Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Engagement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City staff outline IAP2-based engagement tools for capital projects
Summary
MSO staff presented a toolkit—checklist, 'iceberg' and engagement strategies—based on IAP2 guidance to set public-participation levels when budgeting and designing capital projects.
Municipal Services & Operations (MSO) staff presented an engagement toolkit to the Connected City Advisory Group on April 14 that uses IAP2 (International Association for Public Participation) principles to set levels of public participation for capital projects and other initiatives.
MSO communications and engagement specialist Michael Leos described a checklist that staff use to determine an engagement level and a second tool MSO calls the “iceberg,” which maps examples and indicators to levels of engagement from inform to collaborate. "We start by obviously determining the level of community engagement. We'll create those strategies, implement the strategies. And then of course, we're tracking that engagement," Leos said.
Why it matters: staff said the toolkit helps project managers budget engagement work in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and write scopes of work for consultants so that engagement is baked into the project budget and schedule rather than added later as change orders.
How the tools work: Jessica Mortinger, a transportation MPO leader, said the tools are intended to make expectations transparent for the public and consistent across departments. She described using the tools to show what strategies meet an “involve” or “consult” level and to hold staff and consultants accountable to agreed engagement levels.
Examples and flexibility: staff gave examples where a project’s phase can change engagement level. The Jayhawk Watershed stormwater project was cited: planners described it as a stormwater drainage project with multi-month street impacts that required outreach and adjustments to construction phasing to accommodate deliveries, events and KU schedules. Jessica Mortinger said pieces of large projects may require different engagement levels—“some of it has to do just with what in that decision, in the project that you're embarking on, how much level of flexibility … the things that are negotiable for your community.”
No formal vote: the group discussed the toolkit and asked questions about departmental rollout, consultant scopes and options for documenting outreach. Staff said the tools are already used in CIP development to allocate budget for engagement and to guide consultant scopes of work.
