E. O. Wilson is, of course, the author of Sociobiology, a highly controversial 1975 book on evolution.  He experienced a politically- and ideologically-based backlash against his book, which offended some people by claiming that certain aspects of human behavior are based on our genes.  (For more on this, read the excellent book The Blank Slate by Steven Pinker.)

In his quotation above, he refers to the danger of allowing political ideology to interfere with science.  But it is equally dangerous to allow political ideology to interfere with good policy. I am a democratic-leaning independent, and when in discussion with friends, I feel that ideology often gets in the way of a clear discussion, and impedes attempts to get to the best solution for a problem.

For example, take “clean coal“.  The idea is to process coal in clever ways to prevent it from emitting lots of CO2 and other harmful chemicals.  At a recent environmental event I attended, the speaker was talking about alternative energy sources, and proclaimed loudly, “And let’s not forget that there is no such thing as clean coal!”  The crowd cheered and clapped.

But the speaker didn’t have any facts to back up his statement!  He wasn’t claiming a fact; he was asserting an ideology.  And his audience shared the same ideology.  To be clear, I personally believe the future is in renewable energy sources, and that we need to move away from oil and coal toward power from solar, wind, geothermal, etc.  But I object to his fact-free approach.  Whether he likes it or not, there is such a thing as clean coal.  He might argue that it won’t solve our problems, or that coal mines are dangerous for workers, or whatnot, but denying the existence of something just because you don’t like it lowers the level of discourse.

Democrats, of cours, don’t have a monopoly on this sort of thinking.  A friend of mine, a fiscal conservative, opposes taxes.  I understand the arguments against many taxes, but for many fiscal conservatives it is an article of faith that taxes are bad. This sort of faith ends any discussion, and makes it impossible to move forward.  Ideology isn’t much better than superstition, in my mind.

How do you know if you are being superstitious, or how do you show someone else that they are being superstitious?  Ask this simple question: What conceivable evidence would convince you that you’re wrong? If no evidence will convince you that you’re wrong, you’re allowing your ideology to get in the way of productive discussion.  An artful dodger will reply with a piece of evidence that is so far-fetched that it is, for practical purposes, impossible to obtain.  (Creationists, for example, often claim that they will accept evolution only given a complete fossil record, which we will never find.)

So let’s all do this exercise now, together.  Pick something you hold dear, and think about what would convince you that you’re wrong. I’ll start.  I think that global warming (1) is occurring, (2) is at least partly human-caused, and (3) will wreak havoc on the world if drastic action isn’t taken to reverse the increase in CO2 emissions.  As I am not a climate expert myself, I base my position on the general consensus in the scientific community that global warming exists, is at least partly man-made, and will lead to big problems.  If I started reading articles that referenced studies in peer-reviewed journals, and these studies found miscalculations in our current climate models, and these miscalculations led us to overestimate the impact of industry on CO2 emissions, or of CO2 on global warming, I would reconsider.  I would do more research and try to suss out whether the scientific community accepted these studies or not.

Your turn now.  What would it take to convince you to reconsider?  Pause a moment, right now, and think about that before moving on.

I’ll point out that I do think there is a place for some ideology in politics.  Most people believe, for example, that our democracy should be more participatory.  People should vote more.  People should contact their representatives.  I happen to believe that this is important even if evidence shows it doesn’t lead to government that is any better, because I believe that participation is important.

The key, in my mind, is that you need to acknowledge when you are being ideological. That’s what intellectual honesty requires.

I work in a legislative office, so you might think I’m biased in favor of legislation.  Okay, so I am biased in favor of legislation.  But I feel strongly that legislating a solution to a problem is not always the best solution to a problem - it’s often just the easiest.  Writing a law, despite the difficulty of getting agreement from all the other parties required to pass a bill, can be much easier than going out into the community to create a solution that will address the problem better.

Y’see, I have a very strong belief that while a legislative solution can create opposing sides on an issue, both with completely legitimate objections, a hands-on, real-world solution that engages the community can sometimes bring both sides together in agreement.

Recently, for example, an intern in our office decided to involve himself in a struggle over a recently-passed city ordinance.  This Sacramento ordinance prohibits anyone from going through the recycling bins distributed to residences.

The ordinance was passed to prevent identity theft – there is a law against rifling through trash cans, but not against going through recycling bins.  So a police officer who spots someone hanging around some trash cans in a residential neighborhood can’t do anything, because they can claim they were going for the recycling bins, whether they actually were or not.  Of course, those who oppose it feel that it unfairly deprives the homeless of one of the few revenue streams they have.

