RE: Who is doing public involvement?

[Steve Taylor <Steve@miltoxproj.org>]

Very important stuff - and thanks for raising the questions, slightly off-topic or not.

I agree that training in public participation is very key. It takes time to learn and involves a particular set of skills.

Often, EPA public involvements folks (and those of other agencies, including especially the Depts. of Energy and Defense and most especially ATSDR) seem to treat their public involvement requirements as simply a need to control public debate and opposition to the Agency's plans.  The Department of Defense has even discussed in testimony at Congressional hearings over the past few months their new initiative on "outrage management."  We might also mention the EPA conference a few weeks ago on Community Involvement - held in San Antonio - which did not include community leaders.  The agenda included a session on "non-violent communication."  Who are they accusing of being violent - them or us?

My first, introductory, post in this dialogue referenced the need for REAL public involvement, the kind proposed by many postings here.  This is one of the key differences.  EPA often proceeds with the goal of "managing" the process and suppressing participation by the most "troublesome" folks.

Steve