Santa Monica City Council
October 10, 2023

DRAFT
2024–2025 SMO
Community Panel
Draft Scope of Services
for the City of Santa Monica – Sept. 2023
Prepared by:

In consultation with City of Santa Monica staff
Last updated: 25 Sept. 2023 1/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
This page intentionally left blank.
2/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Table of Contents

1. Project Overview 4
i. Project Introduction 4
ii. What Makes a Lottery-Selected Panel Different 6
iii. Overarching Principles of Lottery-Selected Panels 7 iv. Project Timeline 8

2. Project Elements 9
i. Panelist Selection & Care 9
a. Overview 9
b. Panelist Selection 9
c. Panelist Care 10
ii. Deliberative Process 13
a. Overview 13
b. Unique Process Elements 14
b. Timeline 16
c. Panel Deliverables 22
d. Information 23
e. Broader Public Engagement 25
f. Panel Autonomy & Self-Governance 27
g. Transparency & Privacy 28
iv. External Communications 28
a. Overview 28
b. Communicating Democratically 29
c. Communications Elements 29
v. Policy Impact 35
vi. Independent Evaluation 36

3. Roles of Project Partners 37
i. Roles, Responsibilities & Areas of Final Authority 37 ii. Relationships Between Parties 42
iv. Additional Project Partners 43
v. Dispute Resolution Methodology 44
Appendix A: Detailed Policies & Procedures for Panelist Selection 46 Appendix B: Transparency & Privacy Policy 48
Appendix C: Example Group Working Agreements 51
Appendix D: External Communications Toolkit 52
3/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services

1. Project Overview
i. Project Introduction
The Santa Monica Airport is a beloved community resource with rich historic significance – and its future should be decided through robust and inclusive community engagement.

Lottery-Selected Panels are a 50-year-old democratic innovation – inspired by ancient democracies in Greece and India – that put everyday people at the heart of public decision making. Often called Citizens’ Assemblies or Policy Juries, these processes combine two key design elements: 1) A democratic lottery selects a Panel that is demographically representative of the community and fully supported to participate. 2) A deliberative process allows Panelists to collaboratively consider many perspectives and produce well-informed policy recommendations. With over 600 examples globally to date, the model is gaining traction as a way for governments to deeply engage residents in helping find collaborative, inclusive, and durable policy solutions.

As an innovative City with a highly engaged community, Santa Monica is poised to become a leader in this new model for local democracy. This Scope of Services outlines how a Lottery-Selected Panel could reimagine the future of the Santa Monica Airport property.

Forty-two Panelists, reflective of Santa Monica, would meet for six long weekends from September 2024 to May 2025 to gather information and collaboratively craft a vision for the site’s future. Together, they would answer the question:

Santa Monica has an exciting and unique opportunity to develop a vision for over 200 acres of public land to serve generations to come with the anticipated closure of the Santa Monica Airport after 2028. The City’s adopted policy frameworks envision a Santa Monica that is a thriving, safe, sustainable, resilient, mobile, culturally rich, ethnically diverse, equitable, local economy that serves the needs of the entire community.

Therefore, the project and this land, which was originally purchased for a public park, must be in service of this vision. Keeping these things in mind, 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 contribute most effectively to Santa Monica’s long-term vitality and leadership in our region?
1 Aided by an expert urban design team, City of Santa Monica staff, community stakeholders, and others, Panelists would engage in an extensive learning phase in which they become experts on a wide range of community perspectives and design possibilities. Through a series of collaborative design sessions, intensive internal deliberation, and feedback loops with the broader community, the Panel would then create multiple viable scenarios and eventually build agreement for one preferred vision. This recommendation would set the stage for future decision making by the City Council.

Given their extensive time commitment and collaborative orientation, Panelists quickly become leaders who are trusted – both by the public and elected officials – to work in service of the broadest public good.
1 This framing question is pending final approval by City Council. 4/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
The future of the Santa Monica Airport will impact residents for many generations. The process proposed herein sets a new standard for independence, inclusivity, and collaborative planning deserving of such great possibility. 5/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
ii. What Makes a Lottery-Selected Panel Different
Traditional Public Engagement Lottery-Selected Panels
Self-selected volunteers and
stakeholders with a vested interest in the
topic.

Frequent overrepresentation of those
with the most time and resources.

Participants often skew whiter, older, and
more highly educated than the general
public.

Everyday community members, most of
whom don’t engage in other public
processes.

Guarantees demographic
representation. Reduces practical
barriers to participation (e.g., time,
money, childcare, and information).

Participants expected to do their own
research or rely on pre-packaged
information from a government agency.

Debates over “the facts” prevent
collaborative critical thinking and
overshadow substantive conversation
about solutions.

Access to a wide range of viewpoints
and evidence, selected in part by an
independent stakeholder body.

Collecting and analyzing information is a
collaborative undertaking – with the goal
of understanding diverse viewpoints and
identifying creative solutions.

Fundamentally designed to encourage
adversarial debate about specific policy
positions, creating a zero-sum political
environment.

Time-constrained – e.g., a 3-minute
public comment or afternoon workshop
– lending itself to superficial input.

Designed by staff or consultants, without
input from participants, external
advisors, or independent evaluators.

Fundamentally designed to encourage
thoughtful and respectful deliberation
about what solutions serve a variety of
community interests.

Plenty of time and freedom to dig
deeply into a topic and produce
comprehensive policy recommendations
from scratch.

Panelists oversee process staff and have
power to direct their own process; thirdparty evaluation and advice is standard.

Emphasizes one-directional community
input. Staff and electeds receive
comments from many opinion groups
and mediate a policy solution
themselves.

Effect of public feedback is often
unknown.

Emphasizes community-driven problem
solving, in which everyday residents and
stakeholders work among themselves to
identify creative solutions.

Decision makers commit to, at minimum,
thoroughly considering and
substantively responding to Panel
reports.
6/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
iii. Overarching Principles of Lottery-Selected Panels
● A paradigm of Panelists-on-the-dais, not in the audience. ○ Think of Lottery-Selected Panels as fact-finding commissions, task forces, or a jury for policy – just not focus groups.
● Presentations directly to decision makers.
○ Elected officials thoroughly consider the Panel’s recommendations and provide rationale for their decision.
● An emphasis on collaborative decision-making.
○ Working toward shared solutions, without forcing consensus. ● Accountable and transparent governance over the process. ○ An independent Information Committee makes decisions about initial presenters to the Panel and advises the Panel on additional presenters to consider.
○ A group of Program Advisors, made up of practitioner experts, former moderators, and former Panelists, works with HD staff on process details. ○ A Process Committee, made up of current Panelists, makes high-level process decisions and improvements beyond the information-gathering phase.
● Independence from outside political interference.
○ Everyone involved agrees to certain guidelines to prevent undue political manipulation of the Panel’s work – this includes guidelines for Panelists, project convener, elected officials, process staff (i.e., Healthy Democracy), presenting experts, public observers, media, and others. Standard guidelines are available from HD upon request.
● Selection of Panelists through a democratic lottery.
○ Randomly selected from the general public, and
○ Representative on a number of
demographic factors.
● A commitment to universal accessibility.
○ Panelists are supported in ways that offset
the financial burdens of participation (e.g.
child care, elder care, transportation).
○ Appropriate technology, training, and
one-on-one logistical support is provided
to all Panelists.
● A substantial learning phase, including:
○ Substantial background information
provided by the City and expert
consultants.
○ Information presented by presenters
selected by the Information Committee.
○ Information presented by presenters selected by the Panel itself. ○ Other public input that engages the broader community. ● A structured, in-depth deliberation phase.
○ Designed by professional process designers and based on research. ○ Moderated by professional, trained moderators.
○ Designed to encourage collaboration across differences without forcing consensus.
7/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
○ Substantial collaborative work directly with technical experts, deep deliberation on the most contentious tradeoffs, and a methodical pathway toward agreement.
● Actionable recommendations, prioritized in order of agreement. ○ Written by the Panelists themselves, with no writing or editing by staff. ○ Delivered by the full Panel but with room for dissenting opinions and individual voices.
● Third-party evaluation of process design and execution. ○ Academic evaluators not paid by the process, the convening agency, or Healthy Democracy – typically academics or other deliberative experts – observe and review the process, and report to the public and the convener on its fairness and quality.
○ An Evaluation Committee, made up of Panelists, works with these external evaluators to provide its own evaluation of the process, often surveying the broader public about the process.
iv. Project Timeline
8/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services

2. Project Elements
i. Panelist Selection & Care
a. Overview
Selecting Panelists through a democratic lottery
guarantees demographic representation and helps
ensure new voices in local policy making. For many
Panelists selected by lot, this will be their first and most meaningful experience in public decisionmaking. Outlined in great detail below, there are many unique elements in a Lottery-Selected Panel. To begin,
selected Panelists are offered support to offset
financial burdens, offered language interpretation, and reimbursed for childcare, eldercare, and transportation expenses. This sets a new standard for access and inclusion of all communities and mitigates unequal barriers to participation often faced by marginalized residents. The personal care and support we provide helps ensure that Panelists know that their contributions are valued, and helps ensure Panelist retention throughout the deliberative process.
b. Panelist Selection
Panelists are selected from the general public using a democratic lottery, also known as a representative random sample or sortition. While most public engagement processes rely on the same self-selected individuals, democratic lotteries engage new residents through a randomized process that ensures representation across an unusually broad set of diversities.

The lottery begins with a proactive invitation to randomly selected residential addresses that makes it as easy as possible to say “yes.” by offering support for Panelist time and language services. From the resulting pool of respondents, a Panel is randomly selected (at a public event) to reflect a microcosm of the city. Lottery-Selected Panels don’t just “work toward” representation; they guarantee a cross-section of the public’s diversities every time.

The lottery selection for a Panel process generally commences approximately 10-12 weeks in advance of the Panel’s first day. Here’s how the process works:
● Mailings are sent to 15,000–20,000 randomly selected residential addresses. 2 2 Recipients may be exclusively Santa Monica residents or encompass particular geographies beyond Santa Monica, pending decision by City Council.
9/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
● Any qualified
3 residents at those addresses may reply. This reply includes self-reported demographic information. Typically, the response rate for Panels in the United States is 2.5 to 3.5%.
● HD staff also distribute “golden tickets” to social service agencies, for distribution to folks without residential addresses.
● Meanwhile, HD collects data on the demographic makeup of Santa Monica. ● A public Lottery Selection Event is held to select the Panel, as well as a number of alternates. (See Appendix – External Communication Elements) ● Panelists are informed of their selection by HD’s Panelist Liaison and provided with comprehensive support services.

For more information, see Appendix A: Detailed Policies and Procedures for Panelist Selection.

Population Pool
The population from which a Panel is selected may be limited to Santa Monica residents or may extend beyond Santa Monica city limits, depending on direction from City Council.

Regardless of this decision, non-resident stakeholder organizations and presenters will be involved in providing information to the Panel.
c. Panelist Care
Our processes radically prioritize access for everyone – absolutely everyone. While traditional processes put the onus of participation on participants, Lottery Selected Panels uphold that everyone has the right to participate meaningfully in the decision making that affects their lives. To ensure access and inclusion, and to support Panelist retention, we provide thoughtful support to Panelists throughout every step of the process and actively work to reduce potential barriers. This support and care begins as soon as Panelists are selected, with one-on-one personal contact to identify accessibility needs, orient Panelists to the process, and start building a relationship with them.

Staff are made available to provide intensive support for each Panelist. This sets a new standard for access and inclusion of all communities and mitigates unequal barriers to participation often faced by marginalized residents. By bringing this human-centric approach to policy making, we create a space where all people feel like they belong at the decision making table and reduce as many barriers to participation as possible. 3 “Qualified” varies by project, but, typically, members of the public are qualified if they:
● Are at least 18 years of age, regardless of official citizenship or resident status, ● Primarily live at the address to which the mailing is sent (or have received a “golden ticket from a social service agency”),
● Are not a current or former elected official, and
● Are not a current City staff member.

Note that, as part of their response forms, all respondents are asked to certify that they qualify by initialing statements about each of these factors.
10/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Panelist Services
Offsetting financial
burdens
Each Panelist is supported in ways that reduce common financial barriers to participation.