So who’s right?  Assuming both sides have done some research to back up the accurancy of their claims, both sides have legitimate reasons to hold opposing positions.  Each can choose how to balance the welfare of the poor against the privacy concerns of city residents.  One side may win, but probably without adequately addressing the concerns of the losing side.

What can be done?  Sometimes a solution that goes beyond the legislative process can bring both sides together.  I humbly submit a suggestion for this particular issue.  A homeless organization could pass special “recycling bags” to residents interested in supporting the homeless and poor who collect the recycling.  As a resident, I would place my recycling in the bag instead of in the recycling bin, and place it on the street next to my bins.  The ordinance could prohibit rummaging through bins, but allow placing the bags on the street.  The bags would make the task faster and easier for people collecting the cans and bottles, and would encourage people to think more about how to help the poorest in our communities.  (Any recycling company could also pick up the bags, of course, which would prevent them from piling up if a street were neglected by individual collectors.)

Okay, my point is not that I’ve cleverly solved the problem of people digging through trash cans.  My suggestion isn’t perfect, and has issues, and might not actually work out upon implementation for any number of reasons.  My larger point is that the effectiveness of legislation can be augmented by cooperation with existing agencies, organizations, and communities.

People who aren’t familiar with the law-making progress are sometimes surprised by how difficult it is to predict the outcome of a particular law.  Laws frequently don’t have quite the intended effect – the way a law pans out has a lot to do with how enforcement efforts are carried out, and how those efforts interact with organizations and communities affected by the enforcement.  Arguments for or against legislation often grapple with how laws will actually be implemented – gun control laws, for example, discuss whether the law will effectively limit gun ownership, or only encourage a black market.

Malcolm Gladwell, in his very interesting book The Tipping Point, describes how a drug agency’s effort to distribute clean needles was unexpectedly successful.  The agency decided to provide free a needle swap program so that heroin users could avoid infection.  Some time after implementing the program, they ran an audit to find out if it was effective.  They found that individual users were not swapping needles; a few men were coming to swap out bags full of dirty needles for clean ones.  These men took the needles into heroin dens and sold them for $1-2 to users.  At first, the agency was horrified – someone is making a quick buck off our free needles! But they soon realized that without these middle men, there was no way the agency could reach individual users in heroin dens.  Users wouldn’t buy clean needles in advance; they only thought to grab a needle when they were in the act of shooting up.  The middle men bridged the gap between the agency and the users.

The agency’s effort was successful because it interacted in unexpected ways with the existing players in the heroin ecosystem.  But many other efforts are hampered, stymied, or even backfire because they don’t try to engage with the affected stakeholders.  Reaching out to the community, outside the legislative rotunda, is difficult, and is outside the comfort zone of many legislators, but is often critical to the success of a new law.

The most disappointing thing after organizing an event is to be surprised by a low turnout.  And while learning from experience is all well and good, you’ll feel better if you prepare, and make your first big event a big success.

Media: The easiest reliable way to get the word out is to make use of existing media.  Create a short description of your event, including location and time.  If your event is newsworthy, also prepare a half- to full-page description with a picture or two for media that might be interested in a story.

The main media are newspapers, TV, and radio, and blogs and podcasts are joining the ranks of established media.  Search for local media, and contact the editors of each.  Ask if they’d be interested in running a story and/or interview about your event.  Ideally, you want a story before the event for publicity purposes, and a reporter on the scene of the event, as well.  (If they aren’t interested in a story beforehand, you should still ask them to send a reporter to the event itself.)  If they aren’t interested in doing any story, ask if you can send information to them for a public service announcement (PSA), and if they have an online event calendar or event listing as well.

Partnership with community organizations: One of the best ways to guarantee attendees is to partner with a well-known community organization.  “Partnering” can mean many things.  You “partner” with a local business when you want a donation of money or supplies; with a politician when you want the fame of their office; and with another organizer like yourself when you want help coordinating the event.  When you partner with a bigger organization, you may want any or all of these things.

Make it clear from the moment you approach them that you’d like them to make yours an official event of theirs.  For publicity purposes, you want them to make your event an official event of theirs (as opposed to simply an announcement to their membership during a single meeting), so they’ll be committed to their members’ attendance.

