1. law, govt and politics
2. government

MPA Capstone Learning and Professional Development Portfolio
Piece of Evidence Cover Sheet
Name: Samuel T. Weekley
Title/Label of Evidence: Civic Engagement and Online Participation for the Property
Tax Amendments on the 2012 Ballot
Type of Evidence:
o Course assignment for (identify class): PAD 6908, Independent Study, Dr. Rui
Sun
o Internship artifact for (identify internship):
_____________________________________
o Written reflection produced for the portfolio
o Other (explain):
__________________________________________________________________
__
Competency/capacity addressed: 4e: Incorporate and value principles of democracy in the
workplace
Self Assessment
Score: 3
Criteria you have met: Can apply principles of democracy (and frameworks) to
specific situations and contexts. Is able to articulate how she/he views collaborative
leadership as a professional competency.
Instructor Assessment
Score: ___________
Check list:
o Written assessment follows completed rubric
o Evidence is located after written assessment or may be found under another
tab/page of the portfolio (add location):
_________________________________________
o Additional supporting evidence included
Three pieces within this portfolio mean more to me than any of the analyses that I
have conducted during my academic career, and this piece happens to be one of them.
This report, originally written as a literature review for an incomplete publication, this
piece marks a major transition in understanding of the principles of research analyses,
and also represents a shift in how I approached my research. Dr. Rui Sun, who I may add
was one of only three professors within the MPA program at UCF who recognized my
hard work and effort and took an interest in making me into a more competent student,
provided an opportunity to conduct an independent study with her over the summer
semester of 2013 focused solely on the citizen participation initiatives utilized by
Florida’s state government to engage citizens concerning the 2012 property tax
amendments. The work was demanding, tedious, and exceedingly difficult, but with Dr.
Sun’s guidance I feel I became a much more competent and capable student, and man
(for that matter), as her insistence on challenging me to be the best I could be molded me
into the man that I needed to be to be successful at the next level. This piece, while only
a literature review, was a part of a much larger project that not only analyzed tax policy
data, but also made me a stronger man in the process. For that I will always be grateful,
and excited for the opportunity to work on any project Dr. Sun provides me an
opportunity to work for her on.
Civic Engagement and Public Participation for the Property Tax
Amendments on the 2012 Florida Ballot: A Lit Review
Name:
Course:
Instructor:
Independent Study
PAD 6908
Dr. Rui Sun
Introduction
Civic engagement by a representative government, and public participation by its
constituency are two crucial components of a liberal democracy designed to contend with
individualism by facilitating an environment conducive for active citizenship; reduce
conflict by reducing control, and protect the freedoms of the constituency base from the
imposition of tyranny by an autocratic government (Warren 1992, p. 8). Fundamental
questions pertaining to who, what, why, where, and how are imperative for extrapolating
relevant data for public policy decision-making, which ultimately facilitates an
environment conducive for, “well-functioning citizen-centered collaborative public
management” (Cooper, Bryer & Meek 2006, p. 84).
Civic Engagement Fundamentals
The idea of, and belief in a public policy decision-making process that sufficiently
accounts for civic engagement and public participation is synonymous with the rationale
of democracy’s greatest philosophers and advocates (Plato, Aristotle, Rousseau, & Locke
to name a few) whose doctrine for, and understanding of human needs and emotions
transcended those of their immediate peers, and would ultimately become the foundation
of the democratic ideal that all men (and women) regardless of their ethnic, economic,
educational, and societal positions, are indeed created equal, and must be provided equal
opportunities to civil rights and liberties, as well as the capacity to engage each other
directly as equals concerning public problems (Fung 2006, p. 68). In this respect public
participation is the primary medium for the exchange of policy related information and
communication (Baker, Addams & Davis 2005, p. 490), through a deliberative process
that engages citizens and stakeholders in policy related dialogue (Lukenmeyer 2013) that
generates opinions and innovative ideas utilized by government officials and stakeholders
to significantly decrease the potential for misshapen public opinion, (Roberts 2004, p.
316) and ensure the consideration of any and all impacts and ramifications before the
completion of the public policy decision-making process (Bryer 2007, p. 428).