Traditional public engagement relies on residents’ ability to give freely of their time, which allows those with greater access to resources to have an outsized impact. By offering support of those with fewer resources in terms of time and money.

Reimbursement
Panelists are reimbursed for the following expenses:
● Childcare
● Eldercare
● Transportation
We offer reimbursement for childcare and eldercare to make it possible for those with caregiving responsibilities to participate, as well as reimbursement for the cost of public transportation to and from Panel sessions.

We also provide reimbursement for small expenses incurred during the post-Panel subcommittee phase, such as printing costs.

Comprehensive
Language Services
HD will contract full translation of written materials and simultaneous interpretation of oral communications in Spanish.

The invitation mailer will also include a slip inviting responses and phone-based support in several additional languages (including Farsi and Amharic). Further language services may be offered pending the needs of selected Panelists.

Language services are provided so that residents whose primary language is not English can participate fully. We oscillate between simultaneous and sequential interpretation so that non-English speakers can be heard and understood in both small and large group conversations effectively and efficiently.

Technology
Support
Wherever the use of technology is incorporated into process designs, HD staff provides the equipment and personal coaching to ensure that all Panelists are able to participate meaningfully.

This can include but isn’t limited to:
● Access to laptops
● Access to hotspots
● Technical support, personal assistance
11/57
Potential for Panelists may be reimbursed for the following types of expenses:

HD may offer reimbursement to make it possible for those with family circumstances that make it hard financially to participate typically, are able to do so. As well, reimbursement for the cost of public transportation to and from Panel sessions further ensures participation. We may also provide reimbursement for small expenses incurred during the post-Panel subcommittee phase, such as printing costs.

Transportation
Printing
Other
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
While our preference is always for in-person deliberation, we do sometimes use technology to facilitate Panel decision making. This was needed as a response to Covid outbreaks in recent years. If technology is necessary – either within the process or to respond to unforeseen circumstances that prevent in-person gathering – we will provide the necessary equipment and tech support.

Process Orientation
After being selected, every Panelist is contacted by an HD staff member to go through the following:
● Personalized interview and information session (including for alternates);
● Survey of accessibility needs and dietary requirements; ● Administration of intake paperwork (W-9, photo/video
release, reimbursement procedures, etc.).

Personalized intake allows us to anticipate Panelists' needs for accommodations so they can participate fully. It allows for confidential sharing of needs or concerns.

Studies show that it is typical for Panelists to experience some anxiety at the beginning of the process. We make direct personal contact a priority to alleviate concerns, set expectations, and begin to build a relationship.

Accessibility
Accommodations
Accessibility accommodations are proactively identified and provided, and universal accessibility is a baseline design principle.

We take accessibility into account in selecting venues and designing printed and electronic communications.

Prioritizing access and inclusion means making every effort possible for Panelists to contribute meaningfully to the deliberative process. Accommodating a range of accessibility options ensures that we have new voices at the decision making table.

Other Logistical
Support
HD provides the administrative support for financial supports, including tracking Panelist attendance, verifying expenses, and reporting taxable income. This includes as-needed
troubleshooting to address Panelists’ needs, especially as they relate to accessibility. This can include but is not limited to:
● setting up carpools,
● delivering materials in case of illness,
● providing one-on-one phone support as needed.
● providing access to technology as needed.

Reducing barriers comes in many forms. In order to most effectively serve all Panelists, our all-inclusive Panelist concierge services include all administrative costs. We aren’t always able to account for every barrier that someone might face.

We leave extra time and space for incidentals to ensure that we reduce as many barriers as possible. We center the importance and value of each person’s 12/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
contribution to the Panel. Thorough support also increases Panelist retention, which is essential – particularly in long processes.

Meals &
Refreshments
HD staff coordinate and manage:
● Coffee service, snacks, beverages, and lunch are provided at each Panel session.
● We accommodate food allergies and sensitivities and work to serve Panelist preferences in food selection as much as is possible.

Including meals and refreshments not only reduces the cost and stress of participating in a Panel process; it also has the effect of enhancing group cohesion and allowing for informal yet vital Panelist interactions. ii. Deliberative Process
a. Overview
The deliberative process puts everyday
people at the center of in-depth,
well-informed, and collaborative
policymaking. Given that most
lottery-selected Panelists do not have prior
experience with the policy topic, they have
a unique capacity for identifying common
ground solutions in the public’s best
interest. Much like a jury in a criminal court,
they receive a vast amount of information
before independently deliberating on
recommendations. Panelists hear from
dozens of background presenters,
stakeholders, and technical experts to
understand the landscape of opinions and
information on the policy topic.

Then, through meticulously designed
small-group work aided by professional moderators, Panelists carefully consider options, weigh tradeoffs, and collaboratively identify solutions. Panelists hear from the broader public throughout their process to ensure a wide range of community voices and interests are considered. The Panel’s recommendations, written entirely in Panelists’ own words, are delivered directly to decision makers. The time-intensive and collaborative nature of the deliberative process results in recommendations with broad community buy-in – and unusual public legitimacy – that are frequently adopted by government officials.

Healthy Democracy has designed and coordinated lottery-selected deliberative processes like this one for 15 years and draws on decades of international research in all our projects. 13/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
We work with a team of project-specific program advisors – made up of former Panelists, former project partners, and practitioner colleagues – to ensure our process designs are delivering the best practices our field has to offer.
b. Unique Process Elements
Time & Space for
Deep & Thoughtful
Deliberation
● Unusually lengthy process – in this case over 150 hours. ● Unusually diverse iterations within process design – groups larger and smaller, creative mixing, and many different types of activities
Allow for Panel cohesion, to create conditions to consider hard questions from a collaborative orientation.

Allow for time to dig fully into contentious tradeoffs and technical details.

Allow for innovation and creativity to flourish, to bubble up new ideas to highly complex issues.

Conditions for
High-Quality
Deliberation
● Intensive process onboarding to yield productive
collaboration, including activities related to communication styles, cognitive biases, and power and privilege.
● One professional small group moderator for every 6
Panelists.

Deliberation has the power to unlock people’s natural knack for collaborative problem solving – but only with careful planning and intentional exercises that move beyond “win/lose” thinking that dominates most political discourse.

Skilled moderation creates meaningful participation by empowering quiet voices and encouraging difficult conversations.

Extensive Learning
Phase
● Prior knowledge or expertise is not a prerequisite for participation.
● Unusually lengthy information-gathering process –
typically including dozens of presentations, extensive
written materials, personal storytelling, and
hands-on/site-specific learning.
● Transparent and participatory process for selecting
informational presenters.
● Substantial portion of informational inputs controlled by the Panel.

Demystifying policy makes our democracy stronger. Everyone has a role to play in the policy decisions that affect their lives – and everyone is capable of becoming an expert on even the most complex topics.
14/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Exercising considered judgment requires access to high-quality information and lived experience.

Reducing hand-selection of presenters by project conveners increases public legitimacy and buy-in.

Stakeholders &
Experts “On Tap, Not
On Top”
● Stakeholders and experts are important sources of
information, but not directing the process.

Existing stakeholders are integral to the policy landscape, but not always best-positioned to recommend common ground solutions.

Randomly selected community members need the expertise and wisdom of existing actors in order to do their job well.

Panelist-Led
Community
Engagement
● Polis, a virtual deliberative survey tool, allows the Panel to “listen at scale” to many more voices in the broader
community that would typically be able to meaningfully
participate.
● Panelist-hosted community workshop.

With Polis, Panelists can gather ideas from hundreds of community members – easily identifying points of agreement and disagreement across the opinion groups and ensuring key ideas aren’t missed.

As recipients of all community input, all information flows through the Panel itself – avoiding interpretation by consultants, process staff, or conveners.

Collaborative,
Interactive Site
Design
● Collaborative “Deep Dives” with the Design & Technical Team.
● Hands-on, tactile design work that brings the place alive.

The people who will use a space should be the ones to design it. Collaborative design workshops bring out the inherent wisdom of the community with the aid and guidance of professionals.

Lengthy charrette-style workshops put Panelists on eye-level with designers, evening out typical power imbalances. Multiple iterative feedback loops between Panelists and designers ensure that there is time to develop innovative alternatives and work out sticking points. The resulting designs gain the benefits of both energetic, real-time group collaboration and quiet, individual creativity.

Complete Panel
Authority Over
Recommendations
● Panelists are entirely responsible for content, while staff are solely responsible for the process.
● Panelists author every word of their final reports, down to the last typo.
15/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
● Recommendations are delivered directly to decision
makers by Panelists themselves.

Strict process/content delineation reduces both actual and perceived bias, and improves overall public credibility.

Typical processes rely on consultants or City staff to collect, interpret, and summarize comments – creating possible misunderstanding or mischaracterization of public will.

Starting from a blank page and co-authoring reports builds an unparalleled sense of ownership and agency among Panelists. Often they become leaders on the topic for years following delivery of their recommendations.

Maximum Panel
Self-Governance
● Panel subcommittees handle and oversee key staffing
functions.

Panelists themselves are the most trustworthy experts on their own process.

Process staff should act merely as support staff to the Panel, transferring power and ownership over to Panelists at every opportunity.

Fully Independent
Academic
Evaluation
● Qualified third-party researchers, not paid for by the project or associated with HD, observe every stage of the process in person.
● In addition to evaluating each process on a standard set of criteria, evaluators typically pursue a variety of individual research interests.

Deliberative processes benefit from decades of research and constant innovation.

HD is committed to receiving constructive feedback and making continuous improvements in every new project.

Past research on HD’s processes have produced some of the most important work in the field of deliberative democracy internationally – including dozens of articles and at least one book.
b. Timeline
The outline below includes planned Panel activities within each phase of the deliberative process. Each weekend represents 3 full days (Friday-Sunday), with an additional half-day on Weekend 1 and Weekend 6. Full days are scheduled from 9:00AM - 4:30PM, with an hour break for lunch. Sessions 5.5 and 6.5 represent shorter (2-3 hour) meetings involving only a subset of the Panel.
16/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Note that this outline is not comprehensive and is subject to changes in response to process direction from the Panel’s Process Subcommittee or the needs of other project partners.

Activities are organized by theme within each weekend, rather than in strict chronological order.

As part of the customized process design for this project, Healthy Democracy will develop a highly detailed Process Manual. A detailed agenda will be published to the public project web page for each meeting of the Panel.