Ask for as much in the way of other types of support as you think their interest will justify.  This will make them more committed to your event, and so more likely to push their members to attend.  And this will also strengthen your relationship with them.  If you use the light touch, and ask for just a tiny commitment, they won’t feel connected to you in any way after the event, and you’ll be starting from scratch the next time you ask for support.

If they’re not interested in partnering, you can still ask them to announce your event.  You can’t rely on a very many attendees from such announcements, though.  This is no reason not to ask lots of local organizations to announce your event, of course.  Neighborhood associations can be good for this; ask your local government (city or county) or a listing of these.

Online event calendars: While even easier and faster than contacting the media, online calendars are less reliable for bringing people to your event.  But posting can still help – advertising research shows that people need to see a message multiple times before acting on it, so you want people to hear about your event in several different ways.  You can find local event calendars by searching online.

Do-it-yourself outreach: Plan to drop fliers at community locations such as libraries, community centers, public pools, etc.  Attend fairs and events to talk up your event and hand out fliers.  Walk door-to-door to give out fliers or door hangers.  (If you’re organizing for an elected official, mass mailing or campaign laws may prevent such door-to-door mail drops.)

So in all your organizing, don’t forget to get the word out about your event!

If you have other good ways to get the word out, mention them in the comments.

This is part 3 of a serial post.  (See the last post here.)  I will continue to discuss the various events and projects we implement to try to help increase participation in the community.

What better way to get started than to walk around the neighborhood and talk to people?  At the end of the neighborhood association meeting I proposed that we put together a neighborhood walkabout, to talk to neighbors about what neighborhood issues they cared about, and how the NA could be more relevant to them.  Everyone there liked the idea, and I passed around a sign-up sheet scrawled on a piece of lined paper.

I wanted to involve other agencies and offices in the walkabout, for several reasons.  First, I didn’t want to step on any toes by doing an event in a city supervisor’s district without inviting him.  Second, I am still relatively new to this whole community outreach thing, and want to learn from them on events like this.  Third, are involved with the communities already, and are usually interested in participating.

After some calls, I had confirmed attendance from the Sacramento department of neighborhood services, an officer from the community outreach and neighborhood watch program of Sac PD, and the Councilmember who represents the area.  This lends important credibility, actually, because people take you a lot more seriously if they think you can actually do something to address their concerns.

I have done a couple of other walkabouts, as well as some door-to-door marketing, so I know a few things about how these sorts of things turn out:

• A small handful of motivated people can cover a lot of ground, reach a lot of people, and make the effort a success.
• A lot of people won’t be home.
  
• You need a flyer or some sort of literature to leave at each door (for people who aren’t home), and for people who are home, so they’ll have something to refer back to if they want more information later.
• If people are even slightly interested, add them to a sign-up list with phone, address, and email so you can follow up with them later.  This is extremely important!  Never rely on people contacting you, even if they are very interested.

On the day of the walkabout, I got a call from the councilmember – he wouldn’t be able to come.  I had also been unable to reach the contact with the police department.  Keep in mind that in events like this, it is difficult to know beforehand who will actually show up, especially for an activity like this.

In any case, the walkabout went well.  We split up into four pairs and started walking.  Many people we encountered were interested in knowing more about what was going on in the neighborhood, and many were interested in receiving more information.

Some interesting observations:

• Most people didn’t have many (or any) neighborhood issues they wanted to talk about.  Many said they were pretty happy with the way things were, which surprised me, because neighborhood association meeting attendees have plenty of concerns, and are constantly trying to improve the neighborhood.
• A neighborhood member in my walking group tried approaching people by asking them if they were interested in getting involved in the neighborhood.  In my experience this is a chancy approach, because many people will interpret this as a request for time, effort or money.  My predictions were borne out; we got no contact information from anyone who was approached in this way, and I suggested the neighbor try a different approach.
• One woman had plenty of issues she was concerned about (abandoned houses, drug dealing, gang activity), but didn’t want to come to a NA meeting because she “didn’t want any trouble.”  We did finally interest her in receiving a newsletter from the NA, but it concerns me that she feels there might be reprisals against her if she speaks up.

We’re still collating the information we collected, but there is no doubt that it has increased the list of neighbors the NA can contact.  We’ll see if we can bring any of them out to the next meeting.

This is part 2 of a serial post.  (See the last post here.)  In later parts of the series I will discuss the various events and projects we implemented to try to help increase participation in the community.

