EPA Dialogue Summary: Introduction/Goals (July 10)

[Sally Hedman <shedman@home.com>]

Public Involvement in EPA Decisions

Summary: July 10, 2001

Dialogue Day 1 Agenda:  Introductions and Goals of the Public
Involvement Policy

Dialogue moderator Bob Carlitz asked participants to introduce
themselves and share their prior experience with the EPA or at the state
or local level, why they chose to participate in this dialogue, and what
they hope to gain. Furthermore, he requested comments on the
completeness of the goals for public involvement in EPA's draft Public
Information Policy.

Approximately 975 participants from every state, and some U.S.
territories and other countries registered for the 10-day discussion.
Approximately 170 messages were posted to today's discussion.
Note: Postings appearing by 8:00 PM Eastern time appear in today's
summary.

Participants' Introductions: Experiences with EPA, Reasons for
Participation, Anticipated Accomplishments

** Host and panelist Patricia Bonner, EPA's lead staff person for the
Public Information Policy, encouraged participants to share their
experiences and knowledge that will enhance the implementation of this
policy.

**The participants represented a broad range of organizations: federal,
state and local agencies; community organizations; educational
facilities; citizen activist groups; libraries; animal rights groups;
non-profit environmental and wildlife groups; and research, policy and
advocacy organizations. Several participants represented the interests
of tribal groups, immigrant populations, people of color, small
communities, and low income groups.

**The participants included engineers, environmental consultants,
activists, political consultants, librarians, educators, university
professors, scientists, students, planners, public involvement
specialists, systems experts, lawyers, mediators, facilitators, and
interested citizens.

**The participants have involved themselves in diverse environmental
arenas including air and water quality standards, hazardous and solid
waste management, permitting, citizen involvement, citizen work groups,
natural resource defense, mining, environmental decision-making,
Brownfields assistance, military environmental problems, small community
issues, pesticide programs, ethical treatment of animals, Superfund
enforcement, planning, environmental justice, zoning, wetland
regulation, civil rights, wastewater treatment.

**These individuals joined the Dialogue for various reasons including a
desire to observe, learn, and share.

Comments on completeness of goals for public involvement

Some participants viewed the goals as laudable, thorough, and broad in
scope, while others thought them vague, incomplete, too numerous, and
paternalistic. Several key points about the goals are highlighted here.

**One panelist presented a thesis for meeting the goals of the Public
Information Policy by "a seamless, unified national facility registry
that provides basic permit application, renewal, and enforcement
information for all EPA and State delegated sites." Such a registry
would break down barriers to public involvement and effective
government.

**Equal access to EPA information, in particular, information available
via the Internet was of concern. Participation for people without access
to computers or high-speed internet connections could be limited.
Indigenous communities, and low income and working class communities
will be disproportionately left out of any communication strategies
focusing primarily on electronic distribution of information. This goal
needs to foster effective access to information.

**Mention using EPA resources, especially agency or third-party
facilitation and mediation services, to assist as needed with public
participation processes.

**Acknowledge that much of the relevant information from the public is
contained in narrative formats (stories). Incorporate a requirement that
public involvement processes account for this information and weigh it
with the technical and scientific perspectives.

**Include a goal of providing opportunities for dialogue in order to
increase trust, understanding of diverse viewpoints, and collaborative
problem-solving.

**It is important to ensure the success of real and continued public
involvement. Ensure EPA does not solicit information on issues already
decided.

**Ensure EPA communicates to the public about how its input affected the
Agency's decisions; the public wants to make sure their participation
makes a difference.

**Ensure EPA communicates where it is truly constrained in its
discretion and where public input can make a real difference in decision
making outcomes.

**Acknowledge that shared decision-making between EPA and the public is
not always possible due to existing laws and regulations and Agency
mandates, so as not to raise unrealistic expectations. Even in these
situations, exchange of information and solicitation of public input can
be valuable.

**Encourage real discussion among public citizens that is informal, at
their request and convenience and time scale, rather than at the request
of the government.

**Add a goal that provides the public with the means to hold EPA
accountable to these goals and to the spirit and letter of the Public
Involvement Policy.

**Encourage the use of community working groups and citizen advisory
boards to promote discussion among members of the public. Support
collaborative coalitions wherein groups work out their differences.

**Make sure stakeholder involvement activities are sufficiently
budgeted, planned for, and incorporated into project schedules.

**Address building and maintaining effective relationships to foster
successful stakeholder involvement.

**Ensure adequate support, commitment and enforcement from the highest
levels of the EPA. Only when top management commits itself to a policy
of openness and forthrightness and requires the same of its staff will
the public actually benefit from this policy.

**Distinguish between "the public" and "stakeholders" and discuss the
broad spectrum of public involvement opportunities -- from public
education to collaborative agreement-seeking processes to resolving
disputes.

**Include a goal to enfranchise those who are otherwise marginalized.

**Establish a goal of improving the efficiency of decision-making by
constructively engaging all stakeholder groups from the outset.

**Rephrase each goal statement as a desired directional outcome. Goals
are about "what" is to be achieved; the "how" of getting there is
through strategies and actions. Use more concise language and active
voice and eliminate "legalese".

**Establish a goal of making better decisions which is almost always an
outcome of a good public process.

Each day's summary is intended to capture the essence of the
conversation. While this summary contains the highlights of
participants' comments, more comprehensive information may be found in
the individual postings. I welcome your comments on the summaries.

Sally Hedman
Reporter