Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-17-2014 B1 Financial Responsibility Philosophy, 2014 Benchmark Study, and Discussion of Tools to Improve Transparency & Accountability of City Expenditures (Measure Y)City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number FROM: Katie Lichtig, City Manager Prepared By: Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager Monica Irons, Human Resources Manager Greg Hermann, Special Projects Manager SUBJECT: FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY PHILOSOPHY, 2014 BENCHMARK STUDY, AND DISCUSSION OF TOOLS TO IMPROVE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF CITY EXPENDITURES. RECOMMENDATION 1. Review and discuss a draft Financial Responsibility Philosophy, and provide staff with direction regarding changes and additional outreach needed before a resolution is returned to the City Council for adoption. 2. Receive and file the 2014 City of San Luis Obispo Benchmark Study titled, “Measuring Our Performance.” 3. Provide direction to staff to obtain public input regarding access to City data and performance measurements to increase transparency and accountability of City operations. REPORT-IN-BRIEF As the City Council considers placing an extension of the City’s half-cent sales tax on the November general election ballot, it has fostered a community conversation about financial responsibility and improving transparency and accountability. At the direction of the City Council, a draft Financial Responsibility Philosophy (FRP) has been prepared for Council consideration and direction (Attachment 1). Conceptually, an FRP would establish expectations and a framework for future decision making. The FRP includes the following components, which are described in depth in this report: A. Informed Decision-making. B. Shared responsibility. C. Increased Transparency. D. Aligned Investments. E. Diversified and Aligned Revenue Sources. F. Reduced Unfunded Liabilities. The Council is being asked to provide input on the preliminary components of the FRP, and to direct staff to conduct additional outreach before a final draft is prepared and brought back to the council for adoption. This report also presents the 2014 Benchmark Study, as called for in the Fiscal Health Major City Goal (Attachment 2). The Benchmark Study compares the City to previously used June 17, 2014 B1 B1 - 1 FRP, Benchmark Study, and Dashboards Page 2 benchmark communities in areas including costs, service levels, community priorities, and outcomes delivered. Key findings of the Study include: 1. The City was close to the median on most comparisons with benchmark cities. 2. The City’s financial operations had lower than average operating costs and debt levels. 3. In some categories, such as fire service, being below average on costs is especially significant given the higher standard of service provided by San Luis Obispo as compared with benchmark cities. 4. San Luis Obispo is among the safest communities in terms of violent crime and fire emergencies. 5. San Luis Obispo’s pavement condition index - an indicator of street quality - is among the best of the benchmark cities. 6. This study does not include any indicators relating to compensation because the Benchmark Compensation Study is currently underway, which will provide a complete overview of compensation related factors. Finally, this report outlines an approach for improving transparency and accountability, and increasing citizen engagement. Staff has been researching options available for developing and reporting new performance measures using technology, including dashboards. Staff is seeking direction from the City Council to move forward with the following tasks: A. Compile existing performance measures that are currently tracked at the department level, and included in various reports, to begin creating the framework for a citywide performance measurement system that could provide data to populate dashboards. B. Begin conducting community outreach to determine what measures will be most useful in creating a dashboard for the public. C. Begin outreach to the community to identify opportunities for open data pilot projects to increase transparency including the use of an online financial tracking tool. DISCUSSION Background On July 1, 2014, the City Council is scheduled to consider introducing an ordinance to place an extension of the Essential Services Measure before the voters on the November general election ballot. During a recent discussion on this topic, the Council heard public testimony about the need for the City to remain focused on fiscal sustainability. In addition, speakers expressed a need for the City to improve access to information and performance measurements to increase the transparency and accountability of City operations. On May 20, 2014, staff presented the City Council with preliminary information about dashboards and performance measurements and also received direction to return with an outline of a Financial Responsibility Philosophy for discussion. Additional information is provided in this report to support a community conversation on these topics, and allow the City Council to provide staff with direction regarding next steps. B1 - 2 FRP, Benchmark Study, and Dashboards Page 3 Financial Responsibility Philosophy 1. Financial Sustainability Strategy Beginning with the 2011-2013 Financial Plan, the City of San Luis Obispo committed itself to a Financial Sustainability Strategy. The strategy expressed in both the 2011-2013 and 2013-2015 Financial Plans identifies the following core objectives: • Aligning