Policy Consensus E-News — August 2004
If you are unable to properly view this email, please click here.
In this issue:
- A Kansas legislative leader champions intergovernmental cooperation and consensus building
- Case Study: How a Vermont agency worked with EPA on a forum to address contentious stormwater management issues
- How leaders can convene consensus processes
Senate Majority Leader Sets New Course for Kansas Legislature
For
Lana Oleen, a PCI/NPCC Board member and full-time champion of intergovernmental
cooperation and consensus building in the legislative arena, skillful
listening is the first step to good policy making. "So many parts
of this job involve mediating people's differences, and trying to help
everyone feel that they're part of the solution," she says.
Through four terms in the Kansas Senate—including four years as Majority Leader, an array of key committee chair and vice-chair positions, and memberships on numerous councils, committees and boards—Oleen has been encouraging the art of listening.
A teacher by profession, Oleen touted good listening skills in her classroom—well before her entrée into lawmaking. "I would tell students, 'we learn nothing by talking; we only learn by listening." So when she arrived in Topeka for her first term in the Senate, Oleen was well prepared. "People really want to be heard. Everyone believes he or she is right about what they have to say."
As a freshman legislator in 1988, Oleen was elected Chair of the Governmental Organization Committee—an unusual appointment for a newly elected member. The first bill to land on her desk had to do with the Department of Revenue and its impending abolition. "I thought, how are we ever going to pay for things?" she recalled. "So I started listening. I discovered there were some programs people thought were good, and others that weren't so good. It was then I began structuring hearings so both proponents and opponents were in the same room at the same time."
Case Study
Vermont Water Board Opens Docket to Resolve
Stormwater Management Permitting Controversy
This case is adapted from a report written by Ellie Tonkin, specialist with the EPA's Regional ADR Program in Boston.
In July 2003, Vermont's Water Resources Board approached the Environmental Protection Agency's Boston-based Regional ADR Program about whether and how to create a forum—apart from the ongoing legal and political debates—to explore solutions to a long festering controversy over stormwater management.
The Board had recently upheld a challenge to the legal sufficiency of state-issued Watershed Improvement Permits, the regulatory mechanism through which stormwater is managed at the state level. Uncertainty in the permitting program was affecting property sales and putting new development projects at risk; tensions among regulators, the regulated community, environmentalists, and other interested parties were rising as fast as the backlog of expired permits. In short, the absence of a clear approach to stormwater management was draining resources and goodwill across all sectors of the state.
Following the Boards' request for assistance, Ellie Tonkin and Doug Thompson of the EPA's ADR Program began consulting with Board staff on the design and implementation of a collaborative process to address stormwater issues. In late September, under the Board's sponsorship, Tonkin and Thompson co-facilitated the first meeting of the Vermont Stormwater Docket Investigation.
How Leaders Convene Consensus Processes
In
the past several issues, E-news has been featuring ways in which leaders
are serving as conveners for collaborative processes. A convener is the
person or organization that initiates a consensus process. In April and
May, we ran stories about how legislators and legislative staff have
invited groups to work out consensus-based agreements. In June and July,
two governors wrote about how they brought people to the table to resolve
difficult issues in their states.
Agencies, too, can serve as conveners, as the Vermont case (above) illustrates.
Convening can be done either directly or indirectly. Some conveners serve as figureheads, using their visibility and relationships to bring stakeholders together around a specific project. They tend to the "politics" that arise, and help smooth potential conflicts among group members.
In some cases, leaders convene a group and use a facilitator or mediator to assist them with the process. Or, conveners can serve as active facilitators and work with staff in leading the group through a process. The convener and staff should decide jointly upon convener responsibilities that make sense for the project and the convener.
There are several steps a convener should take before, during and after a consensus process. PCI's Practical Guide to Consensus describes these steps in detail, and offers useful advice on the most effective ways to convene or sponsor a consensus approach.
The book also includes chapters with step-by-step instructions on:
- When to use a consensus process
- How to assess whether consensus will work
- How to ensure representative participation
- How to select and work with a facilitator;
- How to plan and organize the process, and
- How to negotiate the issues and reach agreement.
A Trainer's Manual that accompanies the Practical Guide is also available.
Share PolicyConsenus E-News with your leaders and colleagues by forwarding this edition to them. Or, direct them to www.policyconsensus.org, where they can sign up to receive it in their own e-mail inbox!