Weekend 1 (Sept. 2024)
Process
Welcome
○ Dignitary welcome
○ Comprehensive introductions
Process
Orientation
○ Timing, logistics, roles, conduct, and other details
○ Cognitive biases activity
○ Power and privilege activity
○ Collaborative decision-making activity
○ (Continuous process reorientation and signposting will follow throughout the Panel’s subsequent sessions – not noted in this outline) Informational
Inputs
○ Introductions and handoff from the Information Committee ○ Policy context
○ Panelist discussions of their lived experience
○ Presented and written material from the City
○ Presenters selected by the Information Committee
○ Introduction to Polis online deliberation process
Interactions
with the DTT
○ Meet & greet with Design & Technical Team (in person) ○ Two “learning sessions” with Design & Technical Team (in person) ● Site tour
● Existing Conditions report summary
Analyzing
Information
○ Reading and collaborative sense-making of initial informational inputs ○ Information gaps analysis
● Select additional presenters
● Request additional information/analysis from Design & Technical Team
Guiding
Principles
○ Introduction to the use of principles in decision making ○ Practice activity
○ Non-judgemental principles brainstorming work
○ Parking lot for visions and site use options
17/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Broad Public
Engagement
○ Initiate Polis for broader community feedback on brainstormed Guiding Principles concepts
Weekend 2 (Oct. 2024)
Process
Orientation
○ Reminders and additional orientation activities
Informational
Inputs
○ More IC-selected presenters
○ First Panel-selected presenters
○ More review of written materials
○ Independent Panelist research
○ Additional presenters and/or materials
Interactions
with the DTT
○ Third “learning session” and review of any new information from the Design & Technical Team, with them in real time (virtual) Analyzing
Information
○ Gaps Analysis:
● Request additional information/analysis from Design & Technical Team
● Request additional information from the City team
Panel Subcommittees○ Introduction to the concept of Panel subcommittees and self-governance
Broad Public
Engagement
○ Training on how to read and interpret Polis reports
○ Review Polis feedback on brainstormed Guiding Principles concepts Guiding
Principles
○ Iterative workshopping of concepts and Polis feedback in small groups
○ Creation of rough-draft Guiding Principles
Begin SiteSpecific
Visioning
○ Non-judgemental brainstorming of visions for the site, using tactile and creative modalities
Weekend 3 (Jan. 2025)
Informational
Inputs
○ Panelist-driven research on land use topics
○ Policy context review
18/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
○ Any Panel-requested presenters/materials
Broad Public
Engagement
○ Panel-hosted community event
○ Initiate new Polis instance to gather feedback on land use ideas Guiding
Principles
○ Iterative workshopping in small groups
○ Revision and refinement
○ Prioritization process
○ Finalize Guiding Principles report
Panel Subcommittees○ Internal subcommittees convened for the first time ● These subcommittees will continue to work on their independent process oversight, planning, and outreach tasks throughout the rest of the Panel’s process (not noted further in this outline) Land Use
Topic Groups
○ Creation of Panel subgroups to work on Panel-identified subtopics ○ Fact finding
○ Design concepts
○ Tradeoffs analysis
○ Presentations back to large group
Overarching
Site-Specific
Visioning
○ Community/regional needs analysis
○ Identifying overarching land use goals that satisfy Guiding Principles Analyzing
Information
○ Prepare for Deep Dive 1:
● Prepare questions, information requests, and any additional presenters in topic groups and between groups
● Begin tradeoff analysis across topic groups & identification of polarizing points
● Engage in additional information gaps analysis
DELIVERABLE: Guiding Principles Report
(presented to City Council by Panelists)
Weekend 4 (Feb. 2025)
Informational
Inputs
○ Review response from City to Guiding Principles report, including Q&A session with City staff and/or City Councilors (if needed) ○ Additional independent reading and research time
○ Any additional Panel-requested presenters/materials/collaboration 19/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Stakeholder
Engagement
○ Panel-directed feedback on initial land use concepts from pre-identified stakeholder organizations
Broad Public
Engagement
○ Review Polis feedback on land use ideas
Initial Design
Concepts
○ Panel introduces vision/design concepts from its own prior work and collected previously from stakeholders and broader public Interactions
with the DTT
○ Design & Technical Team begins to present design precedents / case studies and conceptual frameworks – in plenary and also within land us topic groups
○ DEEP DIVE 1: Intensive charrette-style design work (in person) ● First hands-on work between Panel and Design & Technical Team.

Tradeoffs
Analysis
○ Continue tradeoffs analysis, now with help from DTT analysis and data on polarizing points from Polis report
Land Use
Topic Groups
○ Further Panel deliberation in and between topic groups Analyzing
Information
○ Gaps Analysis
● Identify additional expert and/or stakeholder presenters Prep for
Deep Dive 2
○ Organize design elements into draft visions
○ Identify additional information, analysis, and design aspects to be requested from Design & Technical Team
Weekend 5 (March 2025)
Informational
Inputs
○ Review feedback from Design & Technical Team
○ Review feedback from stakeholders and/or broader community ○ Additional independent reading and research time
○ Any additional Panel-requested presenters/materials/collaboration Analyzing
Information
○ Identify questions and additional analysis needed from Design & Technical Team
Broader
Public/
○ Identify questions for stakeholders and/or broader community 20/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Stakeholder
Engagement
Interactions
with the DTT
○ DEEP DIVE 2: Intensive charrette-style design work (in person) ● Second work session between Panel and Design & Technical Team ● Refine conceptual visualizations of each land use scenario ● Negotiate tradeoffs within each land use scenario
Evaluating
Scenarios
○ Evaluate scenarios based on existing information, including:
● Guiding Principles
● Overarching land use goals
● Policy context
● Needs analysis
● Financial analysis
● Other analysis from Existing Conditions phase or elsewhere Session 5.5 (March 2025)
Interactions
with the DTT
○ Panel reviews and approves final visualizations refined by Design & Technical Team. (Note: only a predesignated subset of the Panel meets in-person and liaises with the DTT.)
DELIVERABLE: Alternative Scenarios Report
(presented to City Council by Panelists prior to Weekend 6) Weekend 6 (May 2025)
Informational
Inputs
○ Review the City’s response to Alternative Scenarios report ○ Q&A with City staff related to the feasibility and/or policy implications of each alternative scenario
○ Review feedback from public workshop/surveys hosted by Sasaki on the Panel’s 3 alternative scenarios
Interactions
with the DTT
○ DEEP DIVE 3: Intensive charrette-style design work with the Design & Technical Team, to build agreement between alternative scenarios (in person)
● Organization of Panel work will be somewhat context dependent – on the nature and scale of existing conflict points or unsolved questions/issues
● Design & Technical Team provides creative design concepts to aid in building trans-scenario agreement
21/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
○ Iterative small- and large-group agreement-seeking towards one preferred alternative
● Tradeoffs negotiated between alternative scenarios (as opposed to within scenarios, as in Deep Dive 2)
Final
Agreement
Seeking
○ Final large-group agreement-seeking on any remaining conflict points and resolution-seeking of any other remaining unsolved
questions/issues
Report
Delivery &
Refinement
○ Plan for report delivery and follow up
○ Final refinement, editing, and approval of narrative scenario material Session 6.5 (May 2025)
Interactions
with the DTT
○ Panel reviews and approves final visualizations refined by Design & Technical Team. (Note: only a predesignated subset of the Panel meets in-person and liaises with the DTT.)
DELIVERABLE: Preferred Scenario Report
(presented to City Council by Panelists)
Following the formal process activities outlined below, Panelists will be supported for an additional 30 hours to continue engaging with the community and decision makers about their recommendations. In addition to events organized by Panelist subcommittees, at least one full-Panel event will be scheduled for approximately a year after conclusion of the process.
c. Panel Deliverables
The Panel will author at least three documents, which we have temporarily titled and placed within the overview of the Panel's process above. These reports will include (but may not be limited to):
4 1. Guiding Principles
A prioritized list of overarching values, decision-making criteria, key interests, and important activities that any final recommendation should take into consideration.

Principles will be ordered using a multidimensional prioritization mechanism.

2. Alternative Scenarios
4 City Council should approve or amend the description of each deliverable. 22/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
An outline of multiple comprehensive and viable visions for the Airport site, including options considered and rationales based on lived experience and outside evidence.

3. Preferred Scenario
The Panel's recommendations, including preferred Airport land use(s) and rationales, dissenting opinions, and supporting details.

All Panel deliverables will be authored exclusively by Panelists, without intervention or suggestion by HD staff, City staff, or any other non-Panelist. In addition, all editing – up to and including typos – will be done exclusively by Panelists, with no editing done by staff or any other non-Panelist.

Panelist reports will be presented as written to the public as soon as they are completed and approved by the Panel for distribution. Neither HD staff nor anyone other than the Panel in aggregate may delay the release of a Panel report for any reason.

Any attempts to direct, edit, delay, or otherwise compromise the Panel's independent work should be reported to the Panel's Process Subcommittee and dealt with through the Panel's Dispute Resolution process, as outlined in this document.

In view of the importance of non-majority views – even those of one person – Panel reports are created through a process of nondestructive addition and editing, with less-favored ideas dropping to the bottom of the report, rather than being eliminated. To accomplish this, we design processes that use prioritization mechanisms wherever possible, rather than simple yes/no voting. Only in cases where proposals are in direct conflict, or where a single recommendation is necessary will a simple vote be used.

The formatting of all public Panel reports will be created by Healthy Democracy and approved by the Panel's Policy Impact Subcommittee. Any explanatory preamble or other text on a report will be written by Healthy Democracy, clearly marked as such, and approved by the Policy Impact Subcommittee.
d. Information
High-quality information from a wide variety of sources is a cornerstone of any deliberative process. Many actors play a role in ensuring that Panelists have access to the information they need to complete their work. Prior to the Panel’s first meeting, a group of stakeholders select introductory presenters that introduce the Panel to the topic. The City and Design & Technical Team act as key sources of information about the policy context, existing site conditions, and initial design opportunities. Local stakeholders and members of the general public engage with the Panel in feedback loops throughout the process, and as sources of specific informational presentations when invited by the Information Committee or the Panel. Ultimately, the Panel itself contains a wealth of lived experience and capacity for independent research that drives its analysis and decision-making process.

Information Committee
The Information Committee (IC) is a group of stakeholders tasked with curating background informational presenters for the Panel. Rather than rely on hand-selected presenters by the City, the following process ensures broad representation among those initial sources of information through the following process:
23/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services

1. HD invites designated stakeholder IC participants to nominate up to two introductory presenters each, with rationales for why it’s important that the Panel hear from them.

2. Once all presenter nominations are received, HD invites the stakeholder organizations to participate in an online Polis engagement; through their evaluation of each other’s nominations, the list of nominees is sorted and prioritized.

3. The 5 presenters who receive the most consensus from poll respondents are automatically invited to speak to the Panel.

4. The Information Committee meets for a series of 5 sessions to select an additional 15 presenters.

5. All 20 selected presenters are contacted and scheduled by HD staff.

For more detailed policies and procedures related to the Information Committee, see Appendix C: Information Committee Policies.

Sources of Information
The following partners act as core information collaborators with the Panel:

City of Santa Monica staff will act as core collaborators with Panelists, delivering key policy context and background information throughout the process. City staff reserve availability throughout the process to answer Panelist questions related to the policy context.

The Design & Technical Team will act as a key information source for the Panel during the learning phase and as co-designers during the “deep dives,” in which Panelists and DTT develop alternative scenarios together for the Airport site.

The following actors engage in feedback loops with the Panel – responding to its thinking and offering suggestions.

Everyday community members who are not serving on the Panel – and in some cases, residents of surrounding areas – have opportunities throughout the process to give the Panel feedback. Opportunities will be varied in format, from online deliberation tools like Polis to an in-person community workshop hosted by the Panel itself. More on broader public engagement can be found in the next section.

City staff and City Council will have opportunities to give the Panel feedback on its reports and draft site plans. Feedback loops with staff and policymakers serve the specific purpose of helping ensure the Panel’s recommendations are actionable according to the City’s existing policy frameworks and commitments.

Stakeholder organizations are vital sources of information and feedback throughout the process – helping the Panel understand the full landscape of land use options available and why different groups are interested in particular land use types.

The following sources of information are built into the process during the Panel’s Learning Phase to portray a wide variety of perspectives and on the topic.

As an inherently diverse group, Panelists bring a wealth of lived experience to the room which creates a rich foundation for deliberation.
24/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Many informational presenters – including background experts in relevant professional fields and stakeholders with unique perspectives on the topic – will speak to the Panel during its learning phase. An initial slate of informational presenters is selected by the Information Committee, while all additional presenters are selected off a ‘Menu of Presenters’ by Panelists themselves.

Panelists conduct independent research and information requests to the extent the group deems necessary. Requests can be made from any external party or source. e. Broader Public Engagement
While the Panel is uniquely representative of the Santa Monica public – and of new voices to local politics – every democratic process must also include open calls for participation.

Opportunities open to any interested participants will always be subject to self-selection biases, but broader engagement also comes with important upsides: to provide a window on the overall political landscape and to create a way for ideas percolating among the public to be assured of making their way into the Panel’s process – regardless of any decisions about informational inputs made by the City, the DTT, the Information Committee, or the Panel itself. If there is a brilliant idea out there, then there should be a way for it to rise to the top and make its way to the Panel. In Santa Monica, a combination of low- and high-tech tools will help realize this goal.

Public Workshops & Surveys
At several stages throughout the project, the Panel will hear from the broader community through open-invitation events, to ensure it has captured and integrated ideas from all residents. Workshops and surveys will occur at several points throughout the project:
● Jan.–Sept. 2024: Broad community engagement led by the DTT (accompanying technical work on Existing Conditions) will identify community needs and opportunities at the Airport site. A summary of this engagement will be produced by the DTT for the Panel.
● Jan. 2025: A Panel-hosted community event will provide an open-invitation, interactive forum for Panelists to hear directly from community members about their needs and interests related to the Airport.
● Apr. 2025: Surveys and engagement “events” led by the DTT will showcase the Panel’s three alternative scenarios for the Airport and collect community feedback to feed into the Panel’s development of a single preferred scenario.

