Fresno State anthropology student Marisol Torres (left) takes input from community members.
Since taking office last year, Mayor Ashley Swearingen has charged the newly-created Downtown and Community Revitalization Department with making the Lowell neighborhood a community development test case. As part of that process, the city has been hosting a series of Lowell community meetings. The fourth such meeting was held on Tuesday, April 13…but my involvement with the meeting process goes back to last year.
I attended my first Lowell meeting last November and found the Lowell Elementary School cafeteria packed with nearly 200 residents, city officials and members of community benefit organizations. One goal of the meetings is to hold city departments responsible for responding to community concerns. Hence, the first half of the meeting was occupied by a series of city department PowerPoint presentations about their activities. The second half of the meeting consisted of a mass input session, with the moderator taking comments from the crowd.
Everybody present saw potential for the meeting to be a significant forum for city-citizen communication, but it was also apparent that the format presented some obstacles. Most importantly, the feedback session – one mass feedback session – set a high bar for participation. Attendees had to be willing to voice questions and concerns in front of the entire group. Some were willing, but I suspected that many were being left behind, especially Spanish-speakers in a meeting conducted in English (albeit with simultaneous translation).
In the months that followed, I entered into a series of discussions about the format of the meeting with Craig Scharton, director of downtown revitalization, and his staff, including Elaine Robles-McGraw and Dawn Steele. Phil Skei of the Fresno Institute for Urban Leadership joined in some of the meetings, and I also consulted with the Lowell Neighborhood Association and La Union de Familias (two sides of the community organization coin in Lowell). With their consultation, Kiel Schmidt (of ArcHop and Spacio Design) and I developed a plan for a new format, intended to maximize community participation and provide a model that community leaders might use to “take over” the meeting in the future.
Our efforts involved some significant design challenges, including the organization or time and space and the delegation of roles to the right people.
The main change over previous meetings came during the community feedback portion. Basically, we broke the room down into eight smaller sub-groups, each with its own moderator, to provide a more intimate and relaxed setting for neighborly participation.
Fresno State student Pete Serrato at the kids table.
Here’s how we did it. We moved the clunky cafeteria tables out of the room and the city brought in eight tables and 200 folding chairs. We set up the chairs facing the screen in front and distributed the tables throughout the room. (Thanks to Kiel’s keen eye for spatial organization for this set-up.) Nine of my anthropology students from Fresno State and two Fresno Pacific students were assigned to the tables; each table had both Spanish and English language moderators. We decided not to split tables up by language group in order to oppose the existing tendency for neighbors comfortable in each language to go their own ways. At the end of the department presentations, meeting moderator, Elaine Robles-McGraw, called on everyone to find a table and share their input on three questions: progress made in the last year, remaining challenges, and what they felt they could do to make their own community better. The moderators recorded all comments on 2′ x 3′ post-it notes in both English and Spanish.
During the input sessions, Craig Scharton and Elaine Robles-McGraw of the city and Ivan Paz and Araceli Almadan from the neighborhood circulated among the groups to gauge the trends in the input. At the close of the meeting, Craig and Araceli delivered their impressions of the major themes to the entire meeting – Craig in English and Araceli in Spanish.
We are still in the process of compiling the comments from the post-it notes, but I can definitely say that the volume of input by both English and Spanish speakers was much higher than the previous meetings. I also know that the issues raised in the small groups varied from those voiced in front of the entire meeting. The large meeting provides some space for certain controversial issues to emerge, such as the problem of “slum lords” and poor building maintenance. However, it’s understandable that barriers exist for some issues to be voiced for all to hear. In at least one small group, a Latino woman complained that driving home from work late at night, she has been pulled over and she felt she had been a victim of racial profiling. The fact that she felt she could voice this concern to the moderator of her small group is a victory. Craig told me another story that is even more encouraging. As he circulated among the groups, he came to one in which an elderly Latino woman was doing a lot of talking. One of her neighbors told Craig that the woman has attended every meeting so far, but this was the first time she had spoken. Craig was elated. We feel that these stories, and the objectively higher rate of commentary, vindicate the revised meeting structure as a way to greater and more candid community participation at the meetings.
Mai Lee and Elfego Franco listen to Lowell residents.
We still have some challenges to address. The city department presentations occupied a full hour, leaving only about 20 minutes for community input. The student moderators agreed that their group discussions were just getting rolling when time was called. This needs to be balanced out more.
In my engagement with Craig Scharton and his staff, I have found collaborators with a sincere desire to build community capacity for self-governance. Thanks to Craig, Elaine, Dawn and Elliott Balch, as well as Phil, Ivan, Araceli and other members of the Lowell Neighborhood Association and La Union de Familias, the meeting was largely successful. I’m lucky to have Kiel Schmidt as a collaborator in this and other projects – his eye for space and feel for community-based work is invaluable. Next, we will focus on helping community leaders replace me and my students and ultimately take over the meeting.
I would especially thank the student moderators, Fresno State anthropology students Kim Arnold, Jackie Cortez, Selena Farnesi, Elfego Franco (actually, a recent graduate), Jim Hoak, Mai Lee, Courtney Perry, Pete Serrato, and Marisol Torres. Two Fresno Pacific Students, Miguel and Suzy, also helped moderate the tables.
TheAnthroGeek
anthroguy
Felicia Salcido
39 comments
Comments feed for this article
April 15, 2010 at 1:33 pm
Eileen
So cool! So clearly effective. It’s nice to see the shared goal of facilitators for community input, though as you say, the different amounts of time available for community and city say something about whose voices are ‘louder’. It will be great if that can be evened out more. Clearly you folks (including the city) are doing a good job of modifying space with humans in mind. Makes me smile.
