Bill de Blasio, the mayor elect of New York City, in coordination with area foundations, has a novel approach to getting feedback from New Yorkers about what they hope he will accomplish as mayor. He has established a Talking Transition tent at Canal Street and Sixth Avenue. (And yes, both de Blasio’s team and the press capitalize Talking Transition.) Perhaps it’s a nod to de Blasio’s kinship with Occupy Wall Street protesters who once camped out in tents in Zucccotti Park. Or maybe it’s the irresistibility of the big tent metaphor for a mayor whose African American wife and biracial children have captivated New Yorkers. And it could just be that we should take the word of the co-chairperson of de Blasio’s transition team at face value: the tent is and “inclusive” “model of civic engagement” that is “emblematic” of de Blasio’s approach to governing.
Whatever the case, the tent -- sponsored by ten foundations including the Open Society Foundations -- is a big hit. The tent features different ways of engaging with the mayor elect. Some do not require a big commitment. Visitors to the tent are invited to record ideas for city improvement on post-it notes, engaging with and building off of ideas already posted on a giant board. Residents can take a five minute survey on computer tablets, offering their perspectives on a variety of policy areas, including public safety, education, and housing. Other engagement activities in the tent are more involved. A “soapbox” area allows participants to videotape messages for de Blasio. Oh, and there’s pizza and beer available, too.
Organizers expect 50,000 to take the survey in the tent, and more still to drop by to see what’s happening. So far, they have counted upwards of 50,000 participants in the project, though fewer have taken the survey. Those that do may be rewarded by a chance to talk to the mayor elect directly. de Blasio has made it a point to take reporters question and make policy announcements from within the tent. The data from the conversations and survey will be presented to de Blasio when the tent closes its doors (flaps?) later this year. Of course the real power of the tent will be seen in what de Blasio’s team decides to do with the information they collect from those who participate in the civic engagement experiment.
So far the tent project seems promising, though. Media reports indicate that those who come to the tent to record their views often engage in vigorous debate with one another, as well as with de Blasio’s team. And anecdotal evidence shows that those flocking to the tent are diverse. The collaborative nature of the post-it exercise invites residents to engage with one another, building off one another’s suggestions. The tent has become a kind of public square to hash out ideas and devise solutions. The fact that area foundations sponsored the project also represents a good model for public/private partnerships.
Yet the tent model is not one that would work everywhere. New York is a dense city in which residents who live in the outer boroughs are likely to pass through Manhattan for work or school. Neighborhoods might be segregated by race or class, but most New Yorkers rely on a shared public transit system and have easy access to the tent’s SoHo location. Despite these traits unique to New York, all cities should strive toward civic engagement tools that do what the Transition Tent seems to have done successfully: integrate the power of place, in-person meeting, and technological sophistication to create a more responsive and adaptive local government in service to all residents.
Whatever the case, the tent -- sponsored by ten foundations including the Open Society Foundations -- is a big hit. The tent features different ways of engaging with the mayor elect. Some do not require a big commitment. Visitors to the tent are invited to record ideas for city improvement on post-it notes, engaging with and building off of ideas already posted on a giant board. Residents can take a five minute survey on computer tablets, offering their perspectives on a variety of policy areas, including public safety, education, and housing. Other engagement activities in the tent are more involved. A “soapbox” area allows participants to videotape messages for de Blasio. Oh, and there’s pizza and beer available, too.
Organizers expect 50,000 to take the survey in the tent, and more still to drop by to see what’s happening. So far, they have counted upwards of 50,000 participants in the project, though fewer have taken the survey. Those that do may be rewarded by a chance to talk to the mayor elect directly. de Blasio has made it a point to take reporters question and make policy announcements from within the tent. The data from the conversations and survey will be presented to de Blasio when the tent closes its doors (flaps?) later this year. Of course the real power of the tent will be seen in what de Blasio’s team decides to do with the information they collect from those who participate in the civic engagement experiment.
So far the tent project seems promising, though. Media reports indicate that those who come to the tent to record their views often engage in vigorous debate with one another, as well as with de Blasio’s team. And anecdotal evidence shows that those flocking to the tent are diverse. The collaborative nature of the post-it exercise invites residents to engage with one another, building off one another’s suggestions. The tent has become a kind of public square to hash out ideas and devise solutions. The fact that area foundations sponsored the project also represents a good model for public/private partnerships.
Yet the tent model is not one that would work everywhere. New York is a dense city in which residents who live in the outer boroughs are likely to pass through Manhattan for work or school. Neighborhoods might be segregated by race or class, but most New Yorkers rely on a shared public transit system and have easy access to the tent’s SoHo location. Despite these traits unique to New York, all cities should strive toward civic engagement tools that do what the Transition Tent seems to have done successfully: integrate the power of place, in-person meeting, and technological sophistication to create a more responsive and adaptive local government in service to all residents.