City Council Study Session - Item 7a
October 10, 2023
Discussion on the LotterySelected Panel Process for
the Airport
Team Roles SANTA MONICA AIRPORT
FROM FARMLAND TO AVIATION
AND MANUFACTURING CENTER
Airfield dedicated 1923 as
“Clover Field.”
Santa Monica buys airport
land through a park bond in
1926
Douglas Aircraft Company
was the largest employer in
Santa Monica’s history
However...
MEASURE LOCAL CONTROL (LC) Team Roles
2014 - MEASURE LC LIMITS LAND
USE AT SANTA MONICA AIRPORT
No new development until voters
have approved limits on uses
Provides exemptions for:
Parks and public open spaces
Recreational facilities
Maintenance/replacement of
existing cultural arts and education
uses
“Shall the City Charter be amended
to:
(1) Prohibit new development on
Airport land, except for parks,
public open spaces and public
recreational facilities, until the
voters approve limits on the uses
and development that may occur
on the land; and
(2) Affirm the City Council’s authority
to manage the Airport and to close
all or part of it”
60% yes, 40% no
Team Roles SANTA MONICA AIRPORT TODAY
CITY HAS LEGAL AUTHORITY TO
CLOSE AIRPORT
Consistent direction from Council to
close Airport over past several decades
Authorized for closure after December
31, 2028
Requires Council action
Written Notice to FAA
Environmental Review
Ordinance for closure
Budget established for planning process
to determine future use of land
History of local measures and
community preferences
Team Roles
Timeline Overview
1. January 2023 = Council authorization
2. February 2023 = RFQ released
3. March 2023 = RFQ closed (27 teams
responded, eight short-listed)
4. May 2023 = RFP released to short-list
5. June 2023 = RFP closed, five teams invited to
interviews in July
6. August 2023 = Notice of decision, goes to
Council 11/14/23
7. September 2023 = Info Item posted
WHAT HAS BEEN DONE TO DATE
Team Roles CITY AND PROJECT TEAMS
Project Management
Alex Parry
Senior Design Manager
Amber Richane
Acting Chief Operations
Officer
Amelia
Feichtner
Capital Programs
Manager
Chris Dishlip
Assistant Director
City of Santa Monica Public Works
Sasaki (recommended)
Sasaki
Design+Technical Team
(D+TT)
The
Roberts
Group,
HR&A
Arup
Atelier
10 Group
Delta
CARS
ESA
7 TRADITIONAL OUTREACH CHALLENGES
What has been done before:
Limited opportunities for participation,
based on life circumstances.
Takes longerthan anticipated,
community participation wanes.
Staffinterprets what was said and
reports out to City Council.
Community has been left feeling
disenfranchised, misrepresented,
and/or marginalized.
8 QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL
Tonight staff is asking:
• Review and comment on the democratic lottery
process as the primary public engagement
method for the Future of the Santa Monica Airport
project;
• Provide direction to staff about: the framing
question the Lottery Selected Panel would answer,
if approved, and whether the Lottery Selected
Panel should be comprised of Santa Monica
residents only or also include business owners
and/or people from the adjacent West Los
Angeles area; and
• Direct staff to prepare a sole source contract, as
an exception to the competitive bidding process
pursuant to Section 2.24.250 (b), for Healthy
Democracy to provide the services related to the
democratic lottery process and bring it back for
Council review in November.
Team Roles CITY AND PROJECT TEAMS
Process Managers
Linn Davis
Program Co-Director
Alex Renirie
Program Co-Director
Grace Taylor
Operations Director
Kacey Bull
Outreach & Comms
Director
Healthy Democracy (recommended)
Sasaki (recommended)
Sasaki
Design+Technical Team
(D+TT)
The
Roberts
Group,
HR&A
Arup
Atelier
10 Group
Delta
Project Management
Alex Parry
Senior Design Manager
Amber Richane
Acting Chief Operations
Officer
Amelia
Feichtner
Capital Programs
Manager
Chris Dishlip
Assistant Director
City of Santa Monica Public Works
CARS
ESA
Reimagining Civic Participation
SMO Airport Community Panel
10 October 2023
Alex Renirie, Program Co-Director
Linn Davis, Program Co-Director
Who is Healthy Democracy?
We aim to empower new voices and represents
the community across our many diversities, using
democratic lotteries.
We design deliberative processes that prove a more
collaborative politics is possible.
We partner with governments, nonprofits, and others
to bring together Lottery-Selected Panels that
tackle our most difficult policy questions.
Healthy Democracy:
A History
We created one of the best known reforms in the field
of deliberative democracy – the Citizens’ Initiative
Review.
● Run since 2008 in 5 states & 2 other countries
● Became Oregon law in 2011
● Among the most studied deliberative processes
globally
Current focus: local government decision-making
processes.
