David M. Motzenbecker; President, City Planning Commission at City of Minneapolis

It began with a simple enough thought: “There aren’t nearly enough people here.”

On a fall afternoon in 2007, I was attending a public meeting held by theMinneapolis Planning Department to garner citizens’ input on their latest revisionto the City’s Comprehensive Plan – The Minneapolis Plan for SustainableGrowth. As President of the City Planning Commission, my charge is to stewardthe vision for the growth of the city as outlined in its comprehensive plan. Onedefinition of stewardship is “a person using every talent and repeatedly sacrificingdesires to do the right thing.” Wasteful actions or not doing everything possibleto achieve a positive outcome is contradictory to notion of stewardship. It wasthe sensation of just going through the motions at this particular meeting, notreally embracing the democratic notion of people shaping their own city, thatstruck me as wasteful. The attendance, comments, and results of meetingslike this one led me to the conclusion that the planning commission wasn’tstewarding anything but the opinions of city staff and our own points of view.
I’m 40 years old. I’m a Landscape Architect and lover of all things urban. Icherish what an amazing city Minneapolis is. I know that the backbone of anytrue democracy or democratic process is the degree to which it embraces thenotion of the commons – when people are actively engaged in crafting andinfluencing what belongs to them, the results are richer. I am dedicated topreserving and enhancing these qualities and methods for myself and for futuregenerations. I’m sure many of you feel similarly about your own cities andtowns. And I know that people here care about Minneapolis and, if given theopportunity to truly engage in the nitty-gritty of city building from the most grass-roots level, they will get involved. Why? Because they are already building thecommons everyday—engaging in their neighborhood organizations, volunteeringfor charitable organizations, holding events to improve the human condition. Butthey were not offering input to the City of Minneapolis’ Comprehensive Plan.

That was the moment I realized that we needed a new vehicle for communityinvolvement in important planning decisions. Soon, I was ruminating on what kindof new vehicle people might use to enhance and translate their love for their cityand its commons into action. If my friends and neighbors could easily accessa document, like the entire Minneapolis Plan for Sustainable Growth, online,at any time they desired— and if the interface was simple and easy to use–they would be more willing and able to offer their opinions. If they were givenaction items, and could go online to represent their thoughts after putting thekids to bed, or while they’re at a coffeehouse on Saturday morning, they wouldbe more engaged in building their city than by coming to a 4:30p.m. or 7p.m.public meeting on a cold winter night after a long day of work. And if my friends(with children, with full time jobs) would do this, younger generations, who havegrown-up in the globally-connected, collaborative universe that is the web, wouldcertainly embrace it.

So, I began talking about ways in which Minneapolis could adopt this newcollaborative technology, both as a new tool, and supplemental way to gatherpublic input. This idea was something the Mayor of Minneapolis understood andsupported wholeheartedly. Not just for its possibilities for the comprehensiveplan, but for the larger, more visionary capabilities that the technology holds forrethinking the entire public process.
By contrast, the staff of the Minneapolis Planning Department was hesitant toembrace the idea. By highlighting this hesitancy, I am simply pointing a spotlighton the current paradigm as it stands in most municipalities across the country.I can sympathize, being a trained professional myself, at the reaction plannerswould have at the suggestion we allow the general public to make such large-scale decisions?
In a truly democratic and healthy collaborative community, however, whyshouldn’t citizens have a say in decisions that affect their future? After all, thatis a component of stewardship. But the existing vehicle for public participation,which has been used for generations, has broken down.

Continue reading “An infusion of commons thinking can transform how we plan the future” »