Polis
At two points in the process, the Panel will benefit from an open source tool called Polis, designed and maintained by our partner, the nonprofit Computational Democracy Project.

Polis is an online platform that allows for large numbers of people to participate in a form of “light deliberation,” involving suggesting short ideas, opinions, or proposals and then reacting to those submitted by others. Unlike similar tools, Polis is not a black box that collects content or tallies opinions. Rather, it acts as an aid to participants, helping them – in real time – to understand the ways in which their statements sit within the broader landscape of ideas and helping new ideas with more agreement to emerge. 25/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
In this process, the Panel will utilize Polis to test its own ideas, to understand the full breadth of the opinion landscape, and to source new concepts. This will happen in a similar manner both times that Polis is employed:
● Between Weekends 1 and 2: The Panel will send its early guiding principles concepts to Polis as “seed statements”; Polis participants will evaluate these concepts and suggest new potential principles of their own. ● Between Weekends 3 and 4: The Panel will send its early site use ideas to Polis as “seed statements”; Polis participants will evaluate these concepts and suggest new potential site uses of their own.
(Note that Polis will also be used for a specialized purpose during the Information Committee’s process. See the Information Committee section above for more details.) Distribution
Each time Polis is launched, Polis participants will be invited in two phases:
● Phase 1: First, Polis will be opened to a near-representative sample of several hundred members of the broader public, including
○ All community members who responded to the initial Panelist mailing but who were not selected onto the Panel, supplemented by
○ Targeted outreach to help fill in gaps in representation among that respondent list, to bring the overall group as close as possible to the representativeness on the Panel.
● Phase 2: After the near-representative group above has had a chance to interact with Polis, an invitation will be opened to all Santa Monica residents. This general invitation will be pushed out through:
○ The stakeholder list used during the Information Committee process, ○ The project’s communications partners, and
○ The City’s local communications channels.

The goals of this phased approach are to:
● Give an early boost to the voices of a (near-representative) cross-section of the public, before Polis is opened to a fully self-selected broader public. ● Offer a meaningful participatory opportunity to respondents to the democratic lottery who are likely to be enthusiastic first-time participants – but who were simply unlucky in the lottery.
(Note that none of this applies to the specialized use of Polis during the Information Committee’s process. See its section above for more details.) Technical Description
Polis is an open source platform that leverages machine intelligence to scale up deliberative processes. Polis was designed with respect for the extremely difficult work of facilitation.

The goal of Polis is to enable open and constructive dialogue between people with diverse viewpoints. Using a combination of machine learning and human interaction, Polis helps groups understand each other and identify points of common ground. Polis can be used for a variety of purposes, including group decision-making, public engagement, and public opinion research. Polis has a proven track record of hosting open and constructive dialogue between people with diverse viewpoints (see e.g. Horton, 2018; CPI, 2019). Polis works by 26/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
allowing participants to submit comments in response to an open-ended prompt, and votes in response to other people’s comments. By arranging the votes in a vote matrix and applying dimension reduction and clustering techniques—specifically Principle Components Analysis (PCA) (Pearson, 1901) and K-means clustering (MacQueen, 1967)—Polis is able to learn a 2-dimensional opinion space and opinion groups, which are used as the basis for syntheses of the deliberations. Specifically, it is possible to surface comments which best distinguish opinion groups, as well as points of consensus between groups (group-informed consensus). This manifests in a real-time visualization within the participation interface, as well as in an automated report for deeper analysis.
f. Panel Autonomy & Self-Governance
Panel Independence
To maintain the integrity of the process, we believe it is important that process and content are independent of each other. Panelists are entirely responsible for content – with inputs from other actors – while HD staff are only responsible for convening a high-quality process.

This is for the sake of reducing both actual and perceived bias, and improving overall public credibility. In practical terms, this means:
● Process staff design and deliver a
process that is content-agnostic,
with advice from external process
advisors, Panelists, and others –
and with oversight by the Panel’s
Process Subcommittee.
● City staff consult on process design
but do not hold final process
decision-making power.
● City staff, stakeholders, and elected
officials agree that they will not
attempt to contact Panelists
directly. All Panelist
communications should be directed
through Healthy Democracy staff to
protect Panelist privacy.

Panel Subcommittees
For the purpose of further realizing our goal of Panel autonomy, we propose the following Panel subcommittees, where the Panel will have the opportunity to act as its own staff members, make certain decisions, and speak for itself with the public and decision makers. ● Public Outreach Committee:
○ Work with HD and City Communications staff to tell the story of Panelists and their experience to a general public audience.
○ Liaise with members of the media, as appropriate.
○ Advise on the creation of materials that explain the process to the community. ○ Assist in the design and implementation of public events and public engagement opportunities in connection with the process. 27/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
○ [Refer to Section 2.iv - External Communications for additional Public Outreach Committee opportunities.]
● Policy Impact Committee:
○ Liaise with City staff and elected public officials to ensure the Panel has substantial impact on future decision making.
○ Provide proofreading of the Panel’s written reports, for the purpose of maximizing the readability – and therefore impact – of the Panel’s policy recommendations. (Note that this subcommittee may not change the original meaning of the text, and that all edits must receive final approval from the full Panel – or from the text’s original author, as appropriate). ○ Help coordinate the Panel’s presentations at Council and other public meetings and answer any questions about the Panel’s recommendations outside of public meetings (any Panelist may opt out of speaking publicly). ● Process Committee:
○ Make key high-level process decisions in collaboration with HD staff. ○ Co-create any additional process elements in collaboration with HD staff. ○ Review process mandates, time allotments, and activities for clarity and effectiveness.
○ Act as first point of contact for any concerns or disputes raised related to the Panel process, with the authority to directly determine a resolution (by supermajority) or call together a broader stakeholder group (outlined in Section 3.v Dispute Resolution Methodology).
● Evaluation Committee:
○ Liaise with independent evaluators regarding their research. ○ Review end-of-day Panelist surveys and make recommendations to HD staff. ○ Conduct additional surveys or evaluation strategies to measure the effectiveness of the process, staff, and any other components. ○ Follow and evaluate the public perception and policy impact of the Panel’s work.
○ Optionally, advise the City on general public engagement strategies, based on the experience of this Panel.
g. Transparency & Privacy
HD process staff take both public transparency and Panelist privacy very seriously. Please see Appendix D: Transparency & Privacy Policy for more details. iv. External Communications
a. Overview
The primary goal of project communications is to amplify the work of the Panel and to connect everyday Santa Monicans with its work. Ensuring that the broader public, decision makers, and city staff have a clear, accessible, and deep understanding of the Panel process is essential to generating buy-in and adding to the Panels’ legitimacy.

A secondary goal of project communications – utilizing private funding and partnerships – is to elevate Santa Monica as a model to cities everywhere. As the first ever Lottery-Selected 28/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Panel to be convened in Southern California, this is a unique and powerful opportunity to show Santa Monica’s peers, near and far, the revolutionary way in which the City is deeply involving everyday people in policy making – and on a highly complex land use topic, no less. Lottery-selected democracy is increasingly popular around the world, and we believe this project will be a groundbreaking step forward for democratic innovation. b. Communicating Democratically
With both of these goals in mind, the way we talk about the process becomes as important as the process itself. We envision a world where more of us have more collaborative power over more of our lives. And we believe that realizing that vision will require conscious changes both to how we do decision making and how we describe it.

Therefore, we work consistently to democratize not only our organizational structures and our programmatic designs, but also the language we use – publicly and privately. ● We aim for accessibility, clarity, and honesty by being simple and straightforward. ● We aim to focus on our role as process experts by being impartial to other content. ● We aim to emphasize that democracy is for everyone by being proactively inclusive. ● We aim for humility and empowerment of others by being oriented toward service.

These four tenets guide our approach to all external communications about the Panel and its work. HD staff aims to ensure that the broader public has accurate, timely, and accessible information about the Panel’s proceedings through live broadcasting of plenary sessions, regular webpage updates (including daily public agendas and Panelist materials), social media posts, and press releases. Aside from our standard external communications practices, we want to highlight some of the more creative ways 5 we plan to bring the
broader public along on this democracy ride of a lifetime 6 .
c. Communications Elements
Project Kickoff
Panel Promotion
● Seek partnerships with public broadcasting stations and local print media
● Create and display print ads on public transportation hubs (buses, bus stops, light rail, light rail stops) and public places (library, city buildings), and in local newspapers ● HD may pursue the creation of short spots for broadcast TV and public radio pending outside funding/partnerships.
6 The following elements are jumping-off concepts. Many of the elements listed can and will be directed by the Panel’s Public Outreach Subcommittee.
5 Please note that this chart also has a ‘scale’ field for each element. Most of these elements can be scaled up to include farther-reaching outreach opportunities. The scale field is broken up into a) the level we are committing to in this Scope of Services and b) the potential for growth, pending outside resources like funding, partnerships, and/or volunteers. 29/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Proposed scale:
● Current scope includes purchase of a small number of local print ads.

Potential scale pending outside resources:
● With partnerships from local stations/channels and/or support from the City to display messaging in public places, promotional material could reach much wider audiences.

Panel promotion can provide a brief explanation of what the Panel is and what it is tasked with. This can encourage a better understanding of the City’s broader public engagement plan and of the Panel process. A better understanding of the Panel process can boost response rates to the initial mailing and build excitement about the process, about the City’s dedication to hearing from everyday people, and about local democracy generally.

Public Selection
Event
● Conduct a public Lottery Selection Event where a Panel, both random and demographically representative, is
selected.
● The event typically includes a presentation from the City and process staff on the project and serves as a
press-friendly kickoff of the Panel.

Proposed scale:
● Healthy Democracy designs, coordinates, and publicly broadcasts a virtual selection event via an online meeting platform. This includes translation into one other language and an ASL interpreter.

Potential scale pending outside resources:
● With private funding, the selection event could be an in-person event, if desired. It could be professionally produced and broadcast to encourage understanding and buy-in from a broader section of the public.

A live and public selection event is an essential piece in creating trust and process legitimacy. Appearing professional, transparent, and accessible is essential at this initial stage. A larger event that is celebratory in nature can help bolster public sentiment and belief in the process. It can encourage participation of everyday folks in this process and, more generally, in local decision making.

Democracy Art
Installations
● Partner with a local arts nonprofit on art installations around Santa Monica that center on democratic engagement, the
Panel process, and Panelist stories.
● This can happen before, during, and after the Panel.

Proposed scale:
● Currently, no staff time or resources is included for this task.

Potential scale pending outside resources:
● Dedicating HD staff time to this body of work is entirely reliant on finding outside resources and forming connections to local arts nonprofits.

Assistance and buy-in from the City could make this possibility a reality. 30/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Inviting the arts into spaces that traditionally place higher value on the written word, deductive reasoning, and oratorical mastery invites people into different perspectives and ways of life. It can help foster a sense of empathy that is required in a democracy and breathe new life into otherwise bland and bureaucratic processes. It often encourages more youth involvement and generally generates excitement about the Panel and the City’s innovative approach.

Throughout Panel Sessions
Public Gallery
● A public gallery allows members of the public to watch the Panel’s plenary sessions in person.
● Attendees have access to a communal hard copy version of the Panel’s public documents.
● Attendees are not allowed to interfere in Panel proceedings or otherwise engage Panelists.

Proposed scale::
● This is a core feature of all our in-person processes, and is open while the Panel is in session, except in the case of extenuating circumstances (e.g., Covid or other safety precautions).

Potential scale pending outside resources:
● Pending qualified volunteer support, the public gallery could have a volunteer host. This person could help orient attendees to the Panel process and the Panel’s progress. A public gallery host can help take demands off of event staff who are occupied supporting Panelists.

Much like a congressional public gallery, the Panel’s public gallery ensures the highest level of transparency while protecting Panelists’ privacy. The public gallery allows members of the public to watch a new kind of democracy in action.

Live Broadcasting
● All plenary sessions are broadcast live. However, the camera(s) are oriented toward the front of the room (away from Panelists’ faces), in order to show any presenters or people in the front of the room while still maintaining Panelist comfort and privacy.
● All Panelists, moderators, and presenters are required to use microphones for the benefit of observers, language
interpreters, and those who experience difficulty hearing. ● Sessions are broadcast in all languages for which
interpretation is available.
31/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Proposed scale:
● Healthy Democracy live streams the sessions to our YouTube channels (in English and Spanish). Contracted tech support helps ensure the live stream runs smoothly and that audio is intelligible.