Direct Democracy and Brazil
The benefits of citizen engagement and public participation are indeed
multifaceted, but encompass a fundamental supposition that the promotion of
accountability, and transparency establish a foundation for citizen trust, and supportive
civic behaviors concerning the representativeness of a government (Wang & Bryer 2011,
p. 194). Public participation is “intrinsically valuable,” because of its capacity for
keeping communal life relative, holding public entities accountable, resolving complex
public issues and conflicts, and advancing a “public spirited moral character,” with the
efficacious realization that through civic engagement citizens are able to realize their
ultimate potential as, “an integral, and essential part of the governance process” (Roberts
2004, ps. 320 & 323).
Brazil, which harbors the world’s seventh largest economy, provides an
exemplary example that ultimately became a modern era archetype for the democratic
process, and civic engagement with the implementation of its constitution in 1988. Even
today however, Brazil faces economic and social crises that hinder its desire for, and
realization of complete economic autonomy. High poverty levels, intense political and
social inequalities, and a lack of concern on behalf of local government officials for
fundamental democratic principles are elements that contribute to what Wampler (2009)
suggests is “limited citizenship” (Wampler 2009, p. 21). Yet, even considering its highly
documented economic and social troubles, many of the larger economies within the
country participate in a participatory budgeting process that affords local stakeholders
and constituents an opportunity to work directly with public policy decision-makers
through town-hall fashioned forums to achieve public policy solutions to these inequities.
Participatory budgeting has produced substantial, and significant results (for
Brazil) that seem to indicate a positive trend for public approval as it relates to the
reinforcement of the democratic ideal through public participation. Citizens who actively
engage in the participatory process, whether annually, or for a specific one-time purpose
(i.e. a public project) have been more likely to approve of, and support their local
government’s initiatives, even if the associated cost is higher than average. The effect of
participatory budgeting in Brazil is multifaceted, but the consensus is that engaged
citizens, “understand their own problems better than government officials,” and therefore
will be able to match proposed public policy and projects to their needs (Wampler 2009,
59 & 60). Civically engaged participants become empowered citizens, and gain a greater
understanding for the democratic process utilized by their elected government, and learn
more about the character and ideology of their elected officials. In many ways this
process mirrors the elemental principles of accountability, and propounds the
imperativeness of two way communication and collaboration, and that just as citizens
should not be viewed (by the government) as clients of the state, the government, and
government officials should not be viewed (by citizens) as autonomous figureheads, but
rather as facilitators for effective public policy.
AmericaSpeaks & the Metropolitan Revolution
The concept of direct democracy is universal, but the application is more complex
and difficult when negotiating with a representative government. The application of
direct democracy in the United States for example may be more applicative to local
governments than to federal and even state governments because of bureaucracy, and the
consent voters relinquish to federal officials to govern and make policy according to the
consensus held by the majority. AmericaSpeaks, a nonpartisan nonprofit founded by Dr.
Carolyn J. Lukenmeyer, has conducted participative public policy discussion forums
focused on engaging citizens within communities where existing citizen apathy toward
representative government impedes that local government’s capacity for securing citizen
and stakeholder trust, and any attempt at a well-planned long term commitment.
Lukenmeyer (2013) describes civic engagement and public participation initiatives, such
as those conducted by AmericaSpeaks as a “deliberative process,” designed to reduce
special interest power, produce durable public policies, “build constituencies committed
to specific outcomes,” and increase public trust in their respective representative
government (Lukenmeyer 2013). In her book Bringing Citizen Voices to the Table: A
Guide for Public Managers; Lukenmeyer (2013) highlights successes, and lessons
learned from numerous AmericaSpeaks initiatives conducted within communities around
the United States that have, or continue to suffer from citizen apathy for representative
government. “The goal of deliberative forums,” Lukenmeyer writes, “ is to illuminate
why people support certain courses of action, and what their reservations and main
concerns are” (Lukenmeyer 2013). In fact, deliberative forums such as those conducted
by AmericaSpeaks have been employed throughout history by representative democracies
in ancient Greece, Rome, and the United States of America, as a platform for citizen
participation to ensure that public policy accounts for citizen needs and concerns, and that
public managers and civil service leaders can formulate relationships within diverse
constituencies that ultimately aid in the construction of an direct democracy
infrastructure.