delivery of essential services with resources available on an ongoing basis; • Reinvesting in the Capital Improvement Plan; • Addressing escalating staffing costs while maintaining ability to attract and retain well-qualified employees; • Maintaining General Fund and other operating fund balances within policy reserve levels; and • Continuing to focus on delivering essential services with local tax dollars generated by the Measure Y ½-cent sales tax. This strategy became a very important part of the City’s ability to weather the financial storm of the Great Recession, and continue to focus on long-term fiscal health during the more recent recovery. As the overall economy continues to improve, maintaining focus on long-term fiscal responsibility will ensure that the City is prepared to meet the financial challenges of the future, including increased operating costs and future economic downturns. 2. What is a Financial Responsibility Philosophy? To ensure that the focus on fiscal responsibility is maintained even during good economic times, the City Council directed staff to outline a Fiscal Responsibility Philosophy (FRP, Attachment 1). Fiscal responsibility is the balanced approach to providing the infrastructure, maintenance, and services that preserve and enhance the quality of life in our community, as identified and prioritized through community input. A FRP is proposed to ensure informed decision-making during good or difficult financial times. With that in mind, a philosophy typically lays out the guiding principles or guideposts for decision-making. The philosophy does not prescribe future actions but instead guides them. For example, Council has adopted a Compensation Philosophy, which provided guidance to Council members during the 2007 Benchmark Compensation Study, the labor relations objectives developed by Council in 2011, and that will provide context for the 2014 Benchmark Compensation Study which will be presented in August. The philosophy establishes an overarching goal for the City’s pay and benefit plans, which is to provide “competitive compensation as part of an overall strategy of attracting and retaining well qualified employees who exemplify our organizational values.” The Good philosophy documents do not include formulas, “if x, then y” statements, or specific targets that may lock decision-makers into an action that may not be pertinent or in the best interest of the community at the time. More specific goals and objectives can be outlined in other documents such as work programs supporting Major City Goals that are established by Council during the two-year financial planning process. B1 - 3 FRP, Benchmark Study, and Dashboards Page 4 Compensation Philosophy includes guidance on how Council will define “competitive” by describing multiple considerations such as market compensation data, private sector comparisons, services provided to the community, community acceptability, and financial sustainability. Similarly, a FRP will provide general guidance to City Council members now and in the future regarding its approach to funding services in consideration of available ongoing revenues, and the ongoing costs associated with providing those services. 2. Don’t We Already Have Budget and Fiscal Policies? Yes, the City’s two-year financial plan includes a section titled Reference Materials where budget and fiscal policies are available and reviewed every two years during the financial planning process. The policies within this document serve a different purpose in that they are specific to financial actions. For example, there are policies that guide user fee cost recovery, enterprise fund use, fund balance and reserves, and staffing. 3. How Do We Develop a Fiscal Responsibility Philosophy? Staff was not able to find FRP examples from other agencies, however, agencies have adopted related documents such as Palo Alto’s labor guiding principles, the City of Davis’ principles for negotiations related to employee compensation, and San Jose’s transparency guidelines. Based on community input and staff research, a preliminary draft FRP is attached for Council consideration of the concept, and if Council desires, to provide staff input. The key components of this preliminary draft FRP include: A. Informed Decision-making. The City will identify and consider immediate and long-term economic, social, and environmental impacts of all decisions presented to Council. B. Shared responsibility. The City recognizes a shared responsibility between the employee and employer to appropriately fund employee benefits, including pension benefits. Ensuring an appropriate balance is a valuable tool in attracting and retaining well qualified employees that deliver services to the community. C. Increased Transparency. The City will conduct all business, including labor negotiations and other employee compensation matters, with transparency pursuant to all applicable laws and regulations. The City will continue to develop tools, such as key measures and dashboards that make information readily available to community members in a timely and useful manner. D. Aligned Investments. The City shall allocate resources in alignment with community needs and priorities for maintaining and/or adding capital projects or services. E. Diversified and Aligned Revenue Sources. The City will pursue diversified revenue sources that are aligned with expenditures and community priorities. F. Reduced Unfunded Liabilities. The City will identify potential long-term unfunded liabilities in advance of Council direction and create, present, and implement plans to reduce current or unavoidable unfunded liabilities. B1 - 4 FRP, Benchmark Study, and Dashboards Page 5 Staff is seeking feedback on this draft RFP from the City Council, as follows: 1. Does the Council agree in principle with the components of the FRP outlined above? 