Potential scale pending outside resources:
● With outside resources and/or connection to a local broadcaster, the live streams could be more produced. This could make the recordings more accessible and more readily watched.

Much like the public gallery, maintaining accessible viewing opportunities through live streaming ensures the highest level of transparency and encourages buy-in from the broader public and stakeholders by ensuring that everyone can view the Panel’s proceedings.
“A Glimpse of . . .”
Session Recaps
● At the end of each weekend, self-selected Panelists will record a brief recap of the work completed by the Panel and what they’d like the broader public to know about the Panel’s progress.
● These will be compiled by HD staff and displayed on HD’s social media channels, the Panel webpage, and HD’s
YouTube channel.

Proposed scale:
● Healthy Democracy will record and compile Panelist videos and upload them to the channels mentioned above.

Potential scale pending outside resources:
● With outside resources and/or connection to a local broadcasting organization, these videos could be professionally produced. This could make the video compilations more accessible, attractive, and tied into other media.

Though all plenary sessions are recorded, watching hours and hours of Panel deliberations is not usually the most accessible way to understand what the Panel is up to, nor does it highlight the emotion and connection often built in the room.

These short session recaps will function as a highlight reel of that session’s key moments as seen through the eyes of Panelists. These are meant to encourage understanding of the Panel and connection to the real, everyday people who are a part of this groundbreaking process.

Lottery Selected
Panel Tours
We’ll curate special tour days throughout the Panel that are open to local government staff, elected officials, and members of the press. An HD staff member will serve as tour guide, and tour elements may include:
● An introduction to Lottery-Selected Panels
● An update on Panel progress and a roadmap for where the process will go
● Materials that provide a snapshot of the process
32/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
● An opportunity to observe the Panel in person at a
specifically selected key moment in the process
● A Q&A with process staff
● Interaction with Panelists (pending approval by Panelist Public Outreach Subcommittee)
Proposed scale:
● Dedicated staff time for two 3-hour Panel tours at key moments in the Panel process, with invitations to Santa Monica press, decision makers, and staff.

Potential scale pending outside resources:
● With private funding and financial support, tour days could make the process a model for other cities in the region and beyond. We are in discussions with the Berggruen Institute related to this element in particular.

Involvement and deep understanding by members of the press encourages accurate coverage that hones in on important programmatic elements that make this model distinct – and boosts the Panel’s legitimacy by offering a more in-depth view of the inside of the process. Involvement by decision makers and City staff builds knowledge of the process – so the City can make the most of the Panel’s later work. Finally, the experience of having outside visitors builds a sense of gravity among Panelists.

Panel Report
Learning Sessions
● Geared specifically to Santa Monica City staff and decision makers, HD will provide learning sessions prior to the
publishing of each report. Learning sessions will include HD staff and/or a subsection of Panelists, to explain the Panel’s work that led to the report. Learning sessions will act as a user manual of sorts, so that decision makers and staff understand how best to interpret and use the forthcoming report.
● It is important to note these sessions are not intended to help interpret the content of the Panel’s report, as the report won’t be complete. Rather, these sessions will help guests understand the process and context in which the
report sits.

Proposed scale:
● Dedicated staff time for three 1-hour learning sessions just preceding each Panelist report. The intended audience is Santa Monica city staff and decision makers.

Potential scale pending outside resources:
● With desire from City staff and decision makers, and outside funding, there may be flexibility in the number and structure of learning sessions. If there is a desire to broaden the audience, this can be explored. 33/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Due to the nature and complexity of the Panel’s reports, we have learned that it can sometimes be useful for decision makers and staff to understand the context surrounding each report. A past Panel subcommittee created its own “user’s manual” for decision makers; now, this will be a standard part of the process from the start.

Panel Closing
Panelist Stories
Video
● Throughout the final sessions of the Panel, HD staff will put together a short video that encapsulates Panelists’ personal experiences of the process and final thoughts they wish to express about the process to Council.
● Previously, this video has been shown at the public
presentation of the Panel’s recommendations.

Proposed scale:
● Healthy Democracy will record and compile the Panelist testimonial video, upload it to HD’s social media channels, and work with City staff to have it ready for public presentation.

Potential scale pending outside resources:
● With outside resources and/or connection to a local broadcaster, the video could be more fully produced.

Much like the session recap videos, the Panelist stories video will function as a highlight reel of what it is like to be a Panelist, including key moments and takeaways in Panelists’ own words. This is meant to encourage understanding of the process and connection to the real, everyday people who are a part of it.

Joint Letter from the
Panel
● In the past, some Panels have chosen to write a brief letter related to their experience. This may take the form of a letter to the editor or an open letter to decision makers. ● The direction and content of any letter would be chosen by Panelists.

Proposed scale:
● If the Panel’s Public Outreach Subcommittee chooses to write a letter – or make any other public statement – HD would share it on our channels and on the project web page.
● Any other audiences for dissemination of the letter would be chosen and pursued by Panelists themselves.

Potential scale pending outside resources:
● If members of the press and decision makers make use of the Panel Tour Days, this element may be a great follow up or final stage for Panel advocacy.
34/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
A joint letter could further amplify the work of the Panel, if the Panel chooses this approach. Sharing the work of the Panel in multiple modes, mediums, and tones helps ensure that more people are along for the ride. Panelists often seek opportunities to share their experience in a meaningful democratic process; this is one of several avenues that Panelists could choose to take.

Democracy
Celebration
● At the culmination of the Panel process, we need a joyous celebration! Presenting to Council never feels like quite enough after all the time the Panel has spent together and all the work it has done for the community.

Proposed scale:
● After delivering the recommendations to decision makers, HD will host a simple outdoor gathering where Panelists and their families can get together and celebrate a job well done.

Potential scale pending outside resources:
● Pending outside funding and partnerships, the sky (could be) the limit. We’re inspired by the “democracy festivals” overseas to bring a truly festive atmosphere back to public decision making. Food? Arts? Music? Talks? Democracy? Sure!
Democracy isn’t only the hard stuff. The detailed policy making is a crucial element, but so is having an emotional and human connection with our neighbors. Panelists deserve to celebrate their success – and we all deserve to experience the fun side of democracy along with them. The more folks involved, the better! See Appendix F: External Communications Toolkit for the following resources: FAQ, Common Concerns, and Overview of Lottery-Selected Panels.
v. Policy Impact
Given the time-intensive and collaborative nature of Panel processes, their resulting recommendations tend to be adopted at unusually high rates by decision makers.

According to a 2021 report by the OECD, which reviewed the results of over 500 lottery-selected deliberative processes internationally:
● In 28% of cases, public authorities implemented 100% of the Panel’s recommendations.
● In 39% of cases, public authorities implemented more than 50% (but less than 100%) of the Panel’s recommendations.
● In only 11% of cases, public authorities implemented none of the Panel’s recommendations.

As a minimum condition of our work on any project, Healthy Democracy requires that decision makers commit to formally receiving and replying to the Panel’s work. As part of authorizing this process in Santa Monica, this would mean:
35/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
● The Santa Monica City Council commits to hearing a presentation directly from Panelists after the release of each of the Panel’s reports. ● The Santa Monica City Council commits to thoroughly considering the Panel’s recommendations and providing a substantive response to each report. 7 vi. Independent Evaluation
Like all Healthy Democracy Lottery-Selected Panels, this process will be evaluated by third-party observers. These observers will be either academic deliberation researchers or staff from fellow deliberative practitioner organizations in the United States or abroad.

These evaluators may produce, at their discretion, their own independent reports about the process, not subject to review by Healthy Democracy or the City.

Evaluators will communicate directly with members of the Panel's own Evaluation Subcommittee.

All evaluators will be independently funded – not funded by Healthy Democracy, the City, or any other project partner. Evaluators will have no formal association with HD, the City, or any other project partner.

Healthy Democracy staff will send a notice to potential lead evaluators to observe the project. Lead evaluators will be announced on HD’s project page and will assemble a research team. Any qualified evaluator is welcome to contact them about this opportunity.

All evaluators must receive prior approval and orientation from the project’s lead evaluators in advance of the Panel’s first day. Evaluators will be approved based on qualifications in deliberative evaluation and as long as space permits, but without bias toward prior statements or work.

As is our standard policy, Healthy Democracy guarantees evaluators will be provided with full access to the process, including but not limited to:
● Access to the complete Process Manual and all materials given or shown to the Panel.
● Access to any other internal materials created by Healthy Democracy related to the project, upon request – with the exception of materials containing personal demographic or contact details.
● Access to internal planning and design meetings, as feasible. ● Access to closely observe all Panel sessions, including all small-group work, from within the Panel's domain (i.e., not only from the public gallery). 7 Pending approval by City Council.
36/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services

3. Roles of Project Partners
As an innovative model, project partners’ roles and responsibilities differ from a typical staff-driven planning process. The Panel acts as the primary conduit of information and final author of recommendations to decision makers. Healthy Democracy serves as process managers and primary support staff to the Panel. The Design & Technical Team acts as a key source of information and works alongside Panelists as expert planning and design collaborators. The City of Santa Monica provides key background information, partners on logistics and communications, and facilitates pathways to policy influence for the Panel. The Information Committee selects background presenters for the Panel. Stakeholders and the broader community participate via informational presentations to the Panel, online engagement, and Panel-hosted participatory events.
i. Roles, Responsibilities & Areas of Final Authority
This represents the proposed division of work between the City, Healthy Democracy, the Panel, the Design & Technical Team, and the Informational Committee.

Healthy Democracy
Areas of
Final
Authority
● Details related to Panelist selection methodology, beyond the policies in this Scope of Services.
● Logistics-related decisions related to the process.
● Final process design details and urgent process adjustments during the Panel.
● Moderation-related process decisions, including adding or removing an assistant moderator or adjusting moderation methods.
● Management of communications, public engagement, interpretation, and process facilitation subcontractors.

Pathways to
Impact
● Consult on selection of a policy question that is specific and fitting for deliberation.
● Produce and distribute the Panel’s self-authored reports, accompanied by an explanation of the process by HD.
● Support the City’s follow-up with Panelists after the Panel concludes, including helping to coordinate Panelist attendance at Council meetings.
● Advise on the use of feedback loops throughout the process. ● Provide resources and training for City staff and decision makers about the Lottery-Selected Panel model and the process leading to the Panel’s reports.

Process ● Provide professional, customized process designs tailored to the characteristics of this policy-making context.
● Engage in continuous redesign and improvement in response to feedback from Panelists, advisors, and partners.
● Lead the process team and act as primary representative of the process design before, during, and after the deliberations. ● Recruit and train all moderators and other support staff. ● Act as liaison between the Panel and the City, the DTT, and other 37/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
presenters.
● Lead on project management for the Panel process.
● Work with the City to conduct initial stakeholder analysis. ● Collaborate on the selection process for IC members, and convene and facilitate IC meetings.
● Design and coordinate interactions with the online engagement tool Polis.

Logistics ● Lead on logistics, including scheduling and on-the-ground preparations.
● Deliver all aspects of Panelist selection.
● Deliver all aspects of Panelist care.
● Lead on technical concerns (both hardware and software), with assistance from the City when possible.
● Administer financial supports for Panelists.

Accessibility ● Arrange the distribution of funds and materials to reduce barriers to participation, including transportation, childcare, eldercare, tech support, and equipment.
● Coordinate translation of materials, simultaneous interpretation, and any other language services.

Staffing ● Provide logistics staff, including Panelist care, logistics lead and project management,
● Provide Panelist tech support, and presenter liaison. ● Provide process staff, including customized process design, professional moderators, lead process advisor, and ombud. ● Provide communications staff, including external communications with the broader public and public resource curation.

Communications● Conduct ongoing promotion of the Panel’s work, including maintaining a public project page, creating outreach materials, liaising with media about process questions, providing educational sessions about the Panel process, and distributing the resulting report(s). ● Manage relationships with external communications partners. ● Design and coordinate guided tours of Panel sessions for members of the press and interested local government staff and decision makers.