May 9, 2010 at 3:34 pm
Kennedy Vu
I want to express the appreciation for the efforts that have been put forth to enhance the community involvement for neighborhood meetings such as the one conducted at Lowell. As I have read, there was a tremendous change in the way individuals participated, one in particular, whom was an elderly Latina which attended every meeting but this is the first time she has spoken out about her concerns. This is striking to me and forces us to look deeper into making more changes to our system to culturally adapt to the environment in which we are trying to change. The effort to adapt to the culture and understand the challenges of those who were participating is a great observation and strategy to try and incorporate everyone and voice their concerns.
The first attempt to have a feedback session in which individuals stand in front of a crowd obviously didn’t work because there is an obstacle of stage freight and the lack of being personal. The new approach to this meeting was tremendously successful because I can see that individuals are being more personal with whom they talk to, in turn, which makes them feel invited and heard about their concerns. With the growing population of latino/Latinas in the Central Valley we need to understand the challenges of how their culture is affected by our setting. If we want to be inviting we have to be culturally competent in what we do, understand the culture and how they view the invitation and not being pushed away. The consideration of the change is definitely making an improvement.
May 10, 2010 at 5:49 pm
WhitneyM.
First off, I would just like to say having this Downtown and Community Revitalization Department is a great idea and that this is a department that is much needed in Fresno. I also really like the idea that there have been community meetings held at the local elementary school cafeteria. The first meeting that was attended by the author, seemed to be unbeneficial to the community. However, the changes that were made in the second meeting to better assist the community was much more beneficial to the population at hand.
I felt that the goal that was mentioned, “Holding city departments responsible for responding to community concerns,” is a great goal and depending on the goal, can be easily met. In the first meeting that the author attended it seemed as if there was a large chunk of the Lowell community population that attended. This is a great sign that information about the meetings is available to those who wish to make their community a better place.
In the first meeting however, it seemed like not having interpreters was a big mistake. Fresno is a melting pot of different cultures, this should have been an issue noticed when putting the program together. Fixing this issue by having translators seemed to make a huge change in the second meeting attended by the author. Another issue that may have been a challenge for the community meeting was that people may have not felt comfortable speaking in front of a large crowd. The city-citizen forum seemed to work much better in the second meeting when it was split into smaller groups with translators made available to the community members. The ability of the community members to speak in front of their peers and moderators is a key component in fixing issues in the community.
May 11, 2010 at 9:50 am
jayjohanajameson
I think it is great that the community wants to get involved in the city’s plan for revitalization. I wonder though if they have the same goal in mind. The residents, those that I know who live in the area would like a safe, clean, environmentally sound community. The city on the other hand, as I have heard, wants to attract wealth, business, and a center for commerce (i.e. shopping malls, restaurants, et al.). It seems the community has to have a say, since it is their tax dollars funding the building. But are there any community members working with the planning department as in long term goals? Or are they just voicing opinions and letting the city’s government give their power point presentations and giving feedback on them? I believe in every branch of the city’s government a residential community member of the affected areas should be given a volunteer position so that they can report back daily/weekly/monthly on how their voices are being represented.
May 15, 2010 at 10:50 pm
Robert F
I think the revitalization of the Lowell community in Fresno is a great thing for the community. I was raised about half a mile from Dickey Park on Poplar and remember the history of that area. For the longest time there has been a large concentration of slum lord apartments. Problems when I was being raised were drugs, graffiti, prostitution, and things getting stolen. I had my bicycle stolen twice from my backyard as a child. It also seemed like there was always trash behind the house in the alley. Recently I have visited the area and it seems to be cleaning up. Studies like the ones done to maximize community involvement are a great help to this often overlooked community. These people often want to voice there opinion on the potholes in the street, but do not have the resources to be heard. I applaud you for setting up a forum where many community members could be heard; often the best ideas come from the quiet, experienced people like the elderly lady who did not speak at other community meetings. I think you adequately addressed the needs of that Spanish based community by holding the forum in a bilingual format. Some emotions can be expressed through Spanish simply due to there cultural and sociological impact.
May 17, 2010 at 9:53 pm
PedroR
Having worked with many politicians and candidates I know how important communication is to improving our communities. This is in particularly important to the Lowell community which is referred as a neighborhood in extreme poverty. Having more town halls and open forums so that the community can openly discuss the issues they are confronting themselves as well as vent. It also further allows the elected officials to get in touch with their constituents. I am happy to know that the changes recommended by our very own anthology faculty made a great impact on the conduct of the meetings. As a son of immigrants I know how awkward it is to be in a community meeting place, with only one language used (English), and me having to translate as much as I could. By giving people of other culture who don’t know English an opportunity to participate in such community meetings, it builds trust within a group. Trust can lead to improving communication, integrating many groups of people, and our communities.
May 18, 2010 at 11:19 pm
KyleC
This article seemed to be very crucial in changing the way we create meetings with the communities of each city or town. It was great to see how they were able to create a situation, such as this one, and have so much conversing and problem solving, and not to mention the stress that can be released when venting about these certain issues.
They started with separating the groups into smaller groups. These smaller groups made it more of an intimate conversation and less scary or nerve racking like speaking in front of a large crowd. This allowed the individuals to speak more clearly and for more people to start talking that would not have spoken in a larger crowd before. When more people talk and give their points of view then it is easier to solve problems. This way of communicating seems to be very effective, and it also makes me happy to see such a large group of people getting along and really getting matters understood and ultimately solved.
Another good point was how they used interpreters to keep the groups mixed up and diverse. Keeping the mixture really made a big difference in how they were able to understand the other people’s points of views. We always want to know the other side of a story so we can better determine how something should be solved. This way, when a matter does get solved it will be for the better of both people (or parties), and it can also create a lot more happier people. I have always believed that there can be magic in the mixture, and in this case there was conversations going on instead of arguing that could have been going on.
It seemed to be that the only problem was that they did not have enough time to finish their conversations. It is important for people to finish their conversations because they need to have a sense of closure and with out that closure it could create some stress or uneasiness with the way they feel about the conversation.
