Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Engagement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee lays out four community engagement approaches and stresses mix of breadth and depth
Summary
Facilitators presented four engagement strategies (ambassadors/advisory committees, two‑way workshops/civic assemblies, technology-enabled breadth, and a stakeholder-focused light approach). Committee members agreed to mix tactics stage‑by‑stage and to emphasize meaningful, trust‑building formats over superficial polling.
The committee heard a detailed presentation on community engagement options and repeatedly emphasized that engagement must create shared facts and trust rather than simply collect survey responses. Lorraine, who led the communications discussion, framed four approaches: an ambassador/advisory model that builds representative advisory panels; a deliberative civic‑assembly/workshop model for deeper two‑way problem solving; a technology‑driven approach that reaches many residents through online tools and surveys; and a lighter stakeholder‑focused approach targeted at groups that can materially support or block the project.
Speakers argued that each approach has a place at different stages of the project: broader, technology‑enabled outreach to establish baseline preferences; smaller, deeper workshops during scenario planning; and targeted stakeholder convenings around technical issues (e.g., soils, water, infrastructure). Several participants advocated hiring outside specialists for deeper deliberative work; others warned against over‑engaging to the point of community fatigue.
The committee identified three priority engagement objectives for the next phase: (1) refine and confirm project goals and design principles; (2) gather input on housing mix and understand trade‑offs (per‑unit subsidy, unit types); and (3) use scenario planning with clear metrics to identify a preferred scenario. Members asked staff to draft a scope of work and timeline for an engagement consultant that balances breath and depth and to return with options that can meet a 12‑month delivery target if the group wants an accelerated schedule.
The committee agreed to continue working with the current facilitator/consultant for the near term while the scope/timing decision is finalized; any firm hired to run community engagement would need explicit guardrails and reporting lines back to SCSC.