Oversight &
Evaluation
● Distribute surveys at the end of each day and upon the Panel’s conclusion.
● Take process design feedback and direction and the Panel’s Process Committee.
● Find, orient, and coordinate a team of independent evaluators (academic researchers or peer practitioners) to observe Panel sessions. ● Coordinate team of Program Advisors – composed of former Panelists, moderators, and deliberative experts – to advise on key process decisions.
● Lead debriefs with process staff.
● Receive and publish any reports created by third-party evaluators. 38/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
City of Santa Monica
Areas of
Final
Authority
● Minor and/or urgent content-related updates during the Panel, in consultation with process staff.
● Substantial written response to the Panel’s reports, presented publicly.

Pathways to
Impact
● Identify a concrete topic to be reviewed, through a participatory process.
● Build political support among decision makers to ensure the Panel’s recommendations have a pathway to impact.
● Participate in training to better understand the process and reports. ● Commit to producing a formal, substantive response to the Panel’s recommendations.
● Facilitate opportunities for Panelists to speak with decision makers and to be involved in ongoing public engagement.
● Lead on all political concerns and relationships with others in the City. ● Be a visible cheerleader of the process – not of any particular potential results but of the process itself.

Process ● Suggest easy-to-understand background information and relevant policy summaries on the topic in the Panelists’ welcome packet. ● Consult on key process design decisions.
● Support HD’s stakeholder analysis by suggesting stakeholder categories and contacts.
● Identify stakeholders to nominate informational presenters and advise on the formation of the the Information Committee.
● Provide access to staff support for Panelist questions throughout the deliberative process.
● Identify and connect HD with any additional staff members from the City / DTT who will deliver introductory presentations to the Panel.

Logistics ● Provide data and consultation related to the Panelist selection process, conducted by HD.
● Assist with identifying an accessible venue and other on-the-ground support.
● Provide access to storage space throughout the project.

Accessibility ● Provide explainers and/or training to help Panelists work with technical policy language and concepts.
● Advise on the procurement of language services.
● Assist with any special outreach necessary to the selection process, such as contacting social service agencies to invite community members without residential addresses.

Staffing ● Appoint project support staff to support the coordination of logistics, process advising, and informational inputs from the City. ● Appoint communications support staff to collaborate on promotion and outreach efforts.
39/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
● Manage planning and/or design contractors to workshop technical options and proposals with the Panel.

Communications● Prepare communications staff in advance of the process. ● Conduct ongoing promotion of the selection process and the Panel’s work through regular outreach channels.
● Support relationships with local media outlets.

Oversight &
Evaluation
● Receive and publish reports from third-party evaluators. ● Collaboratively develop and implement additional evaluation protocols, if desired.

The Panel
Areas of
Final
Authority
● All writing and editing of reports.
● High-level process decisions following the learning phase.

Pathways to
Impact
● The Panel’s Policy Impact Committee works with City staff and decision makers to promote their reports and process.

Process ● Engage in good faith in learning and deliberation. ● Uphold group discussion agreements in all small and large group work.

Logistics ● Coordinate all necessary personal travel and arrangements with external parties (including work, school, and family) to ensure full participation in the Panel process.
● Arrive on time and ready to engage in all Panel time.

Accessibility ● Communicate needs for accommodations (interpretation services, child/elder care, transportation, etc.) to program staff.

Staffing ● Serve on one of four task-specific committees throughout the process.

Communications● The Panel’s Public Outreach Committee works with communications staff to promote the Panel’s work and share their experiences with the broader community.

Oversight &
Evaluation
● The Panel’s Process Committee approves of high-level process outline for the deliberation phase – or work with staff to amend the process to reach approval. Monitor and approve any high-level changes to this portion of the process, as it moves forward.
● The Panel’s Evaluation Committee works with independent researchers to help create and interpret evaluations of the process, and make recommendations to the Panel’s Process Committee and HD staff as necessary.
40/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Design & Technical Team
Note: All contracting and scope of work decisions for the Design & Technical Team (DTT) are managed exclusively by the City of Santa Monica, not Healthy Democracy. Details are included here as reference with regard to the DTT’s interactions with the Lottery-Selected Panel.

Areas of
Final
Authority
● Creation of technical materials, including Existing Conditions reports. ● Creation of design concepts and rendering of site visualizations in accordance with Panelist deliberation and collaborative design sessions.

Pathways to
Impact
● Present supporting technical and design details to City Council and City staff, accompanying Panelist reports.

Process ● Participate in collaborative design sessions that support Panelist-led deliberation, learning, and development of land use scenarios. ● Answer Panelist questions and complete additional Panelist-requested technical analysis.

Logistics ● Coordinate with HD on the procurement of tools and materials (e.g., site maps, tactile objects) needed for Deep Dive workshops. ● Schedule in-person and virtual engagements with the Panel as part of process plans, to be developed collaboratively with HD.

Accessibility ● Translate technical reports into plain language and images that are understandable by everyday Santa Monicans with a wide variety of educational backgrounds.

Staffing ● Provide adequate staffing from relevant teams.

Communications● Update HD communications staff about project branding and outreach activities, as it pertains to the Panel process.

Oversight &
Evaluation
● Participate in debriefs with HD process staff after sessions with the Panel; make necessary adjustments and improvements for the future.

Information Committee
Areas of
Final
Authority
● Select most initial presenters to the Panel.
● Create a ‘menu’ of potential presenters for the Panel.

Pathways to
Impact
● Ensure the Panel is provided with diverse and high-quality information, leading to feasible and innovative recommendations that carry as much community and political support as possible.

Process ● Select an initial group of background presenters to speak to the Panel. ● Select additional presenters for the Presenter Menu.
● Engage in feedback loops with the Panel as community stakeholders. 41/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Logistics ● Respond to scheduling requests in a timely manner. ● Attend all meetings of the IC.

Accessibility ● None.

Staffing ● None.

Communications● None.

Oversight &
Evaluation
● Debrief Panel process and meet with Panel Subcommittees, if requested by either party.
ii. Relationships Between Parties
Healthy Democracy & the City of Santa Monica
Healthy Democracy will work in close collaboration with a cross-departmental team of City staff during regular meetings to be scheduled by project partners. Each party will provide regular updates on their areas of responsibility and authority. Subsets of programs- and logistics-focused staff members may choose to schedule additional meetings on an as-needed basis.

HD and City communications staff members will work together to develop a system of approval to efficiently and effectively share social media campaigns and website content.

Both the City and HD will designate a team of 2-3 staff members to approve information for public release by the other party on project websites and press releases. Alternatively, HD and City communications staff will develop a shared folder of pre-approved social media posts and website content. The communications teams will have a minimum of a half-hour meeting every other week to check content and create a shared vision and workplan.

Healthy Democracy & the Design & Technical Team
Healthy Democracy will remain in regular communication and coordination with the Design & Technical Team to design and implement interactions with the Panel and informational inputs from broader public engagement conducted by the DTT. Healthy Democracy process staff will act as the lead process designers for all activities involving the Panel – with input from the Panel, the City, and the DTT. All public engagement conducted by the DTT will be co-designed with HD process staff to ensure integration and logical information flows with the Panel.

The Panel & All Parties
The Panel may initiate contact with any party at any time. The same, however, is not true in reverse – for the sake of Panelist privacy, prevention of undue influence, and Panel autonomy – unless a Panelist or Panelist subcommittee has made first contact. Panelists are encouraged to never speak on behalf of the whole Panel, and all parties are encouraged to not let any personal interactions result in preferential treatment or special influence on the Panel’s process.
42/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
The Panel’s primary points of contact will be HD staff and contract moderators. All questions related to logistics, the process, and Panelist participation should first be directed to HD staff. Relevant correspondence with the Panel’s subcommittees may be forwarded via Healthy Democracy staff.

All project partners (and all members of the public) are welcome to attend any Panel sessions as observers, but direct interactions with Panelists will be reserved for designated sessions according to the process plan and pre-identified points of interaction.

Information Committee & All Parties
The Informational Committee will work primarily with HD staff in regularly scheduled meetings to fulfill its commitments to the Panel process. Members of the IC may maintain individual relationships with HD staff and/or City staff to support their Committee participation, as long as these interactions do not result in preferential treatment of any particular stakeholder interest.
iv. Additional Project Partners
A team of accomplished project partners will be integral to the success of the Panel process. Healthy Democracy has assembled a team of process and communications professionals to ensure not only that this project is a success, but that it becomes a world-class example of innovative deliberative democracy.

A list of project partners and subcontractors follows. In addition to these partners, Healthy Democracy will also contract with local professionals skilled in group facilitation, event logistics, and technical support.

Berggruen Institute
Role: Amplification of the Panel’s story and impact to audiences within Santa Monica and beyond.

The LA-based Berggruen Institute was established in 2010 to develop foundational ideas about how to reshape political and social institutions in the face of great transformations.

They work across cultures, disciplines, and political boundaries, engaging great thinkers to develop and promote long-term answers to the biggest challenges of the 21st Century. The Berggruen Institute is optimistic about supporting the following areas of collaboration:
documenting the Panel process in ways that are accessible and shareable to a wide range of audiences; providing logistic and outreach support for Tour Days to ensure a diverse and robust group of attendees; if met with support from other interested parties, supporting a celebratory event that shares the story of the Panel with the broader public and elevates it as a model for deliberative democracy in North America.

Computational Democracy Project
Role: Train HD staff and Panelists in the distribution, management, and interpretation of the Polis tool. Provide advice, custom data science, and design for new applications of the Polis tool to the Santa Monica project.

The Computational Democracy Project researches, develops, supports, and maintains open tools and systems which leverage advanced mathematics and computation to enable novel 43/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
processes of citizen-driven agenda setting, public deliberation, and participatory decision making. The Computational Democracy Project was founded in 2018 as a nonprofit continuation of Polis's open source work toward a world in which governance better reflects public will.

HD’s Program Advisors
Role: Provide advice on process design decisions by HD Program Co-Directors.

HD’s diverse group of Program Advisors are made up of our former Panelists, former project partners, public engagement practitioners, and international deliberative democracy experts. A group of 5 advisors will be selected (by lottery, of course) specifically for this project, to provide regular feedback and advice on process design to HD Program Co-Directors. Advisors’ involvement in the Santa Monica project will help (and already has helped) to ensure that the process is responsive and accountable to people with a range of expertise related to deliberative processes.

Rahmin Sarabi
Role: Co-coordinate stakeholder and broader community engagement activities.

Rahmin Sarabi is the Founder and Director of the American Public Trust. He is a collaborative entrepreneur, human-centered designer, and strategist with a nearly 20 year background across social benefit startups and not-for-profit organizations. His work in deliberative democracy includes contributions to the Michigan Citizens’ Panel on COVID-19, the Petaluma Fairgrounds Advisory Panel with Healthy Democracy, a novel integration of mini-publics with digital deliberative tools for the State of Colorado, and the lead role in the strategic planning for the international Democracy R&D network. He has spoken on democratic innovations to audiences organized by Stanford, MIT, the Berggruen Institute, and the International Association of Public Participation Professionals. He is also a board member of the Co-Intelligence Institute.

STC Interpreting & Translation
Role: Document translation and simultaneous interpretation of all Panel proceedings.

STC Interpreting & Translation specializes in the translation of documents and websites, as well as foreign language research. Based in Los Angeles and locally owned, their network of qualified and experienced interpreters provide consecutive and simultaneous interpretation in most major languages, including but not limited to: Spanish, French, Italian, Portuguese, German, Japanese, Greek, Russian, and Chinese. Professional, culturally knowledgeable, confidential, and flexible, STC provides onsite and in-person interpreting services nationwide.
v. Dispute Resolution Methodology
For Conflicts or Concerns Related to Project Management If a project partner becomes unable to fulfill any aspect of their commitment or is dissatisfied with work done by the other party, they may first request a meeting to discuss the concern and attempt to resolve it themselves. If no resolution can be reached, both 44/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
parties will decide whether to hire a professional mediator for a set duration of time or amend or terminate the contract (according to procedures outlined in that document).