2. Are there any additional concepts that should be incorporated into subsequent drafts? 3. Does the Council wish to direct staff to conduct outreach with the community and City employees regarding the draft FRP? 2014 Benchmark Study The Major City Goal for fiscal health includes a task for the City to prepare a benchmark study that helps illustrate how the City is doing by comparing it to other like cities across a number of performance measures. The Benchmark Study evaluates 2012-13 data on financial performance such as revenue diversity, expense allocation, staffing costs, and debt management. Service costs do not always reflect service levels or efficiency, so the study also compares service outcomes like crime rates, fire response and pavement condition. Eight cities were chosen for comparison to San Luis Obispo (population 45,500) by the City Council: 1. Davis (66,500) 2. Monterey (28,300) 3. Napa (77,900) 4. Palm Springs (45,700) 5. Santa Barbara (89,700) 6. Santa Cruz (62,400) 7. Santa Maria (100,300) 8. Paso Robles (30,500) The comparison cities are from the same set used in the 2006 Benchmark Study with the exception of Paso Robles replacing Ventura. The objective is to provide a snapshot of how San Luis Obispo measures up to similar cities in California. The study also provides the opportunity to evaluate San Luis Obispo’s revenue sources in comparison with costs, services and community priorities. 1. Summary of Results The City’s financial operations had lower than average operating costs and debt levels. In some categories, such as fire service, being below average on costs is especially significant given service level differences among benchmark cities. Santa Maria does not provide advanced life support (paramedic) services, and Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz, and Napa do not provide advanced life support by all emergency response crews. Only San Luis Obispo and Paso Robles provide this service by all emergency response crews. The provision of advanced life support services increases costs related to personnel, training, administration, and equipment, and approximately 70% of San Luis Obispo’s fire emergency response activities are for medical emergencies. Comparison of service outcomes reveals that San Luis Obispo is among the safest communities in terms of violent crime and fire emergencies. San Luis Obispo’s pavement condition index - an B1 - 5 FRP, Benchmark Study, and Dashboards Page 6 indicator of street quality - is among the best of the benchmark cities (only Santa Maria had a comparable rating). Staffing levels are consistent with benchmark cities as well, with San Luis Obispo hitting the median or slightly above in the staffing areas selected for comparison. Compensation was not reviewed as part of this analysis. A more detailed Compensation Benchmark Study is in progress that will be available to public and City Council in mid-August 2014. 2. Future Benchmarking Efforts While the Benchmark Study is a helpful resource, staff is looking forward to increasing transparency and accountability by making information such as this more readily available, and where appropriate, tied to measurements of performance or service outcomes. Traditional benchmark studies compare past practices of the City with other cities, but there is also value in measuring the City’s performance based on progress towards meeting future goals and objectives. The following includes a discussion of new tools available to cities to accomplish these objectives in a more timely, relevant, and useful way. Increasing Transparency and Accountability There is a broad spectrum of tools available to cities to increase transparency and accountability and engage the public. Some leverage new and innovative technology while others involve face to face meetings and communication. It is important to have a clear understanding of the purpose behind any transparency and accountability efforts in order to inform the appropriate set of tools to use. International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Spectrum of Public Participation B1 - 6 FRP, Benchmark Study, and Dashboards Page 7 The International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Spectrum of Public Participation provides a useful framework for understanding the different purposes for engaging with the public. In this model, proper identification of the purpose drives the approach selected. 1. Transparency Many cities are utilizing new ways to increase community members’ access to information. Some cities opt to post a wide variety of information or data directly on the city’s website. This is known as an “open data portal.” This approach allows community members to browse various data sets, create different visualizations for the data and even download the data for their own analysis. In some cases, this data has even been used by volunteers or private companies to create applications for the community. While still a relatively new concept, open data portals and corresponding open data policies for public agencies have grown significantly in popularity over the past several years. Another approach to increasing transparency focuses specifically on financial data. A number of tools are available to reimagine the information currently presented in budget books and spreadsheets