It is nice to see that cities are starting to care more about what the people of the community have to say about the city instead of having the people vote for someone to speak for them. Because if the community of people have to vote for someone, that one person who is voted in will generally only be speaking for only half of the people who want what he or she wants, and the other people in that community, in a sense, get shafted.
Therefore, in creating this scene of communications creates a very good situation and it can lead to many more solutions rather than more problems. It is very important that the methods of keeping the groups mixed and in smaller numbers will lead to creating better conversations for people in the community. This can then help generate more solutions that are closer to being equal for all rather than farther away from equality.
May 19, 2010 at 8:52 am
TimothyY
I often question the intent of government officials when holding such community meetings. Are they political ploys done so to give the appearance of listening and caring, while only checking off an item on a list? Does change actually occur as a result of such meetings? The stark contrast in the November and most recent meeting highlights the differences that can occur when the city allows input from professionals and chooses not to go through the motions. Taking the time to understand the people of the community, the cultural challenges of the area, and how that would translate into a meeting such as this, paid off. It’s refreshing to see the input the city officials took and the changes in feedback that resulted. Hopefully, my pessimistic attitude toward the government fails to hold true in this situation and bottom up change occurs.
May 20, 2010 at 5:42 pm
BrentJ
What a powerful idea! What a great idea! It is great to see people feel secure enough to want to voice opinions and ideas that might not otherwise be heard. Take for example the lady who revealed that she feels that she experienced racial profiling. It will be the individuals who share their experiences in the Lowell neighborhood that will bring about change. The thing that jumps out to me as most important is the fact that the community input time is intimate and non-threatening. As people continually experience these meetings they will gain trust in the moderators, especially when the moderators are switched over from students to members of the community. It will be imperative to choose the right members of the community to become the moderators. It can be quite easy for individuals with other motives to manipulate the moderator position. Once the moderators are chosen they may feel pressure from other individuals in the community. I mean it would seem natural that a slum lord would desire to silence the voice of the people. Slum Lords very well may attempt to influence the moderators to “misplace” some of the sticky notes, or to falsify others. One possible solution would be to rotate the moderators from group to group improving the chance that groups will have an honest moderator from time to time. Another possible solution would be to provide safe boxes that the moderator cannot open. Whatever steps are taken it important to find moderators that share interest in the common good of the Lowell community.
May 20, 2010 at 6:43 pm
AngelaG
Looks like the efforts you put forward to change the flow of the meeting was good. In my opinion it is always easier talking in smaller groups; its easier to be heard and gives you more chance to express your concerns. Although Ive never been to one of these meetings it seems to me as though these meetings are very important to some people who attend. Being able to express yourself and concerns within the community is always great. And hearing what community people have to say can be a very positive experience and lead to amazing changes. If more people are being heard that can lead to more people attending these meetings to give their input. Your efforts are leading to better meetings which will ultimately lead to a better society once the people can have their voices heard!!
June 2, 2010 at 5:19 pm
richardrh
Wow! That’s awesome that you guys put forth the effort to make those meetings as comfortable as possible for those who are shy by nature! You started out with a meeting in which you could see a barrier and all of you guys figured out a way to break it. Voicing your opinion is always easier when your in a smaller group, and I liked that you didn’t separate the tables by language. People who speak English need to hear the voices of those who speak Spanish and vice versa. It’s good to know that your new method was effect. The fact that that woman was able to voice her view on why she was pulled over takes guts, especially when suggesting something like racial profiling, and also the Latino woman who spoke up finally makes me smile. Clearly you already know what needs to be addressed next as far as the community feedback goes. Might I suggest 40 minutes of presentation instead of an hour? This way the citizens have an equal 40 minutes of feedback time. You could also extend the meeting, but I don’t know how many people would be willing to sit through a meeting for more than an hour and a half on a regular basis. But if the citizens and community leaders are passionate enough, I’m sure they would want to remain there as long as they need to ensure that everything is addressed and each person walks out of that meeting feeling satisfied and knowing that something good was accomplished.
July 15, 2010 at 4:02 pm
Liviu Amariei
It seems that the new approach has brought some fruit. Keep up the good work! I liked the idea of giving the community a voice that is not fenced by city hall type of meeting formalisms. The thought of speaking to many people at once will make most people tremble and shy away. Not everybody is suited for this. Take a speech class and you will see that even speaking to twenty people makes your hand shake and voice quiver. It takes a lot of practice to be an efficient public speaker, and the purpose of the meeting was not to hone public speaking skills but to involve people in the community. A small group setting offers the right frame to allow everyone to voice out concerns, ideas, dislikes, likes, and anything that may be on their heart without feeling as if their speaking ability and the value of their value is always under the pressure of perfectionism. It was encouraging to find out that people that have not found the courage to speak in public felt at ease to speak their heart as it was the case of the Latino lady.
Keeping a mixture of people and languages was a good idea as it provided an opportunity for people of different language backgrounds to interact and hopefully realize that speaking different languages doesn’t have to put a wall in the mutual effort of building a better community.
I wonder why the presentation took a whole hour. It doesn’t seem very effective as the group conversations were only beginning to unravel. I hope that lessons will be learned from this and allow the discussions to last for longer as I have a feeling that not everybody in those small groups had a chance to speak up.
I do not think that the city did this just to check mark another box in their books. Maybe they are following “cook books” when having these meeting, but I’m glad to know that they allow for flexibility in how some of the meetings are conducted, and this shows a willingness to listen to the voice of the community.
July 22, 2010 at 11:14 am
Whitney P
April 15, 2010 Lowell Community Meeting was a good example of the value of the small group. I always felt that the less time spent in total group presentations the better. I feel most people already feel anonymous in their city and to have a chance for more personal contact to ask questions and voice concerns is paramount. People will continue to attend and participate if they feel their opinions have value.