Oregon
Massachusetts
Colorado California Arizona
Finland Switzerland
The Context
We participate in our democracy
at vastly different rates.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/510254/postsecondary-education-li nked-volunteerism-better-health.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_content=morelink&utm_campaign=syndication Volunteering by Educational Attainment
(% of US adults who reported volunteering in the past 12 months) Participation in Civic & Political Activities by Income (% of US adults who took part in at least one civic/political activity in the past 12 months)
Source: Pew Research Center, 1 Sept. 2009, tinyurl.com/hdpresent6.
And we don’t see public
decision making as
something we can all do.
Many Current Processes
Devalue Our Humanity
Require Comfort with
Rigid Procedural
Norms
Assume
Subject Matter
Expertise
Are Debate-Oriented,
Not Collaboration-Oriented
And even for those of us
who do participate . . .
Most of us will never be
deeply involved in the details
of any policy decision
that affects us.
No surprise – all this
has consequences.
Source: Fred Lewsey, “Global dissatisfaction with democracy at a record high,” Centre for the Future of Democracy, Univ. of Cambridge, tinyurl.com/hdpresent10.
Rising Dissatisfaction with Democracy in the US
But we’re optimistic about
solving problems locally.
Optimism that People Holding
Different Political Views Can Solve. . .
Source: PRRI/The Atlantic, 2018 Civic Engagement Survey National
Problems
Local Problems
36% 56%
A New Approach to Democracy
Lottery-Selected Panels
(a.k.a., Citizens’ Assembly, Citizens’ Jury)
Where
our public
decision making
reflects our
diversity
Where
everyone
participates in
in-depth
policymaking
Where
expertise is
both valued &
questioned
Where
our government is
a tool we all use
together
INCLUSIVITY
proactive recruitment +
accessibility-driven design
= new voices
PRINCIPLES
INCLUSIVITY
REPRESENTATION
broadly reflects
a community’s
many diversities
PRINCIPLES
INCLUSIVITY
REPRESENTATION
INTEGRITY
research-based design; transparent process; independent evaluation
PRINCIPLES
INCLUSIVITY
REPRESENTATION
INTEGRITY
COLLABORATION
structured, iterative process +
professional moderation
= respectful, evidence-driven
exchange
PRINCIPLES
INCLUSIVITY
REPRESENTATION
PRINCIPLES
INTEGRITY
COLLABORATION
EMPOWERMENT
panel has authority over
their process &
ability to influence policy
INCLUSIVITY
REPRESENTATION
PRINCIPLES
INTEGRITY
COLLABORATION
EMPOWERMENT
panel has authority over
their process &
ability to influence policy
COLLABORATION
structured, iterative process +
professional moderation
= respectful, evidence-driven
exchange
INCLUSIVITY
proactive recruitment +
accessibility-driven design
= new voices
research-based design; transparent process; independent evaluation
REPRESENTATION
broadly reflects
a community’s
many diversities
Elements of a
Lottery-Selected Panel
Democratic Lotteries
create a microcosm of the public
and reduce common barriers to
participation.
In-Depth Deliberation
changes decision-making itself –
through ample time, balanced
information, and support to find
common ground.
Once in a
lifetime
opportunity!
Today, most public
processes are either . . .
The Democracy Pie
Open to
Anyone
Random
Invitation
Specific
Invitation
The Democracy Pie
Open to
Anyone
Lottery
Selection
Specific
Invitation
Better metaphor: more Democracy Pies!
Open to
Anyone
Specific
Invitation
Lottery
Selection
e.g., surveys, hearings, voting e.g., stakeholder negotiations, outreach to particular community
e.g., Lottery-Selected Panels
Anyone! (in theory...)
Same individuals, “thin”
participation, debate-oriented
Can be targeted &
specialized to issue or impact
Often same individuals,
often top-down orientation
New & diverse folks,
in-depth deliberation,
Panelist-led
Needs time & design
Lottery-Selected Panels: An Overview
Invitation:
Random
addresses receive
invites.
Democratic
Lottery:
A representative
Panel is selected!
Information
Gathering:
Panelists conduct
extensive
research.
In-Depth
Deliberation:
Structured,
intensive
discussion.
Policy
Recommendations:
Report delivered to
policymakers.
15k–20k
An International Movement
Around the world,
Lottery-Selected Panels
are being used for
issues that are . . .
● High-stakes
● Complex and contentious
● Prone to lose-lose outcomes
The
“Deliberative
Wave”
Panels can address almost any policy question.
Source: OECD Database of Representative Deliberative Processes and Institutions (2021).
Recommendations are often adopted by public authorities.
Source: OECD Database of Representative Deliberative Processes and Institutions (2021).