In The Metropolitan Revolution Katz and Bradley (2013) build on the idea of
public participation in public policy decision making, and note that there has been a shift
in power from the federal to the metropolitan-local level, as many metropolitan-local
officials and leaders have taken it upon themselves to formulate public policy, and broker
regional and international partnerships that will benefit their local economy (Katz and
Bradley 2013). Metropolitan mayors such as Mike Bloomberg are embracing
globalization as an economic solution to the financial shortfalls New York City has
witnessed in the last decade. The City of Cleveland, Ohio, once believed to be a failed
metropolis has established a partnership with Quicken Loans entrepreneur and billionaire
Dan Gilbert, and many other for-profit, and nonprofit organizations to revive the
downtown landscape. With these examples in mind, it will be interesting to see whether
or not direct democracy becomes the exclusive method for the establishment of
facilitating and enabling public policy, or will representative government continue to
advance initiatives according to their perception of the majority rule.
Social Media and the 2012 Amendments
Conceptualizing civic engagement and public participation for the context of this
study required the compartmentalization of multiple definitions and applicative examples
used within correlating studies to describe the collective action of deliberation and civic
engagement (Cooper, 2005, p. 534), “in a variety of arenas, including
governmental/administrative, electoral, and civil society” (Wang & Bryer 2011, p. 179).
The data accumulated indicates that today, perhaps more than any time in history, civic
engagement and public participation is perceived by our representative government and
the constituents for whom they govern to be an imperative element of the public policy
decision-making process, and more importantly to the democratic ideal. What has
changed are the modes used to facilitate civic engagement and public participation, which
are in a constant state of metamorphosis, adapting to meet the demands of hyperinterconnected society.
Social media technology as a platform for public participation is a widely popular
medium for civic engagement, and facilitating public policy decision-making discussions,
because of its capacity for spanning boundaries, and “enabling deliberation” (Bryer &
Zavattaro 2011, p. 327) and collaboration across stakeholder bases. As an asset, social
media accounts are also inexpensive, barring operational cost, and costs related to
organizational transparency. In this regard, social media, if used properly as a functional
tool for civic engagement and public participation is easily manageable, and has a
minimal impact to both the government and stakeholders who utilize the technology for
these purposes. The use of social media technology to communicate public policy
viewpoints has been in use since the 2004 presidential election, however the social media
landscape has expanded, becoming for many a primary mean for communication. In
place of singular, one-way communication, government entities and officials now have a
capacity for generating and facilitating public discussion between stakeholders and
citizens on an unprecedented scale. This method for civic engagement has drastically
altered the political and policy making panorama, as policy decision-makers are provided
with hard data that in many cases, including the opinions of Florida’s Congress during
the 2012 legislative session, completely changes the political outcome. Special interest
groups, particularly Florida’s League of Women Voters, the Florida Realtor’s
Association, Florida Tax Watch, and the Florida Chamber of Commerce played a
decisive role by distributing policy briefs composed either in house, or through a third
party think tank, that were ultimately designed to promote an organizational wide
political view, and to shape public opinion.
Effective Public Participation?
For the purpose of this research, we attempted to measure the efficacy of the
channels provided to constituents for public feedback concerning the 2012 Florida
Constitutional Amendments on the 2012 Florida ballot. Our research indicated that the
use of public organizational Websites by public agencies to facilitate conversation
concerning policy formulation and implementation was rare, while the use of social
media (i.e. Facebook, Twitter) had increased significantly. As to the question of why the
(seemingly strategic) under-utilization of organizational Websites occurred so frequently,
while social media use to engage citizens seems to be so prevalent, the answer is
multifarious, with the cost, whether financial or organizational far outweighing the
benefit. This assumption aligns with theories proposed by both Baker and Addams
(2005), and Wang and Bryer (2011) who suggest governments generally perceive civic
engagement as a costly, time consuming, and complex agglomeration of issues rather
than an opportunity to unify public sentiment and perception with policy that accounts for
stakeholder and constituent demand. Policy based arguments, particularly those for the
2012 Florida Amendments, were facilitated on such a large scale, and included so many
stakeholders and citizens that the use of an organizational Website to do so could impede
other functions (of the Website) necessary to the organization’s day-to-day operational
performance. High Website traffic also tends to draw unwanted attention from Internet
hacking organizations and lone wolves that continue to present challenges in the way of
cyber-security to governments internationally.