In the last post in this series I left off at the end of a neighborhood association meeting with the Colonial Manor neighborhood association (CMNA).  As I mentioned, the neighbors started discussing their concern about the low turnout at meetings and in NA events in general.  I’m glad they did, because I would have found it much harder to offer suggestions if they were unsolicited, a topic about which I think I’ll write more in the future.  Also, of course, there’s no way I could have thought of all these ideas on my own.

Here are the suggestions they came up with, and my thoughts on them:

• Start a blog: They used to have a blog, apparently, but it fell into disuse.  I think it could be useful to have a blog, but only if neighbors are actually participating, and are interested enough to check the blog for news.  I don’t think the blog would be a good way to get people involved.  And a blog can only survive if someone commits to updating it.  That said, if someone wants to maintain a blog, they’ll stay more active in the neighborhood.  And it would be useful once participation rises.
• Have a snack potluck: I always think food brings more people to meetings, and making it a potluck gives the meeting a “community” feel.  Each person feels that they have contributed some, and feeling may also help draw out people who otherwise may not feel they should contribute to the discussion.
• Change the meeting layout to a circle of chairs, rather than rows facing the front: I agree with this wholeheartedly, given the small number of people who currently attend.
• Introductions at the beginning of the meeting
• Childcare during meetings: Some neighbors can’t attend because they have small children.  One neighbor, a high school student, suggests that she and other students could come to meetings to watch the kids.  High school students often need community service hours.
• Yard signs: CMNA members could post yard signs to get the word out to others.
• Flyers sent home with students: Schools frequently flyers and permission slips home with students; the school could send along a notification about the NA.
• School sign publicity: Schools have marquee signs for announcing upcoming events, and a school could announce NA events as well.
• Bringing friends: Every member could promise to contact three neighbors about the CMNA.  I think this is an excellent idea, for those neighbors willing to do so (they shouldn’t be strong-armed, of course!).  It is often the case that people join a new organization (or religion) only when someone they know encourages them to do so.
• Block party: Close down a block and hold a block party; coordinate with other events and groups (National Night Out [NNO], problem-oriented police officers, etc.)
• What CMNA is already doing: CMNA already sends email notifications before meetings.  The membership packet includes some coupons and CMNA magnets.
• Raffle on National Night Out: Solicit donations from local businesses. On National Night Out, sell memberships to the NA; everyone who buys on NNO gets a raffle ticket.  Each ticket-holder gets a prize from a business (e.g. a bag of groceries, a toy, etc.)

Write in the comments if you have other good ideas to increase participation!

This is part 1 of a serial post.  In later parts of the series I will discuss the actual strategies discussed by the neighbors, and the various events and projects we implemented to try to help increase participation in the community.

Not too long ago I attended an excellent neighborhood association (NA) meeting.  I’ve been attending meetings in the Colonial Manor neighborhood for about 5 months.  I’m working to help connect them to some senior support services provided by nonprofits and by the city and county.  The meetings usually have 5-15 members, and almost every time the president tells me apologetically that she wishes there were more people.  I think she’s embarrassed that Senator Steinberg is sending a representative all the way out to the NA for only a handful of neighbors.  I feel sorry for her; I’d be embarrassed too, and in fact have been in the same situation when I’ve organized events with low turnout.  I feel I’ve let everyone down.

This meeting, while the community police officers were presenting, one neighbor, Lary, asked how CMNA meetings compared with other NA meetings they regularly attended.  She said that CMNA meetings were fairly well-attended, actually, which surprised most of us there – it’s a pitiful reflection on the state of NAs.  Or at least on the state of NAs in the part of Sacramento that these officers patrolled.

At the end of the meeting, Lary spoke up again and asked how we could get more people to come.  What followed was a 20-minute discussion about strategies the NA could use to bring out more people.  There were a lot of great ideas, many of them immediately actionable, and several people stepped up to get some of the started.  I was extremely heartened by the prospect of helping the NA reach more people, and I’ll be helping with several of the actions.  I had proposed, earlier in the meeting, to coordinate a neighborhood walkabout to talk to neighbors about what neighborhood issues interested them, and talk to them about how the NA could be more relevant to them.  I’m excited – this is a great way to get to know the neighborhood and pull it together some.

By focusing more on neighborhood projects, I’m forcing myself to go out and get to know the community more.  That’s a big part of why I’m so excited about this NA meeting taking such a promising move.