Case Study
Petaluma, CA (2022)
Topic: Future of a 55-acre fairgrounds property
Context: Probably the most contentious issue in the
city; seemingly everyone in the city is a stakeholder
Panelists: 36 (residents aged 16+); broadly
representative of Petaluma’s demographics
Work: ~12 total days of in-person work, over 2 months
Result: 3 reports presented to Council & Fair Board:
● Principles – values, criteria, and rationales
● Pathways – specific site use options
● Final Report – preferred Fairgrounds land use(s)
and rationales, and dissenting opinions
More info:
healthydemocracy.org/petaluma
Petaluma Panel Charrette-Style Design Workshop
“It’s cool finally actually putting it (the vision) on paper,” said Jasmine Diaz, a panelist on the project. “Thinking about how people actually interact with spaces has been really helpful.” – Argus Courier, Oct. 2022 Petaluma Panel Results
● A clear change in tone at Council meetings
- “This process helps make politics less vitriolic.”
—Panelist
● Respect from the public and elected officials
- “A new day for democracy!” —Councillor
- “We will never think of public consultation the same
way.” —City Manager
● Three cohesive visions for the site
○ Detailed level of support for each element
○ Visualizations through collaboration with local
architects and planners
● Clear planning recommendations: supermajority
recommendations and implementation options
● Policy impacts of the Panel’s recommendations
unfolding over the next 2+ years
96% of
Panelists …
100% of
Panelists …
92% of
Panelists …
How Democracy Should Work - Dr. Marjan Ehsassi
They feel a
growing sense of
community with
the other
Panelists.
They “have a say
on the Panel”.
Their input is
meaningful and
important in local
decision making.
https://www.berggruen.org/ideas/articles/how-democracy-should-work-lesson-in-learning-building-cohesion-and-community/ Strongly agree or agree…
SMO Community Panel
(Proposed)
LotterySelected
Panel
Broader Public
Stakeholder &
Informational
Presenters
Decision
Makers
SMO Community Panel Process
Design &
Technical Team
Information Cmte
Stakeholders
City Staff
SMO Community Panel – Project Timeline
Sept. 2024–Jan. 2025: Panel Work
(Learning & Principles) Jan.–Aug. 2024: Preparation
External
Communicatio
ns
Deliberative Process
Feb.–May 2025: Panel Work
(Analysis & Scenario Development)
Development &
Refinement of
Scenarios Agreement
Seeking
Guiding Principles
Report
Alternative
Scenarios Report
Preferred
Scenario Report
Panelist
Selection &
Care
Indep.
Evaluati
on
Research Team
Formed
Indep.
Research
Reports
DTT: Design & Technical Team
Observation & Panelist Surveys
Panelist
Selection Onboarding, Accessibility & One-on-One Panelist Care Invitation
Mailing Selection Event
Process Onboarding
Post-Panel
Work
Responses Due
Existing
Conditions
Learning Phase
Updates &
Analysis
Design
Concepts
Deep
Dive 3
Deep Dive
2 Deep
Dive 1
Info.
Presenters
Policy
Context
Panel Promotion
Continued
Engagement
Feedback from
Stakeholders & Public
Selection Event &
Project Launch
Panel Gallery, Live Stream & Session Recaps
Report Learning Sessions
Additional Feedback
Loops
Panel Tour Days
Celebration!
Process Design
Panel Work
Other Inputs
Wknd 1 Wknd 2 Wknd 3 Wknd 4 Wknd 5 Wknd 6
Interactions with DTT
Information Cmte
Sept. 2024–Jan. 2025: Panel Work
(Learning & Principles) Jan.–Aug. 2024: Preparation Feb.–May 2025: Panel Work(Analysis & Scenario Development) Panelist
Selection Onboarding, Accessibility & One-on-One Panelist Care Invitation
Mailing Selection Event
Post-Panel
Work
Responses Due
18,000 invitations to
randomly selected
addresses
Panelist Selection & Care
Responses collected
and compiled by HD
Public lottery selection
event & project kickoff!
