyed great coffee, talked about our ideas, and started to form a plan to do something to improve our community.

During the meeting I explained my proposal to form a non-political citizens' organization that could serve as a community resource. The organization would do the work of clarifying, summarizing, and organizing the information produced by our local government so that residents (and policymakers) would have a one-stop, easy-to-use, reliable resource for understanding important community issues.

Toward that goal, I am setting up a web site to serve as the home for this new resource: the Mt. Lebanon Accountability Organization. (Until the site is ready, I have prepared a short introduction that tries to explain what the MLAO is all about.)

In the end, most attendees thought it was an idea worth pursuing and volunteered their support and assistance, but opinions varied on whether this organization -- or anything, for that matter -- could be an effective vehicle for government reform. In any case, everybody thought it was worth a shot.

If you're reading this and interested in joining us -- all are welcome -- please read the document I linked to above and send me an email (my address is in the document).

Finally, I'd like to thank all the people who took time out of their Saturday afternoon to attend the meeting or drop by: Thanks!

(Note: I am speaking here only for myself, and these comments reflect my impressions of the meeting. If other attendees want to add anything to my summary, please do.)

Cheers,
Tom

September 12, 2009 11:13 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home