July 23, 2010 at 4:20 pm
YelenaA
It seems that this small-group-based format of the community meetings is indeed better suited for the situation where we want to solicit meaningful feedback from the community whose many members are not used to feeling that their voice matter. Myself coming from an immigrant family I can understand this mentality of us (“simple people who don’t even speak English well”) vs. them (“officials”). It is also good that the local faith-based organizations such as FIFUL are getting involved. I am just wondering if organizing Spanish-only groups would still be more effective in making some people speak who otherwise were intimidated in a bilingual context.
Unfortunately, every time I hear that there are efforts to revitalize our city’s poor neighborhoods I have a host of conflicting feelings. On the one hand, there is a hope that maybe something significant will be done in this direction finally – it is not a pleasant experience just to drive through many of our neighborhoods, let alone to live in them. On the other hand, I have an impression that the more there are meetings or town halls on these subjects, the more dilapidated those neighborhoods are. I am wondering if community meetings are necessary for the city to enforce building and maintenance codes, to fix potholes and to sweep streets. Do we need to solicit input from residents when we can send inspectors and basically fine every so-called “slum lord” for being “slum lord”? And of course, the issue of gentrification will also inevitably face every such neighborhood revitalization effort. Where will people move after their neighborhood improves and the rents go up? Should we start from improving their income first? (Maybe after their incomes improve the issue of neighborhood revitalization will disappear by itself?)
July 25, 2010 at 1:48 pm
Jared Maddox
I like how the mold of these meetings is being broken and remolded to get the precipitants more involved. Instead of these meeting being static, (with some thought), they were able to change to best fit the needs of the people, getting better participation from the community. I also liked the idea to keep the groups ethnically diverse.
November 24, 2010 at 4:43 pm
Suzanne Ronshausen
It is wonderful that the groups were split up. This study shows how people are more comfortable speaking up in a situation where they feel as though they are actually heard. It also takes away the pressure of bringing up controversial issues in front of lots of people. That is scary for anyone and in poorer neighborhoods, there may be the natural tendency to not mention things that could bring conflict. Also making notes on comment cards and post-its brings a sense of informality to the meeting which also lessens the pressure. I appreciate too how the groups were comprised of mixed languages. Often times people are separated based in what language they speak which created little pockets of people that don’t interact. These meetings may encourage more mixing of language groups outside the cafeteria as well. Having enough time for discussion is a problem. Creating longer feedback sessions may allow for more individuals to speak up as they become comfortable in the group. Also, it will allow time for more in-depth discussion and the opportunity to get to the core issues. It takes a long time to chip away at the surface problems until they all are talked about. Things like the slum lords and racial profiling may be very personal for people and they need time to relax and feel safe in talking about them. These meetings appear to let people have a voice when they may feel that they otherwise don’t have one. Hopefully, real, practical solutions may be found through this process.
November 24, 2010 at 5:49 pm
ChristopherM
The new format that was implemented during the meetings by breaking down the room into smaller sub-groups will definitely foster more community participation. People have a natural tendency to be reluctant in voicing their opinions or concerns in front of people they do not know. They feel that their statements could cause them to be ostracized amongst the community or perhaps looked upon as being unintelligent in a way. Not to mention, their concerns could be overlooked or not be taken seriously. By having smaller groups listening to these issues, it gives the participants a more private, personalized setting to air their concerns. Being professors, I was curious to see if your teaching experiences were the reason you chose to breakdown the groups in this way. Given the experiences I have had in the classroom, the smaller the setting you have, the more opinionated/personalized feedback you get compared to a large class setting.
I would like to add that during these discussions, having moderators that are neutral and have no biases are important. In my personal experiences, third party participants are easier to trust in a way because they are unfamiliar with the problems within the community and “do not have a side” in a sense (on the other hand, I could see the other side of the argument that if the moderators were from the community, they could relate better and understand the concerns, but you do not want to have that bias present). Not to mention, they bring a fresh perspective on the issues that perhaps the community members did not consider.
My only concern is that only having roughly twenty minutes for people to share their concerns is not enough time, and either the meetings need to have their time extend or the time show be split for the city presentation and group discussions. That way, everyone has a chance to have their voice heard without being rushed. Although this may be less personalized, by giving people the option to call, email, or write to their moderators if they have any other concerns or ideas that they did not have a chance to voice during the meetings is a great way to continue to get feedback (it is not as good as a one on one conversation, but whatever works!).
November 30, 2010 at 1:18 pm
hope
I think that the idea of improving Lowell community is wonderful. It is about time this community gets some attention. Community feedbacks are important so breaking up the large meeting into smaller groups is a great way to bring in more participation. I’m glad that there were translators because not all community members are English speakers. Providing this type of service showed the public that their voices are important and needed to make the revitalization of Lowell community successful. Trust is an issue that’s in people’s mind when such event as this one is held. Having a voice will help build up trust between the people and leaders.
December 2, 2010 at 6:27 pm
Madoka Yano
It is a great idea that break large group into small group, because it is easier to address their opinion better, especially for not native English speaker. In larger group, if professor ask opinion in entire class, only some people say something but not everyone. I also realize a problem that teachers know some people have English problem and if skip or ask the opinion to them in entire class, it might be awkward. That is why I think small group discussion classes are important.
December 5, 2010 at 8:05 pm
RocioT
I found the Lowell Community meeting discussion very important for the benefit of the Lowell society. Honestly, I never imagined that there were a lot of ordinary people like me (individuals who do not hold important positions in the government) out there to be interested in the welfare of the community. Well, I know that there are a lot of citizens interested in their community’s wellbeing, but they never really take the time to be part of a meeting such as the one mentioned above. Being involved in this meeting can have a life changing outcome in their personal and social life. All of those individuals that were part of this meeting had the strength to participate because they wanted a better place for their families. I was amazed to find out that even individuals who do not have the knowledge of the English language were involved too. This event gives us a lesson, as citizens of a particular community we should get involve in meetings like this one because almost every community needs to find solutions to all of their problems in order to improve their community. This type of meetings can bring a lot of benefits to society because individual’s concerns are heard by community members and hopefully their problems will be addressed. This meeting can also help anthropologist examine other ways to better perform this type of meetings so individuals can succeed and improve their communities.