So the question remains: What is the most effective method for actively, and
virtually engaging citizens who do not use social media as a part of their everyday lives?
If Wang and Bryer’s (2011) postulation, which presents a high-degree of unlikelihood
that governmental entities will yield a transformational approach to civic engagement
using “more intensive” mediums and technologies for public participation is to be
accepted, then what is the perceived future for civic engagement? (Wang & Bryer 2011,
p. 180). Our study indicated that the most effective platform for engaging constituents
during the 2012 election was the public comment function available on print news media
Websites. Although the comment function provided at the end of the vast majority of the
news articles analyzed (for this study) was not associated with any specific government
entity, the citizen feedback denoted the majority sentiment (of participating constituents),
which was clearly used to shape state and local leadership opinions. This conclusion
became visible from the point (in time) in which these amendments were initially
conceived during the 2011 Florida legislative session, until the end of the 2012 Florida
legislative session.
From their initial conception these constitutional amendments, particularly those
pertaining to property taxes, were perceived (by the legislative majority) as necessary
mean to ensure long-term public sector fiscal sustainability. After further analysis of the
economic and social impacts of the 2012 Florida Constitutional Amendments however, a
plethora of policy relevant information was generated and published with commentary by
an extensive number of Florida’s print news media outlets. With each article, a
designated space known to most as a comment function was afforded to readers for
public feedback opportunities. The comment function in a high percentage of observed
cases accomplished essentially the same objective that a town-hall style public forum
would achieve, with the added benefit of hard data in the words of the constituents
themselves. We are however obliged to note that oftentimes the discussions veered from
relatively substantive to borderline obscurity, but the substantive data generated, one may
advance, was indeed useful for legislators, as well as stakeholders and constituents to
make an informed decision at the ballot box. This supposition supports a theory
determined and expounded by Wang and Bryer (2011) that implies a, “relationship
between participation mechanisms and participation quantity levels,” and speculates that
“a participation mechanism (in this case the comment function on print news media
articles) with lower participation costs to citizens is associated with greater participation
quantity” (Wang & Bryer 2011, p. 193).
References
Baker, W. H., Addams, H. L., & Davis, B. (2005). Critical factors for enhancing
municipal public hearings. Public Administration Review, 65, 490-499.
Bryer, T. A. (2007a). Toward a relevant agenda for a responsive public
administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17,
479-500.
Bryer, T. A. (2009). Explaining responsiveness in collaboration: Administrator and
citizen role Perceptions. Public Administration Review, 69, 271-283.
Bryer, T. A., & Zavattaro, S. M. (2011). Social media and public administration:
Theoretical dimensions and introduction to symposium. Administrative
Theory & Praxis, 33, 325-340
Cooper T. L., Bryer, T. A., & Meek, J. W. (2006). Citizen-centered collaborative
public management. Public Administration Review, 66(S1), 76-88.
Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public
Administration Review, 66(S1), 66-75.
Irvin, R. A., & Stansbury, J. (2004). Citizen participation in decision making: Is it
worth the effort? Public Administration Review, 64(1), 55-65.
Kathi, P. C., & Cooper, T. L. (2005). Democratizing the administrative state—
Connecting neighborhood councils and city agencies. Public Administration
Review, 65, 559-567.
Katz, B. & Bradley, J. (2013) The Metropolitan Revolution: How Cities and Metros
Are Fixing Our Broken Politics and Fragile Economy. ISBN-13:978-0-81572151-2. Washington D.C. – Brookings Institution Press.
Lukenmeyer, Carol J. Ph.D. (2013) Bringing Citizen Voices to the Table: A Guide
for Public Managers. ISBN-13: 978-1118230879. Jossey-Bass: Wiley & Sons
Publising.
Roberts, N. (2004). Public deliberation in an age of direct citizen participation.
American Review of Public Administration, 34, 315-353.
Wampler, Brian (2009) Participatory Budgeting in Brazil: Contestation,
Cooperation, and Accountability. Pennsylvania State University Press
University Park, PA.
Wang, Xiao Hu & Bryer, T.A. (2009) Assessing the Costs of Public Participation: A
Case Study of Two Online Participation Mechanisms. American Review of
Public Administration. Thousand Oaks, CA – SAGE.
Warren, M. (1992). Democratic theory and self-transformation. American Political
Science Review, 86(1), 8-23.