For Conflicts or Concerns Related to the Process
Any community member, including Panelists and project partners, may raise a concern or conflict to be considered by the following parties, escalating as-needed in sequential order until a resolution is reached:
a. HD staff, to present rationales and clarifications for process design choices. b. The Panel’s Process Committee,
8 to offer a resolution (to the parties) or process
change (to HD). The Process Committee may exercise final decision-making power with a super-majority, or if they prefer, may direct the matter to the next level of escalation.
c. An ad-hoc group of project partners and stakeholders, to offer a resolution (to the parties) or process change (to HD). This group includes two representatives from each of the following groups: HD staff, the City, the Panel’s Process Committee, and the IC. If the conflict or concern reaches this group, they must exercise final decision-making power with a super-majority.
8 Panelists may recuse themselves if they identify a conflict of interest with the conflict or concern. 45/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Appendix A: Detailed Policies & Procedures for Panelist Selection
The following selection method is conducted by Healthy Democracy. Except where noted, these are HD’s standard selection methods – and common across most practitioners in the field.

The Mailing
● An invitation letter is written and designed by Healthy Democracy, in close collaboration and agreement with the project convener.
○ The letter explains the unique democratic opportunity, the compensation provided, and the time commitment, among other relevant details. ○ An attached reply form requests demographic information. Replies are also accepted online. A phone number and staff are provided for those who may have questions or need personal assistance to complete their response. ○ Both the letter and telephone-based support will be provided in multiple languages.
○ An additional survey question on the letter will ask respondents their first language preference, in order to deliver appropriate interpretation services. ● The invitation letter is sent as part of a 5-15,000-piece mailing to randomly selected residential addresses within the project’s geographic scope. ○ A reminder may be sent, if necessary – either to all addresses or to a randomly selected subset.
● Meanwhile, Healthy Democracy – with advice from the project convener – contacts social service organizations and works with them to distribute a number of “golden tickets” to their contacts who do not live at a residential address. 9 ● In the very rare case of a gap in respondents that would not allow for a Panel to be selected that represents the City of Santa Monica, Healthy Democracy or its partners conducts additional targeted outreach.
○ If the response rate is at least 2%, we do not expect this to be necessary. ○ If targeted outreach is used, we will still only accept respondents who live at the randomly selected addresses or who have received a “golden ticket.” ● Compile data to determine representation on the Panel, based on Census and other sources.
● Select 1,000 potential Panels from among the letter’s respondents. ○ Each of these potential Panels must represent Santa Monica’s population. ○ This selection is done in advance of the Lottery Selection Event, using open-source software called Panelot, developed by researchers at Carnegie Mellon and Harvard Universities.
○ Respondents are informed of which potential Panels they have been selected onto, so they can follow along during the Lottery Event to see if one of the Panels they’re on is selected as the final (or alternate) Panel. ● Conduct a public Lottery Selection Event, where one of the potential Panels is chosen.
○ A public lottery is held, where one of the 1,000 potential Panels is selected. 9 A further option: extend the “golden ticket” program to also include social service agencies who work with folks who may be much less likely to reply to the mailing, including folks who live in care homes without individual residential addresses, who are blind, who speak languages other than those into which the mailing is translated, and so on.
46/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
○ A second Panel of alternates is also selected.
○ This event typically also includes a presentation from the project convener and process staff on the project, and serves as the press-friendly kickoff of the Panel.
○ All personal Panelist data is kept fully anonymous during this event.

After the Lottery Selection Event
● Respondents are notified within 4 days.
○ Those selected receive further instructions related to their involvement. Those not selected receive other information about how they can stay involved. ● The process’ Panelist Liaison reaches out to each Panelist. ○ The Panelist Liaison is an HD staff member who acts as each Panelist’s personal contact and concierge.
○ Substantial one-on-one time is spent in advance of the Panel’s first day to help each Panelist feel prepared and comfortable on the first day of the Panel. ● Any selected Panelists who decline to participate – up to midday on the first day of the Panel – are replaced from the Panel of alternates, preserving the Panel’s overall demographic profile as best as possible.
○ The attrition rate during this period can be substantial, as things come up in selected Panelists’ lives or they better understand the commitment required.

Substantial and regular personal check-ins from the Panelist Liaison (and sometimes other staff) help to mitigate this as best as possible and build excitement for the Panel.
● Alternates are supported to attend the first half of the first day of the Panel, so they can immediately be selected and called up in place of Panelists who fail to appear. ● After the first day of the Panel, Panelists may only be replaced at the discretion of Healthy Democracy staff, based on the feasibility of bringing a new Panelist up to speed midway through the process.
○ Luckily, rates of attrition after the Panel is first convened are exceptionally low – typically between zero and two Panelists over the course of the entire process. This is due primarily to the Panel’s immediate investment in its work, and the reduction of practical barriers to participation. 47/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Appendix B: Transparency & Privacy Policy
We work to push the bounds of open and transparent governance, while allowing for one important – and equally novel – exception: designated space for candid deliberation among Panelists.

Specific Policies
● We provide as many materials publicly as possible, including posting all Panel-produced work and any new Panel-requested material to a project website. ● All in-person plenary sessions are live streamed.
● All in-person processes feature a public observation gallery that is open at all times the process is running.
● All Panelists, moderators, and presenters are required to use microphones during all plenary sessions of the Panel – for the benefit of observers, language interpreters, and those who experience difficulty hearing.
● No small-group sessions are amplified or broadcast. The general public and media observers are not permitted in close proximity to small-group tables (for in-person processes) or within small-group breakout rooms (for online processes). ● During in-person processes, all observers are kept at a distance from the Panel, and are subject to the same COVID protocols as Panelists and HD staff. ● Only first names of Panelists are ever used publicly (with the exception of a last initial, as needed).
● All personal information – including demographic info – of Panelists and partners is kept solely by HD in perpetuity, except when individual Panelists provide specific written permission otherwise. More specifically: no Panelist information is ever released to conveners, funders, government agencies, researchers, subcontractors, other project partners, other Panelists, the media, the public, or anyone else who is not a current HD staff member – except with the express opt-in written permission of the Panelist whose information is to be shared, and only then for the specific purpose for which permission was granted.
● Individual Panelists are not required to act as spokespeople for the process or to speak to the public or media, except when they specifically volunteer to do so. ● Panels are designed to not be subject to public meetings laws. ● Small groups are never fully private to Panel members. Most small groups are moderated by professional moderators, who are specifically trained to promote mutual respect and understanding of the process, while staying as impartial as possible to the content of deliberations.
● Maintenance of this process/content distinction is monitored by a Process Ombud (paid by the project), by independent third-party evaluators (not paid by the project or HD), and through periodic evaluations completed by Panelists themselves (and reviewed by evaluators and a subcommittee of the Panel itself). ● All content relevant to the policy question that is generated in small groups is filtered back into the full group process, so that Panelists’ final ideas – while not their identities – are fully public.
● Panelists are empowered through the Process Oversight Subcommittee to raise and address any issues with the process that arise in small or large groups. ● HD commits to providing further explanation to absolutely anyone regarding its process design.
● HD commits to abiding by decisions made through the dispute-resolution process. 48/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Our Rationales
● One primary mission of Lottery-Selected Panels is to open our governance systems to the broadest possible public. We work to find new ways to do exactly what is so often avoided: to show everyone “how the sausage is made.” We’re proud of every part of our detailed designs and internal policies, and we hope to inspire others to do the same. We must embrace and respond productively to public scrutiny if we genuinely aim for a different kind of politics.
● This said, we also recognize that openness cannot be considered in isolation. And we have all seen traditional political bodies – where policy discussions are almost always in full public view – often come with unintended consequences. Ironically, well-intentioned public meeting laws can sometimes be counterproductive to a larger goal of openness. They often encourage meetings that are theoretically and superficially open but not practically so. More specifically:
○ First, traditional public meetings have a chilling effect on who is willing to participate: typically only those with prior political experience, with a confident political voice, and with high degrees of social privilege. ○ Traditional public meetings also have a chilling effect on how participants engage. Participants are more likely to “play to the camera,” to be highly calculated in their speech, or to simply not participate fully for fear of reprisal. ○ What’s more, when there is no accepted and organized space for private negotiation, this rarely means that negotiations are public. Rather, the candid policy conversations necessary to move toward agreement are “driven underground.” They still happen; they just happen informally and without any oversight whatsoever.
● To address these outcomes, we must have designated political spaces where members of the community can work through ideas in some level of safety together.

Courtroom juries operate on this premise – and for many of the same rationales mentioned above. In our processes, the privacy of small group sessions allows Panelists to have substantial in-process time to speak candidly with each other and to work through difficult issues before those ideas are subjected to public scrutiny. ● Panels are created to be supportive spaces where members of the public can authentically learn and contribute without becoming public figures subject to political pressures that they may not have the time, experience, or comfort to manage.
● With all of this in mind, we also want in no way to replicate our current political systems, which – in spite of public meeting laws – often only provide glimpses into policy negotiations either when details are strategically leaked to the press or when a decision is all but finalized. Our policies above relating to the periodic public sharing of content coming out of small groups, as well as the monitoring mechanisms over small-group process periods, attempt to directly address this concern. ● The public must know how processes work to have trust in them. Therefore, our default must be transparency. And where we believe theoretical openness conflicts with practical openness, we must justify our rationale in detail.

Photo/Video Release Policy
● Panelists will be asked to sign a consent form releasing their image, likeness and the sound of voice as recorded on photograph, audiotape, or videotape for the following circumstances:
○ conference presentations
49/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
○ educational presentations or courses
○ informational presentations
○ online educational courses
○ educational videos
○ research studying public deliberation
○ promotional materials
● Panelists will also have the option to release the above either while the Panel is in process or only after the Panel has concluded
Polis Open Data Policy
The Computational Democracy Project operates Polis according to an Open Data Policy.

For the purposes of this Scope of Services, "Open Data" refers to anonymous, non-personal and non-sensitive data resulting from the Polis engagements that is made available to the public under the Creative Commons 4.0 Attribution license. This includes, but is not limited to, participant contributed statements, the vote matrix, and metadata related to the services provided under this contract. Exceptions include participant contributed statements that: a.

Contain personal or private information; b. Is confidential or might jeopardize the safety or privacy of individuals; c. Is subject to other legal restrictions; these shall be excluded from the Open Data commitment. Data will be hosted publicly available online, and while the data is open for public use, any public dissemination or publication of datasets, analyses, or visualizations derived from the Open Data should attribute the Computational Democracy Project as the data source under the Creative Commons 4.0 With Attribution license. 50/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Appendix C: Example Group Working Agreements
These example Group Agreements are typically offered by process staff to the Panel at the start of its work together. After any modifications by the Panel (as it desires), they are used throughout the process and apply to all Panelists, staff, and presenters. ● Use respectful verbal and nonverbal language toward everyone. ● Minimize distracting behavior.
● Attend all scheduled meetings.
● Be open to new ideas and information. Avoid making conclusions until you’ve heard and thoroughly considered all of the available information. ● Listen with care and assume good intent. Make a genuine effort to understand the perspectives of others.
● Keep focused on the issue at hand.
● Speak clearly and briefly, and share “airtime.” We have very limited time together. ● Disagree positively. Direct your energy toward the issues, not people. ● Be a problem solver – suggest alternative approaches or solutions. ● Have humility and contribute in good faith. This is a new process for many of us.

These sample Agreements are subject to change by process staff before the start of the Panel – and subject to the Panel’s modifications, as noted above. 51/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Appendix D: External Communications Toolkit
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a Lottery-Selected Panel?
This is a different kind of democratic process. A Lottery-Selected Panel brings together a group of everyday people to examine an important public issue. Lottery selection ensures that all of us have a place in public decision making. Five to twenty-thousand letters are mailed out to randomly selected residential addresses inviting residents to participate in the Panel. Of those who respond, a Panel is selected that represents the unique demographic characteristics of that community.

Additional Panelists who may not live at an address are selected via “golden tickets” provided to social service agencies. Panels are professionally moderated and follow a structured process to ensure inclusion, collaboration, and innovation. They are designed to reduce the influence of political bias and put everyday people at the heart of policy making.

What are the principles that guide these processes?
Inclusivity: Proactive, invitation-based recruitment methods and accessibility-driven design bring new voices to the table.

Representation: Lottery selection guarantees representation – “a city in one room.” Integrity: Independent evaluation and oversight drive research-based process design and continuous improvement.

Collaboration: Skillfully moderated discussions ensure thorough comprehension of the issue, respectful exchange, and thoughtful decision-making.