December 7, 2010 at 12:49 am
Mandeep Sanghera
Making sure community input meetings have all the attendees input is a great idea. Like many have mentioned the goal of such a community meeting is to ensure the community members have a say and what better way to do it. I really like the idea of breaking down into small groups, I personally can say I would be more comfortable talking in smaller groups rather than a large crowd. Another great resolution was having both Spanish and English monitors. It is possible that the majority of the community does not speak English and therefore many of the community members are reluctant to come to such meetings. Introducing this new method of holding meetings may encourage many to come and give their input. However, one thing that may be a disadvantage to breaking up into smaller groups is that not everyone hears all the comments made.
One problem mentioned was the fact that there was not enough time for the break up session. One possible solution is to have two different meetings one in which the city members present their ideas and possibly hand out pamphlets of informational fliers to inform the attendees of what was discussed and another meeting where the group discussions can take place regarding what was presented in the previous meeting.
December 7, 2010 at 11:29 pm
Nicole S.
The Department and Community Revitalization has affected many people in Fresno, especially those who live in communities like the Lowell neighborhoods. It is never easy to go through a change with your community, because of the fact that there have been tough times. The people of this community should be aware of everything that is happening with it. The meetings are an extremely import aspect to these changes, and if I were a part of this community I would want to share my feelings and ideas with others and also be able to ask questions. I appreciate the fact the mayor and city officials make these meeting possible. It is also a great thing that the author of this article participated with great concern and made evaluation of how the many people in this community could better facilitate their meetings. More things truly get accomplished this way. I know that the people of this community go to these meetings because they are concerned with what is going on in their neighborhoods .With anything that needs to get done; the right structure is needed for success. Change is never easy and that is why it is important to make good use of community meetings when needed. It is great to hear that you and many others went in to the Lowell Community to help improve the way their continuing meetings were ran, in order to see improvements in this community in Fresno. Finding ways for the people to participate is always a key idea to see efficient results. If people don’t get a voice in then it is hard to see the results that they may want. It is always good to speak up, but for those who have a hard time or don’t feel comfortable speaking out loud. Or those who couldn’t get time in now were given the opportunity to do so with the new method approach offered to them to use for the rest of their meetings. In reality it is very enlightening to read that anthropology students from Fresno State and some from Fresno Pacific getting involved in a situation where they could help people of the community speak up in these meetings, without ever having to actually say anything if you chose not to. It is great that you went into one of the meetings as a concerned anthropologist to see what kinds of things about the meetings needed improvement and went in and helped the people of the Lowell community try a new approach. It was a great adjustment and it seemed to be more useful to the people, because there was evidence of more people expressing their feelings.
By reading this educational article, I noticed that when all of the facilitators split up the people involved into the eight different groups regardless of their language abilities or ethnicities that more people participated. Adding people to help that speak Spanish was a great idea since there were a lot of people who spoke Spanish. This also made it easier to get feedback from all people attending the meeting. The method of having the facilitators write their responses to the questions addressed at the meeting, in both English and Spanish was effective. Letting the city know what and how they feel can be critical, if they are a part of a change in their community. I say this because in the long run this change could end up being good for them and the city of Fresno. Everyone involved in making these critical meetings more informational and better designed are greatly appreciated for a job well done. Your concept and method of “take over” was a great idea that was based on the people of the community and has been noted a great way for feedback to be heard. With more time available to them the more they would be able to get out and find the answers you need to know. It is because of the concept of fieldwork and concerned people like you and the rest of the others who are responsible for this or who have helped along the way, that people in a community within Fresno would get help to better their own self- motivated community concerns. It is always good to be involved in a community and better yet it is always good to find people in need and help them fix their problems. The people of the Lowell community must really appreciate all of your efforts for improving their meetings.
December 9, 2010 at 2:52 pm
Adrianna S
I think Mayor Ashley Swearingen has the right idea. It is those communities like Lowell that tend to be forgotten or over looked by city officials because they are labeled bad neighborhoods. Having community meetings/forums where residents can meet with city officials to discuss problems and issues that they may have with their neighborhoods is a great idea. However, when meetings such as the one’s that are being held in the Lowell community are held in English and the majority of the community members speak Spanish, problems can arise. Members of the community are most certainly not going to feel comfortable standing up in front of the entire meeting and voicing their opinions to city officials who probably have no idea what they are saying. So much is lost in translation. I know if I were one of the community members and I did not speak English I would be a bit overwhelmed. How could this person possibly know what I am talking about if they cannot even understand what I am saying.
With the help of Professor Delcore and the others that were mentioned, it sounds like the meetings are more suited towards the community members as opposed to the city officials. Like it was mentioned, there were some individuals such as the old Latino woman who had never voiced her concerns prior to the new set up, began to feel comfortable enough to say what they have probably been wanting to say since the meetings first began. Sometimes it seems like the solution is so obvious, but yet no one ever bothered to fix the problem or maybe they just did not care. If the whole purpose of these meetings is to get the community involved and they are not saying anything, then does it not make sense to reevaluate the way things are being operated. Breaking up the large group into smaller more intimate groups has proven to be beneficial. Members seem like they are more comfortable to voice their concerns to a moderator that speaks the same language. Also there are those individuals that do not like speaking in front of large groups. When put into smaller groups it is less intimidating.
These meetings still need to be tweaked a little in my opinion. It is not fair that city officials get to speak for 3/4 of the meeting and the community members only get half and hour. The meeting such be split up evenly with both groups getting half the time to voice their opinions. Also the community members should be allowed to break up into their small groups first, discuss their concerns, present it to city officials and then let them comment on it the last half of the meeting. I know I would not want to sit there for an hour and a half listening to them talk about who knows what, and I only get thirty minutes to say my part.