Afterward: selected
Panelists are notified
Reflective of Santa Monica in terms of:
❖ Age
❖ Educational Attainment
❖ Experience of a Disability
❖ Housing Status
❖ Location of Residence
❖ Primary Transportation
❖ Sexual Orientation
❖ Other factors (TBD)
Panelist Care
Reducing Barriers to Participation
Financial: Panelists compensated to offset
financial burdens of participation
Direct Panelist support: one-on-one
process onboarding and ongoing support
Language access: Translation,
interpretation, and assistive technologies
High-quality moderation: Ensures
balanced participation
Guiding
Principles
Report
Weekend 2 Weekend 3 Weekend 4 Weekend 5 Weekend 6
Deliberative Process
Highly detailed
process design
Preferred
Scenario
Report
Alternative
Scenarios
Report
Welcome: Orientation,
intros, and policy context
Weekend 1
Learning: Informational presenters
(selected by IC & Panel), site visits,
lived experience, and written material
Intensive deliberation: Ideas collected, then
iteratively developed and refined – this
happens first on principles, then on scenarios
Agreement Seeking:
Negotiation towards
1 preferred scenario
Information
Committee (IC):
Select
introductory
presenters for
Panel
Community
survey:
principles ideas
Panel-hosted
community
workshop
Reports presented to City Council:
Points of broader community involvement:
Community
survey: site use
ideas
Community feedback on
alternative scenarios
Stakeholder survey:
presenter nominations
Sept. 2024–Jan. 2025: Panel Work
(Learning & Principles)
Jan.–Aug. 2024:
Preparation
Feb.–May 2025: Panel Work
(Analysis & Scenario Development)
Deliberative Process
Unique Elements
Directed by Panelists, as much as
possible, and outputs never edited
Includes substantial hands-on design, in
direct collaboration with Design & Tech. Team
Invites weighing of complex tradeoffs
in service of the broader public good
Designed to lead to rough consensus
agreement, while respecting minority views
Benefits to...
Policymakers:
❖ Surfaces fresh perspectives & untapped ideas
❖ Enhances mutual trust in governance
Stakeholders & Advocates:
❖ Allows for collaboration with new individuals
❖ Levels the playing field
The Public:
❖ Fosters ownership over public decision making
❖ Presents a model for collaborative, evidence-based
discourse
❖ Increases access for historically marginalized groups "You engaged us in the actual work of
democracy, and that has left an imprint.
I feel like this is community."
— José, 2020-21 Eugene Panelist
“It has been a huge commitment and it was a
big leap into another way of working
together. This process seems to move to
collaboration from competition and I think
that’s the only way we move forward.”
— Mayor Teresa Barrett, City of Petaluma
Alex Renirie
Program Co-Director
Linn Davis
Program Co-Director
healthydemocracy.org
[email protected]
(503) 841-6865 (office)
11 LOTTERY SELECTED PANEL RECAP
Why This Process?
It removes many traditional barriers to
participation.
Representative sample of Santa Monica’s
population.
Staff is in a support role to the Panel, not the
other way round.
Many opportunities for the community to
provide feedback to the Panel, both inperson and online, and to City Council. This process is highly customizable to allow
Santa Monica to make it our own
12 ANTICIPATED PROJECT TIMELINE
Next Steps:
1. TONIGHT - October 10, 2023 = Study Session
with Council
2. Winter 2023 = contract award for D+TT and
Healthy Democracy, based on feedback
from the October study session
3. Winter - Summer 2024 = Project kick-off
and community engagement
4. Summer 2024 = Panel is selected publicly
5. Fall 2024 = Panel’s first weekend
6. Early Summer 2025 = Panel’s last weekend
13 ANTICIPATED PROCESS TIMELINE
Early Visioning
completed but conditions
have changed
Scenario Planning
(Airport)
Specific Plan
(Airport + Biz Park)
Implementation
UNDERSTANDING
TRADEOFFS
Scenario Planning
Economic Feasibility
Remediation
Engagement
GUIDED
DEVELOPMENT
Zoning
Master Planning
Governance
Financing
Environmental
We are here
14 QUESTION #1 FOR COUNCIL
Please confirm or revise the following framing question:
With the anticipated closure of the Santa Monica Airport after 2028, there is an exciting and unique opportunity to develop a vision for over 200 acres of public land to serve generations to come. In all of its work, the City strives for a community that is vibrant, safe, sustainable, resilient, mobile, culturally rich, ethnically diverse, and equitable to serve the needs of the entire community and to foster a thriving local economy. Therefore, the project and this land, which was originally purchased for a public park, must be in service of this vision. With this background, how should the diverse needs of our community inform the future of the Airport land and the balance of land-uses and development, that will most effectively contribute to Santa Monica’s long-term vitality?
15 QUESTION #2 FOR COUNCIL
Council to confirm if the Panel
should be comprised of:
a. Santa Monica residents only (unless displaced);
or
b. Include up to two non-resident Santa Monica
business owners as well; and/or
c. Include up to two people from the adjacent
West Los Angeles area.
16 RECAP OF QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL
Recap of what staff is asking:
• Review and comment on the democratic lottery
process as the primary public engagement method
for the Future of the Santa Monica Airport project;
• Provide direction to staff about: the framing
question the Lottery Selected Panel would answer, if
approved, and whether the Lottery Selected Panel
should be comprised of Santa Monica residents only
or also include business owners and/or people from
the adjacent West Los Angeles area; and
• Direct staff to prepare a sole source contract, as an exception to the competitive bidding process
pursuant to Section 2.24.250 (b), for Healthy
Democracy to provide the services related to the
democratic lottery process and bring it back for
Council review in November.
Thank you.
http://www.santamonica.gov/future-of-santa-monica-airport-project