REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE OR POST A NEW MESSAGE   

  Date  |   Subject  |   Thread

Defining "public involvement"

  • Archived: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 16:17:00 -0400 (EDT)
  • Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 14:50:47 -0400 (EDT)
  • From: Mickey Feltus <feltus.mickey@epa.gov>
  • Subject: Defining "public involvement"
  • X-topic: Outreach

Introduction - My name is Mickey Feltus and I work the outreach and education function with wetlands in Region 4, Atlanta. My experience in public involvement from community action agencies, energy issues, empowerment zones, community groups, and EPA extends over 30 years. In summation - this experience has taught me that we do not know how to get effective participation, or our expectations may be too high given the desperate need for public involvement in a democratic society, or our public does not react to all of the issues we feel they should be reacting to.

Thus, the crux of my concern is how do we define "public involvement or participation" in a situational setting.

Establishing national policy on wetlands (or any environmental issue) will elicit a different level of participation than we will elicit at a local zoning hearing that proposes to reduce stream buffers. If my concern is valid, we must find ways to "program" public participation in an appropriate way. This means each situation must trickle down to its lowest operational level with public participation defined in the planning process and accounted for in each major activity associated with the plan.

This does little to increase participation from the agency point of view because that is, as it has been stated, a function of staff and other resources. This assumes committment to the ideals we address.

Access to information in a reliable and understandable manner is much easier to attain. If there are sufficient resources.

Gaining trust between the public and the agency is a long term procedure that requires a commitment of staff and financial resources.

This national discussion must focus on ways to achieve our objectives and the anticipated results must be reasonable.

If we are reasonable in our resulting program, i know we can be more effective than we are at getting our colleagues to the polls.

Without these considerations adequately addressed, see you at the next session in twenty years!!!!


  Date  |   Subject  |   Thread

Welcome | About this Event | Briefing Book | Join the Dialogue | Formal Comment | Search

This EPA Dialogue is managed by Information Renaissance. Messages from participants are posted on this non-EPA web site. Views expressed in this dialogue do not represent official EPA policies.