Like I said in the beginning it sounds like Mayor Swearingen has the right idea or at least making a step in the right direction.
December 12, 2010 at 2:43 pm
Nancy M
This article was an eye opener. Only in movies, do I see that small towns hold community meetings in local school cafeteria or gym, but knowing that neighborhood meetings were conducted in Lowell community in an attempt to develop and improve the community and the people’s involvement is of great importance. As one should know and understand, to really improve and change anything, whether it’s a person, business, or organization, it takes time. Change can only occur by careful planning, guidance, input and flexibility to accept change in order for any progression to be evident.
I was glad to hear that the author was there to recognize and acknowledge the errors in the meeting procedures; for instance, the lack or limited involvement of neighborhood residents due to the possible fear of voicing their concerns in front of a large group. If I was a neighborhood resident, I would not feel comfortable to make suggestions or complaints in fear of being ridiculed. It’s especially scary to speak out when higher authority is present, and in this case, it was the city officials. Another crucial barrier was the ethnic and cultural diversity among the attendees. Some of them only spoke Spanish and even though the meeting was translated immediately, it is still hard for them to voice their opinion. I liked how the small groups allowed everyone to speak. Statistically from past studies, it has shown that small groups or class room sizes, increased learning and student involvement due to the availability of one-on-one time with teachers. On the other note, even though the languages posed a problem to some, just the idea of wanting to gain involvement from the community residents is a huge step in the right direction into gaining the knowledge of the diverse cultures that exist in our neighborhoods.
The organization of small groups was a great idea. Learning that the Latino woman attended several of the meetings showed how committed she is in wanting to make a change in her neighborhood. Not only that, she finally voiced her concerns and from the article, it seems that her opinion was noticed and appreciated. Many times, we feel that our opinions don’t matter, but I hope that this community involvement meeting can prove to everyone that all of our opinions matter and can make a difference.
There were several key things I read that I thought were essential in an attempt to regenerate a community neighborhood. First of all, the meeting was very inclusive of the key players; consisting of the city officials, members of community benefit organizations and the residents of the community. This is the first step in creating good communication and trust. This allows everyone to share their thoughts and visions, in hopes of getting everyone on the same page. Second of all, the community involvement, or meetings were consistent; meaning, that in six months they have already met four times. And thirdly, through observation, changes to the structure of the meetings were implemented to increase the quantity and quality of resident involvement. Furthermore, the changes were created to develop a “model” that could be utilized in any future community development projects. This is very beneficial because in future community meetings, leaders will have guidelines to organize the meetings to gain effective city-citizen communication and involvement and maximum results for community neighborhood development.
December 16, 2010 at 3:08 pm
Jorge C
I really enjoyed reading about these kinds of meetings. These meetings really help the community become more involved with the town. As said in the article, there are many people that are not so apt to go out and speak up. That is a little hard for some people, especially those that are not english speaking. I can include myself into this group. Im not the kind of person that speaks up often. You feel like if your responses really don’t have an impact or importance to the meetings. Being in a big group intimidated people. You don’t really get into the topics as much. The fact of coming together into separate groups with no separation of languages, like spanish speaking on one side and english speaking on the other, was really great. This, I feel, makes everyone more confident. One begins to feel like no matter where you come from, your opinion still matters. A small group allows more communication and more ideas that can be said. Not only do you have those individuals that usually always speak up to give their ideas but now there are individuals that would never say anything, now talking!!! That was amazing to see that a women that would never take at the meetings, finally talked!!! This starts to tell you something about the way in which the meetings were designed; they are getting better. The next aspect that was said that needed to change was the time. Increasing the time spent in groups will increase the output. Some individuals don’t automatically feel confident enough to speak out, they need time to get used to the idea. Once that gets fixed the meetings would be really really useful.
December 16, 2010 at 6:38 pm
ryanbsmith
I actually did attend part of the Lowell meeting last April. I feel that the input from the people there was key to showing the leaders like Jerry Dyer and Mayor Ashley Swearingen what the community concerns are so they can better help manage the area. Communication is the most important thing to improving our community. I was shocked when I saw the amount of people that showed up for the meeting. This was one of my first experiences at a city meeting. The Spanish-English translators were a big help in addressing the concerns of the individuals who could not speak English. The translators gave them a chance to share their opinions on important topics covered in the meeting. When the large group broke up into small groups, it made it easier to address their specific issues in the area and how to improve on them. To me the first half was just a general explanation of the progress the community has made thus far and the second half was a more specific/ private setting where individuals had their chance to give more feedback on certain issues. These meetings are very informative to the people that maybe don’t see everything on a first hand basis. Sometimes people are not at home or possibly at work and don’t get to see the revitalization’s each day like some people. This is also a great time for individuals in the community to express their feelings on certain issues not only to the leaders but to their fellow neighbors. I think the neighbors will have more of an understanding on what each member is saying because they actually live in the area, rather than a city official like Ashley Swearingen.
December 18, 2010 at 12:41 pm
Jackie L
I believe it was very crucial and important to change the way people were heard at the meetings. The participation increased as I read about the Latina women that was at every meeting but since the changed happened that was the first time she ever talked. This shows that this technique is working. This shows us we need to do a better job on how things are done and how we go about changing the system around in which we live in. Having the ability to hear everyone’s point of view is very effective and important because not everyone has the same concerns or ideas. Many while talking about the issues have the answers within themselves so breaking them into smaller groups having all their concerns heard maybe the next step could be addressing the problems at every table and getting feedback from everyone. At times people that do not speak English that well have language barriers and cannot comment on any issues that arise. Being that we have a huge number of Hispanics in the Fresno area it was a great idea to make changes so everyone could feel comfortable and be heard. Many times people with language barriers have many things to say but cannot say anything because they are intimated because they do not speak English. It is even more difficult for a non English speaker to talk in front of a big group. They are more confident as talking in a smaller group where they have only a couple of eyes than a room full of eyes. The Lowell community meetings are great ways to help Fresno be a better place because changes are made based on the experiences of the people living in that area.