Empowerment: Panelists have full authority over their process and the opportunity to impact real policy decisions.

What makes a Lottery-Selected Panel different from a typical community advisory committee?
Selection Process: Panelists are selected by democratic lottery – a stratified random sample of community residents aged 18+, a microcosm of the city in one room.

Because Lottery-Selected Panels are composed of residents who typically do not volunteer for other City processes, they are capable of more deliberative arbitration of fraught political topics.

Stakeholder Involvement: Stakeholders and interest groups are not absent from the process – in fact, they are essential to it – but they do not sit on the Panel itself.

Rather, they participate in the process in four ways: 1) Via the Information Committee (IC), stakeholders curates a slate of initial presenters and creates a menu of other presenters for the Panel to consider inviting, 2) A wide array of stakeholders present to and engage with the Panel (some called by the IC and some by the Panel itself), and 3) Stakeholders are invited to offer feedback on the Panel’s work at multiple points later in its deliberative process.
52/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Panel Autonomy: The Panel presents its recommendations directly to Council for thorough consideration. Staff serve the Panel in supportive, rather than directive, roles. This paradigm shift is reflected in process design, moderation style, and budget, with typically around 20-30% of project funds going to mitigating common barriers to participation (financial, logistical, etc.).

Evidence Driven: The Panel gathers a wide range of evidence. In addition to stakeholders, the Panel hears from staff and non-staff expert presenters, has ample time to review documents and question all presenters, and may call its own presenters. It may also receive other public engagement inputs – including survey data, listening sessions, walking tours, or hold open public workshops.

Deliberation: The Panel engages in lengthy conversations around grounding values and principles, before delving into any policy solutions. These discussions seek mutual understanding and shared goals, but they do not force consensus. As with the rest of the Panel, they are professionally moderated and follow a detailed process design established in advance, while remaining flexible to the Panel’s needs.

Built-In Feedback Loops: The Panel has the opportunity to engage in in-depth feedback loops with technical staff, to review proposed policies in detail.

Outcomes: The Panel’s output is therefore substantial, including both: 1) criteria on which it believes any decision should rest, and 2) detailed policy recommendations (or a review of existing proposals).

Efficiency & Efficacy: In order to accomplish these significant tasks, Panels are highly efficient processes, while remaining comfortable, supportive, and collaborative environments for Panelists.

Inclusivity and Accessibility: Since randomly selected Panels include folks from many walks of life, universal accessibility is emphasized. Panelists are supported to participate and reimbursed for transportation, childcare, and eldercare. Both the in-room process and out-of-room logistics seek to accommodate Panelists’ specific needs, providing support services such as translation and assistive technology and adapting to differential learning styles. In online processes, transportation and child/eldercare reimbursements are replaced by technology and hot-spot internet access, as needed.

What are the benefits of Lottery-Selected Panels?
Lottery-selected Panels bring a host of benefits to the community where they take place. ● Boosts diversity in civic participation.
● Increases access for historically marginalized groups. ● Surfaces previously untapped ideas.
● Encourages effective policy co-production.
● Promotes evidence-driven public discourse.
● Showcases a more cooperative politics.
● Fosters ownership over public decision making.
● Enhances mutual trust in governance.
53/57
Since randomly selected Panels include folks from
many walks of life, universal accessibility is emphasized. Panelists are supported to participate and reimbursed for transportation and other costs. Both the in-room process and out-of-room logistics seek to accommodate Panelists' specific needs, providing support services such as translation and assistive technology and adapting to differential learning styles. In online processes, transportation reimbursements are replaced by technology and hot-p-spot Internet access, as needed.

DRAFT
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
How do these processes guarantee equality?
Lottery-Selected Panels strive for equality in three primary ways: 1) community members have an equal opportunity of being invited to serve; 2) Panelists reflect the demographic makeup of their communities; and 3) deliberation creates an inclusive environment in which everyone’s voice has the same weight.

How can these processes work toward equity?
While equality is a minimum guarantee of these processes, it is possible to integrate equity through selection targets, interactions with stakeholder groups, and in-process support for Panelists.

How does Healthy Democracy ensure that the Panel is inclusive of all perspectives?
Although bias is a natural human condition, we strive for a process that minimizes unproductive political bias. The process follows an evidence-driven structure that fosters problem-solving that goes beyond partisanship. Our professional moderator teams are specifically trained to balance participation, manage power imbalances, and put Panelist autonomy first, assisting them to make their own informed decisions.

What is deliberation?
Deliberation involves carefully weighing different options, access to accurate, relevant, and diverse information, and participants finding common ground to reach shared recommendations. Most processes are split into two main phases.

Learning: The Panel interviews dozens of experts and stakeholders and conducts its own research on the topic at hand. With external support, Panelists filter information and conduct gaps analyses to ensure information is strong, reliable, and reflects many perspectives on the issue.

In-depth deliberation: Panelists define decision-making criteria, consider potential policy options, and prioritize alternatives through extensive discussions over multiple days. Panelists spend most of their time in small groups with trained professional moderators. Meticulous process designs enable collaboration between iterative small and large groups.

What role do stakeholders play?
Stakeholders and interest groups are vital to these processes, even though they do not sit on the Panel itself. Here’s how stakeholders are involved at each stage of the process: First, stakeholders serve as information curators for the Panel. A large number of stakeholders suggest ideas for presenters, and then a smaller Information Committee creates an initial slate of presenters to the Panel, as well as a menu of additional presenters the Panel should consider inviting. Many of these presenters will themselves be stakeholders, offering the Panel a wide variety of viewpoints, expertise, and ideas – and engaging directly with Panelists during a lengthy learning phase of the process. After this phase, stakeholders act in an essential ongoing role, offering the Panel feedback on its work at multiple points, both in person and online. 54/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Where else is this being used?
Around the world, governments are employing Lottery-Selected Panels – often called Citizens’ Juries or Citizens’ Assemblies – to put people at the center of governance. See OECD graphics. In over 600 examples globally to date, the model is gaining traction as a way for governments to deeply engage their residents in collaborative, inclusive, and durable policy decisions. Healthy Democracy has designed and convened Panels in five U.S. states and three countries since 2008. We are best known for Oregon’s Citizens’ Initiative Review (CIR), which is one of the most researched deliberative processes in the world and was one of the first modern lottery-selected processes institutionalized in government.

Why can’t anyone decide to participate in the Panel?
Lottery-Selected Panels offer an innovative way of getting new voices to engage in public decision making. While everyone has an equal chance of receiving an invitation to join, self-selection alone tends to privilege voices with the most access.

Panels almost always accompany many other public engagement opportunities in which any community member can make their voice heard – for example, public forums and open surveys. Any member of the community who wants to participate in decision-making related to the policy area is encouraged to be involved. If someone isn’t selected for the Panel but still wants to participate, all Panel sessions are available via livestream, and, like all members of the public, everyone is welcome to visit the Panel in person as an observer.

Common Concerns
Are everyday people really qualified to make quality decisions about technical policy questions?
Yes! When you give a diverse group of people access to quality, balanced information, sufficient time, and skilled facilitators, they can find common ground and make innovative and practical recommendations on even the most complex policy issues. Everyday people have weighed in intelligently on the financial plans of large cities, the location of a new hospital, and how to deal with nuclear waste.

Shouldn’t anyone be allowed to participate?
Lottery-Selected Panels are only one piece of the “democracy pie”. They are a missing tool in our public engagement toolbox – not the only one; other forms are still essential to our democracy. And, Panels can include informational inputs that are open calls for participation (e.g., surveys, workshops). We can’t all be involved on every issue. But we should all be deeply involved on some issues, sometimes – and have faith that others like us are deeply involved at other times. Lotteries allow that.

Let’s focus on outcomes: Are we actually getting broad-based participation in traditional, open-to-all engagement processes or just allowing for the possibility of it? Open-in-theory doesn’t usually mean open-in-practice. Just because any can show up at a council meeting doesn’t mean that everyone has an equal opportunity to do so. We don’t want to only hear from the loudest, most active voices, we want to hear from people from all walks of life.
55/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
Isn’t this sidelining existing stakeholders?
No! In fact, existing stakeholders are essential to the process – they curate initial information, present to the Panel, and provide feedback later in the process.

However, existing advocates are often not the right (or best) deliberators; that’s why trials have juries. While organized advocacy is vital to democracy – and to these processes – lots of folks are stakeholders, not just those who are organized. And all of us deserve a chance to be at the table.

That said, we know what it’s like to feel a stake, to believe in an idea – yet to struggle to even be given the time of day. So we don’t just build processes that work for decision makers and the wider public; we build processes that work better for everyone, advocates included. Traditional processes often make us fight to be heard – limited to two minutes at a microphone or meetings where it feels like everyone is yelling and no one is listening. Lottery-Selected Panels are the exact opposite:
processes that take the time to hear from all sides, that support folks to seriously consider every proposal, that encourage deep collaboration and innovation, and – most of all – that create solutions with inherent power that can’t be ignored. If you are a stakeholder who believes in the value of your ideas, we hope you’ll find the Panel a breath of fresh air.

Isn’t this too expensive?
Panels typically cost no more than traditional methods. Plus, this is not just engagement; it is an investment in new civic leaders and in new civic infrastructure.

The benefits of Lottery-Selected Panels go beyond recommendations: a broader culture of mutual trust and reframing of government as a tool we all use and not some entity that does things to us. We must also consider the quality and credibility of decisions – a strong process now has benefits later: smarter policy, more public legitimacy and support, and long-term financial savings.

Isn’t this equality and not equity?
Equality is a minimum guarantee. Democratic lotteries guarantee representation of a city’s demographics. But equality is only a starting place. There are many ways to incorporate equity:
● In setting targets.
● In informational inputs (e.g., stakeholder outreach). ● In the process itself (e.g., support for Panelist-organized, identity-based enclave deliberation).

Overview of Lottery-Selected Panels
Lottery-Selected Panels are a 50-year-old democratic innovation – inspired by ancient democracies in Greece and India – that put everyday people at the heart of public decision making. Often called Citizens’ Assemblies or Policy Juries, these processes combine two key design elements that fundamentally transform public decision making: 1) a democratic lottery selects a Panel that is demographically representative of the community and fully supported to participate, and 2) a deliberative process allows Panelists to collaboratively consider many perspectives and produce well-informed policy recommendations. With over 600 examples globally to date, the model is gaining traction as a way for governments to 56/57
DRAFT
SMO Community Panel: Draft Scope of Services
deeply engage residents in helping find collaborative, inclusive, and durable policy solutions.

Participants are selected from the general public using a democratic lottery, also known as a representative random sample or sortition. While most public engagement processes rely on the same self-selected individuals, democratic lotteries engage new residents through a randomized process that ensures representation across an unusually broad set of diversities.

The lottery begins with a proactive invitation to randomly selected residential addresses that makes it as easy as possible to say “yes.” From the resulting pool of respondents, a Panel is randomly selected (at a public event) to reflect a microcosm of the city. Lottery-Selected Panels don’t just “work toward” representation; they guarantee a cross-section of the public’s diversities every time. Selected Panelists are offered language interpretation, and reimbursed for childcare, eldercare, and transportation expenses. This sets a new standard for access and inclusion of all communities and mitigates unequal barriers to participation often faced by marginalized residents.

The deliberative process then puts everyday people at the center of in-depth, well-informed, and collaborative policymaking. Given that most lottery-selected Panelists do not have prior experience with the policy topic, they have a unique capacity for identifying common ground solutions in the public’s best interest. Much like a jury in a criminal court, they receive a vast amount of information before independently deliberating on recommendations. Rather than being presented with pre-packaged information from a sponsoring government agency, Panelists hear from dozens of background presenters, stakeholders, and technical experts to understand the landscape of opinions and information on the policy topic. Then, through meticulously designed small-group work aided by professional moderators, Panelists carefully consider options, weigh tradeoffs, and collaboratively identify solutions. Panelists hear from the broader public throughout their process to ensure a wide range of community voices and interests are considered. The Panel’s recommendations, written entirely in Panelists’ own words, are delivered directly to decision makers. The time-intensive and collaborative nature of the deliberative process results in recommendations with broad community buy-in – and unusual public legitimacy – that are frequently adopted by government officials.
57/57