Government Of the People, By the People, For the People

It’s time to evolve how we think about this at the local level

Who influences government is one of the most critical issues of our time. Taken to an extreme, we have seen dark money-funded GOP takeovers of state governments, school boards, and courts across the country, including in North Carolina. This outsized power has resulted in gerrymandering, voter suppression, a dismantling of civil rights for people of color, LGBTQ, immigrants and women, and significant harm to our public schools.

The recent GOP tactics have been shamelessly overt and utterly despicable. But government influence happens every day at all levels of government, whether it is through paid lobbyists, campaign donations, or public comment at a meeting. Of all the levels of government in this country, local government is where everyday people have the most direct access to their elected officials and the greatest opportunity to be involved in decisions that will affect their everyday lives. Given the ability to have such overt influence, it is critical that we ensure equal access to the decision-making process.

How do we ensure that the various levers of influence are deployed so that no one group has an outsized influence? One way we can do that is by continually examining our local governance structures and asking ourselves the tough questions: whose voices are being heard and whose aren’t? Are we privileging any groups over others through our policies and processes? Are we ensuring that our decisions today are made with a deep understanding of our history? Are we using the tools of local government to mitigate harms of the past?

In Chapel Hill, one of the key ways residents have been able to participate in our local government decision-making processes is through participation in our long-standing advisory boards and commissions. Our advisory board members weigh in on a range of important topics and issues related to the Town, including how the town looks, how the community is policed, what modes of transit are prioritized, who has access to parks, which non-profits are funded, where new development does - and doesn’t occur and more.

As a Town, we have invested significantly in the building and maintenance of these boards. Staff recently estimated that boards cost the Town $10,000 per month to resource and staff them. We even explicitly market board membership as a way to influence local government decisions and investments. If our boards - Chapel Hill currently has an astonishing nineteen – are, in fact, one of the most potent ways to influence the direction of the community – it is incumbent on us to ensure equal access to that influence.

On face value, the advisory board structure seems like an effective way for local government to engage with residents and receive input. You will often hear Council Members and staff comment on the input from a specific board or reference input from “the community,” when referring to a discussion that a board or commission had. So, the system works, right? If we go back to our commitment to equal access and pose those questions above, it becomes less clear…

Why is that? Because the boards and commissions are fundamentally flawed, from a structural perspective. The bar for participation is simply too high to be considered inclusive. The time commitment (attendance at up to several meetings per month, most boards have meeting materials members are expected to review in advance); meeting time and duration (often evening meetings that are hours long) and format (who doesn’t love Robert’s Rules of Order?); among other issues create barriers for a large swath of our residents to participate. Additionally, new board members are recommended to the Council by current board members, which tends to perpetuate the similarities of the membership. The boards simply aren’t designed to facilitate the gathering of input from a diverse range of voices and perspectives.

And why should we ask for such a significant commitment to provide input to our staff and Council? Should we assume that the teacher who is grading papers in the evening, the harried dual-career parents who need to feed and get their kids to bed, or the grocery store cashier working third shift don’t have anything to say about their town? Or that their input isn’t as important to us?

Of course not. But that is the message our current board structure communicates to residents. Just last year, a Community Engagement Survey conducted by the Town reinforced that hard truth – we were told loud and clear by residents who are renters, people of color, immigrants, low income residents, and young people that they do not feel heard or represented by our local government. This is a critical problem that we as a Council need to hear and act on with urgency.

Over the last few years, the Council has acknowledged that our current board structure is problematic. The demographic makeup of the boards has persistently and significantly skewed towards older, whiter homeowners. Over time, the purpose and charge of many of the boards has become unclear. We have even had boards “go rogue” to use the power of a board to organize against a specific issue or Council decision. We are aware of these issues and yet our efforts to address these problems have been incremental (offering a childcare stipend, allowing remote participation in some circumstances), and have not addressed the root structural flaws of this outdated approach to getting input from residents nor moved us towards our goal of diverse community input.

What to do instead? Chapel Hill is not the only municipality wrestling with this question. Innovations in community engagement now exist that reach more and different residents in ways that don’t require a commitment to one or more meetings a month; document review; late nights; and allow for participation even if you work the night shift, are a single parent, have young children, lack internet at home to join virtual meetings, or the many other ways that people’s lives are more complicated than ever these days. Creative uses of technology, going to the people instead of requiring them to come to us, and strategic use of time-bound committees, such as the Reimagining Community Safety Taskforce, are all viable alternatives to our current antiquated approach. Town staff have already taken the lead on creative new approaches to community engagement at the department level, for instance with the Planning Department’s Planning Ambassadors program for the LUMO Re-Write and with the guidance of our Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Office.

Let me be clear - we are so grateful for the commitment of time and energy that community members have given over the years through their service on boards. There are many ways to continue to volunteer for the Town in other ways, along with our schools and non-profits, and I hope folks will do so. But the time has come for us to take bold steps to evolve our approach to community engagement. As a Town, we have centered equity and equal access in many of our policy, budget, and procedural decisions. Our boards should be the next – and immediate – focus. Our local government already does want to hear from ALL our community – let’s act now to take the bold steps needed to make that a reality.