I think this is a great way to get the community involved and let the community members know someone cares. Often times the community has many concerns but does not know or how to address them. This is a great way to help them relief some of their concerns and actually take action in making changes. Also as I read it is a good idea to eventually have them, the community members, start the meeting on their one and let them be on their own without any assistance of the anthro people. Another good point that I wanted to mention was how once the groups were broken up the good thing is that they did not put all the Spanish speakers together, keeping it all mixed up with a diverse group was a good idea so they can all hear both point of views. For example, how the Latino women felt she was being pulled over because of racial profiling maybe another felt the same way and was of different ethnic background being in a diverse group helps them see other issues arise to others not only to them. I strongly believe that by keeping the diverse small groups can create bigger and better conversations. I cannot stress enough how imperative this is for the community and how crucial it is to pick the right moderators to keep this going still after the anthro people leave.
December 20, 2010 at 1:44 am
Omar Mejia
If more communities were to do more projects such as the one you and your students are part of, I can assure you that community issues would be at a minimum. It’s so amazing how people tend to change from being in a big group to a small group, they seem to open themselves more and have more input in specific issues that need to be evaluated. I also love how you guys had both English/Spanish speaking personnel to inform all community members. Problems are solved through communication as I believe most problems arise from miscommunication issues; some people assume some things that are nonexistent while certain people over generalize on certain aspects creating problems in a community. By breaking this community into smaller groups, people can really identify with their neighbors that they are not the only ones facing such an issue and this gives them the push they need to open up and express them. Towards the end of your post you mention how, “Next, we will focus on helping community leaders replace me and my students and ultimately take over the meeting.” I think this is fantastic because you guys will not only be helping the community solve their situational issues, but also creating leadership among them, which is what we need and want in this society. Also, you and your group of students could move to other communities in need of assistance and do the same that is being done at Lowell, and create a lasting social impact. As a personal note, I would really love and be honored to be part of such group if you were to continue to evolve yourself in this type of projects.
December 23, 2010 at 4:55 pm
DaRell M
In the Lowell community meeting you can see Applied Anthropology at work you can see that the Fresno city council and The mayor would really like the community input on making this community prosperous and safe. The meeting were very informative after the first meeting getting everybody’s input on what needs to be done it also help with our citizens that speak a different language voice their opinions on what could their community, and that in turns help make that community better for all it’s diverse citizens.
December 30, 2010 at 12:09 pm
Paul Cervantes
I enjoyed reading this article and the strides made to overcome issues with communication identified in the first forum style meeting. I too have had the opportunity to facilitate meetings similar to this as a police officer. These meetings are generally designed around the neighborhood watch program but are similar is set up. After reading this article I reflected on some of the meetings that we held and believe that this second format or style of meeting would clearly have been more conducive for our meeting as well.
Thinking along those lines I started to wonder if there might even be a more efficient way of conducting the same meeting with an even more intimate approach. I do believe that the most intimate meeting with be a one on one face to face meeting with one individual but as a matter of practicality that simply would be too time consuming. Breaking down these groups into smaller groups by table was a great idea. I also liked the idea of moving people around so that the comfort groups would inter mingles with the rest of the community.
One area that I thought might help improve this meeting would be dedicating an all Spanish speaking meeting in addition to the English forum. I am familiar with this area of Fresno and note that there is a tremendous influence of Spanish speaking citizens in this area. In terms of culture, I know that often time people who speak in the Spanish language are more apt to speak openly/freely among individuals who communicate in the same language that they are speaking. This isn’t a matter of dividing citizens by culture or language but rather a common goal of obtaining the most input in time provided. Another way to improve this input would be in the area of time management. I noted that the input on the second meeting was like twenty minutes. Maybe it would be a good idea to try and improve on that time so the group can get passed the initial “measuring up” time. These are only suggestions to the already great method that is being employed. Based upon the input that I received from citizens of the neighborhood watch meetings I see that there definitely is a certain level of “comfort” that comes from speaking openly in a setting or group that one is familiar with.
I think that the objective of community input was made on the first meeting mentioned in this article and the second meeting was even better. I’m curious to see what the results were and the outcome of the next meeting. Hopefully the application of this style of meeting proves to be effective and city officials are able to pull necessary information to improve the quality of life for the Fresno residents that it affects.
January 2, 2011 at 2:35 pm
2010 in review « TheAnthroGuys
[...] Lowell Community Meeting: Designing for Participation April 2010 22 comments Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)#1 Page and Top 3 Posts In 2009Reboot11,000!!! [...]
April 7, 2011 at 7:24 pm
Terry K
I too am qustioning whether this was a political act or indeed it was a honest attempt to get community input, I am distressed at how much time and energy is given to accomadate spanish speaking particapates, I find our school and government too willing to spend valuable resorces to accomadate non-english speakers. I am not discriminating against any one culture, but as our economy continues to decline and more and more jobs lost and less tax revenue to support local government social services, I feel it is time to cut the waist and only provide essential services until our economy improves. No other country cares what people who do not speak their language thinks, yet we continue to not only allow their imput but use valuable resources to enable them to continue to not have to assemilate into our english speaking society. The article spent too time explain the process of obtaining the input and not enough on the actual ideas that might benifit our Lowel community.We don’t need new laws, we just need to enforce the ones we already have. Slumloards would not be so laxed if it were not profitable, we need to enforce our city codes and bring these properties up to livable standards. Peoples bikes would not be stolen right out of their yards if there were not people willing to buy them cheap. most of that money will go to buy drug or alcohol so we need to stop the need to steal as well. My biggest issue is that we need to stop spending taxpayer money on lawyers and consulting firms to do studies, we already know what needs to done to improve our own neihborhoods. So lets just do it.
April 20, 2011 at 12:02 pm
Mary V.
I actually attended one of these meetings and I believe it’s great to have it open to the community of Lowell. People are there with open ears and voice their concerns about the community that surrounds them. I had the opportunity to see pictures of homes that were repaired and repainted, I thought that was awesome. I think it’s great to have important leaders involved like Mayor Ashley. I believe if more less fortunate communities voiced their concerns like the Lowell community we would also see improvement in poor communities throughout Fresno.
May 1, 2011 at 2:57 pm
Nicole J
I think that it’s great that these types of meetings exist. There are so many individuals in the community who have issues that they would like to express, but just don’t know how to go about doing so or may feel intimidated to do so. Initially the meeting was structured in a way that didn’t allow many for many individuals to voice their concerns. I loved how you recognized the problem right a way and took necessary steps in order to fix the problem. This is what anthropology is all about; recognizing a problem, which was that many Spanish speaking individuals were not comfortable with voicing their concerns in front of a large group; and coming about with a solution, which was breaking the room down into small groups and providing translators to the groups. As a result there were alot of individuals who are now expressing their concerns who would normally sit quiet during the meetings. If alot more communities had these types of meetings it would have a very positive effect on society.
May 1, 2011 at 9:30 pm
Aurel Lacuesta
This is an excellent approach to encourage maximum participation in the community! I would have not thought that breaking down the community to smaller groups would have yielded greater feedback. It makes sense that voicing an opinion to a large crowd may be intimidating, especially if you speak to a culturally diverse group of people. Some people are just more comfortable talking in small groups and voicing their concerns to a moderator who speaks for them. Then hearing your opinions and concerns heard when the group unites just empowers them more. Just knowing that you were heard alone can be satisfying enough. It would be interesting to see this method conducted more often in various community meetings.
May 1, 2011 at 10:47 pm
Diane Barnes
This scenario reminds me of a classroom setting. How often do teachers teach a subject and ask questions and there are little responses. Students do not respond for a variety of reasons: fear of looking “stupid” by getting it wrong, fearing their opinion will be criticsized or feeling as though it makes no difference. Other reasons include language barriers or lack of understanding. These reasonings apply to city meetings too!! We are all students of the community listening to our “teachers” or so to speak. I think the group idea was an excellent strategy! You hear so often group work benefits students because they feed off eachothers thoughts and they don’t feel as intimidated to respond. Those who maybe didn’t understand before can have it more clearly laid out for them. I think one of the most important things done here is having the interpreters. When majority of our community is made up of latinos and hispanics, many of whom only speak spanish yet we have no one to speak up for them. Their opinion matters, they are a majority and can move mountains if given the opportunity.
May 2, 2011 at 1:29 am
Angelica Garcia
Community meetings can hold promising changes and solutions to cities’ problems. Modifications are being made to help voice the opinions of the public and that is awesome! Breaking it down to smaller groups and having individuals there to aid as translators makes a tremendous difference. More individuals will be willing to participate if the system is more “user friendly.” Real concerns can be addressed and hopefully real solutions will follow.
Many individuals will not waste their time fighting for something they know they won’t win. I know I wouldn’t and many of us are too busy with demanding schedules as well. Holding more meetings and developing new ways to involve those individuals that cannot make it to the meetings, but does want to make an impact on her environment. Not only allowing individuals to make decisions about their communities, but also build a stronger and more productive community. I also like that it is called the Community Revitalization Department because many of our neighborhoods desperately need revitalizing.
May 4, 2011 at 3:00 pm
JesusS
Although I’m not familiar with the Lowell neighborhood this article seems to focus more on the getting the surrounding citizens inputs how to better the revitalization of that area. The obstacle is this case seems to be the engagement of the community as a whole, particularly those who are Spanish speaking who may have less confidence in themselves to raise concerns or suggestions. Adjustments made to the meetings were in my view productive and enhance the cooperation of those involved.
Often times people who are unfamiliar with each other become timid to voice concerns over decisions that affect a greater number of people. Some people are more vocal and others for someone have good ideas but remain silent. The purpose of breaking the large groups is perhaps to gain a more focused assessment on thoughts often attendees. For example, people in smaller groups will feel more confident and less shy to express their concerns within a small group. In addition, it will take much of the fear of public speaking away because it is smaller and less intense. Mediators in each of the group can proactively have those who are silent engage in the conversation by perhaps asking them about their thoughts. Once those timid individuals express their thoughts initially they will gain confidence in themselves to free participate in the conversation.
Secondly, forming smaller groups the mediators can gain an overall focused consensus of the groups opinion and report back to the person in charge. This method will provide a more organized feedback to the people who wish to get the opinion of the community. Bilingual interpreters were also invaluable to the meetings. Many times those who speak Spanish and come over to this country feel they have no say or no power over what goes on in their community. However, these are the people who children will be first generation Mexican-American and who are likely to be a part of the majority population in California. In fact, I believe that Mexican or Mexican-American population is expected to be the majority in the central valley soon if not already. This puts them in a strong position to voice their concern and overcome the obstacle of not speaking the English language and being involved within their communities. From reviewing this article it seems that it was a success as far breaking the overall participants into smaller groups allowing them to voice concerns equally and not having only a couple of dominate the conversation. Finally, that decision should have improved the cohesiveness of the group and the participation, insuring that there is maximum community input.
May 13, 2011 at 12:43 pm
Marisol Vera
Wow, after reading this article of the Lowell community meeting, I have to say that I’m very satisfied with the results and the different appraches of this program with the community. What I like the most is the importace of the public opions that this program gives credit to. This article explain the concern about the needs of the people. This types of programs are excellent for getting involved with the community and understand their needs and what are they concern with. Forther more, this program represent those who dont let their voices to be heard. Like the example of the lady that use not to talk and after attending this meetings, she became so outspoken. One thing about this program that I think is wonderful is that they have interpreters for Spanish speaking. In my opinion this suggest that this program cares about the Hispanic community and there are some that don’t. Great job!