and translate them into interactive charts, graphs and other visualizations. These tools allow community members to get a broad view of how money is spent in a given area while also providing the ability to drill down into individual categories for greater detail. Similar to an open data portal, these tools typically allow the public to download the raw budget data for their own analysis as well. Implementation of an online financial tracking tool to increase transparency is often a useful first step for cities as this data is usually more readily available than other data sets. Attachment 3 is a report from the California Civic Innovation Project that provides more background specifically with respect to online approaches to increase transparency while also relating the tools back to the purpose for the engagement. There are also sample metrics to assess the success of the effort. 2. Accountability Similar to transparency efforts, there are number of approaches and tools available to aid in demonstrating accountability to the public. One approach is the creation of dashboards to display metrics on the effectiveness of City programs and services. Dashboards are intended to be user friendly tools for condensing and displaying performance measures in an easily understandable format. They should provide a quick and comprehensive overview of an organization’s status and overall direction. They can also provide appropriate indicators for warning if a metric or service area is not performing to the target. What does a dashboard give the public and Council that any number of other reporting formats doesn’t already accomplish? The answer is that the public and Council generally do not need more reports or more information. What they do need is more meaning — and the dashboard is one practical tool for conveying meaning directly and succinctly. Therefore, the key to successful implementation of dashboards as an accountability tool is to identify the correct set of measures that create meaning for the intended audience. Department managers, executive staff and the public may each require a different set of metrics dependent on B1 - 7 FRP, Benchmark Study, and Dashboards Page 8 their needs. A public dashboard could consist of measures associated with community values or progress on Major City Goals. A dashboard for a department manager or executive staff could contain information on workload statistics and length of time to resolve issues. Dashboards are really a method by which an organization and its constituents can more easily and frequently view and interact with its performance measurement system. What is less important is the look and feel of the dashboard, but rather the process of deciding what to measure. Once complete, however, dashboards can help the public and Council focus their attention on what matters most in the City, and, in doing so, gain greater insight and attribute greater meaning to other available data. Attachment 4 is a sample of from the International City County Management Center for Performance Measurement of metrics used by a number of cities to measure performance. This is intended only to be illustrative of the variety of measures available. Also, several examples of public dashboards were included in the agenda packet for the May 20th, 2014 City Council meeting. 3. Getting Started Getting started with the right approach is key to the success of implementing new systems to measure performance and provide access to data. In speaking with jurisdictions that have jumped into the pool without testing the water, most suggest spending time at the outset learning what information the community would find most useful. To get staff started in the right direction, the City Council may direct staff to do the following: A. Compile existing performance measures and datasets that are currently tracked at the department level, and included in various reports, to begin creating the framework for a citywide performance measurement system that can provide data to populate dashboards. B. Begin conducting community outreach to determine what datasets and performance measures will be most useful in creating a dashboard for the public. In addition, staff is currently working on a Public Engagement and Noticing Manual, to be approved by the City Council, which will identify best management practices, tools and strategies that employees can use to enhance community engagement efforts. The Manual will help increase transparency and improve accountability by refining expectations for citizen involvement in local government decisions. FISCAL IMPACT There is no direct impact associated with the recommendations included in this report. However, over the long term implementation of a Fiscal Responsibility Philosophy is intended to have a positive fiscal impact. Staff is in the process of researching costs associated with the development of dashboards and other tools to enhance transparency and accountability. Improving access to City data online is expected to have initial start-up costs, and ongoing annual costs when implemented, including B1 - 8 FRP, Benchmark Study, and Dashboards Page 9 the potential for a significant amount of staff time to be dedicated to the project. These costs will range from low to high depending on the scale of project desired by the Council and the community. ALTERNATIVES The items recommended in this report are intended to be responsive to Council direction and community input as the Council considers whether or not to place a measure on the general election ballot that would seek voter approval for an extension of the City’s half-cent local sales tax. The Council has full discretion over these items, and may provide different direction than recommended. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Fiscal Responsibility Philosophy 2. 2014 Benchmark Study: Measuring Our Performance, a Fiscal Comparison with Selected Benchmark Cities 3. Public Pathways – A Guide to Online Engagement Tools for Local Governments 4. ICMA Sample Performance Measures t:\council agenda reports\2014\2014-06-17\measure y update (codron)\revenuemeasure-4(car).docx B1 - 9 Attachment 1 R ______ RESOLUTION NO. ( Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ADOPTING ITS FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY PHILOSOPHY WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo strives to provide excellent service to the community at all times, and believes fiscal responsibility is a means for promoting community health and well-being; and WHEREAS, the City has a robust financial planning process with a strong foundation of citizen input and sound fiscal policies to ensure a balanced budget; and WHEREAS, the City has used its fiscal health contingency plan as a means to proactively reduce the negative impacts of economic downturns; and, WHEREAS, the City regularly examines its cost and revenue drivers and presents updated fiscal forecasts to Council; and, WHEREAS, the City recognizes that personnel costs represent a significant portion of the City’s total expenditures and, as such, adopted a Compensation Philosophy and continues to monitor, report, and propose means to effectively manage those costs; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that the City’s fiscal responsibility philosophy is adopted as follows: SECTION 1. The City is committed to fiscal responsibility through good economic times as well as economic downturns. SECTION 2. Fiscal responsibility is the balanced approach to providing the infrastructure, maintenance, and services that preserve and enhance the quality of life in our community, as identified and prioritized through community input. SECTION 3. In achieving and maintaining fiscal responsibility, the City commits to the following: A. Informed Decision-making. The City will identify and consider immediate and long-term economic, social, and environmental impacts of all decisions presented to Council. B. Shared responsibility. The City recognizes a shared responsibility between the employee and employer to appropriately fund employee benefits, including pension benefits. Ensuring an appropriate balance is a valuable tool in attracting and retaining well qualified employees that deliver services to the community. C. Increased Transparency. The City will conduct all business, including labor negotiations and other employee compensation matters, with transparency pursuant to all applicable laws and regulations. The City will continue to develop tools, such as key measures and dashboards that make information readily available to community members in a timely and useful manner. B1 - 10 Resolution No. _______________ (2014 Series) D. Aligned Investments. The City shall allocate resources in alignment with community needs and priorities for maintaining and/or adding capital projects or services. E. Diversified and Aligned Revenue Sources. The City will pursue diversified revenue sources that are aligned with expenditures and community priorities. F. Reduced Unfunded Liabilities. The City will identify potential long-term unfunded liabilities in advance of Council direction and create, present, and implement plans to reduce current or unavoidable unfunded liabilities. Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________, and on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was adopted on . ____________________________________ Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: ____________________________________ Anthony Mejia, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick, City Attorney B1 - 11 M e a s u r i n g O u r Performanc e June 2 0 1 4 A Fiscal Comparison with Selected Benchmark Cities Attachment 2 B1 - 12 2 Measuring Our Performance A Fiscal Comparison with Selected Benchmark Cities PROJECT MANAGERS James David, Principal Analyst, Administration Kate Auslen, Administrative Assistant, Human Resources Ryan Betz, Analyst, Public Works CITY STAFF Katie Lichtig, City Manager Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager Steve Gesell, Police Chief Monica Irons, Human Resources Director Derek Johnson, Community Development Director Garret Olson, Fire Chief Wayne Padilla, Finance and Information Technology Director Shelly Stanwyck, Parks and Recreation Director Attachment 2 B1 - 13 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents INTRODUCTION 4 Factors that Affect Benchmark Comparisons FINANCIAL BENCHMARKS: RESOURCE COMPARISON 6 Chart 1: General Fund per Capita Chart 2: Sales Tax, Property Tax & Transient Occupancy Tax: Percent of Total General Fund Revenues Chart 3: Sales Tax Revenues per Capita Chart 4: Property Tax Revenues per Capita Chart 5: Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) Revenues per Capita Chart 6: Ratio of Fees to Total General Fund Revenues FINANCIAL BENCHMARKS: COST COMPARISON 8 Chart 7: Governmental Costs per Capita Chart 8: General Fund Operating Costs per Capita Chart 9: Percent of Governmental Costs that are Interest Payments Chart 10: General Fund Allocations to Public Safety Chart 11: General Fund Public Safety Costs per Capita Chart 12: General Fund Allocations for General Government FINANCIAL BENCHMARKS: STAFFING COMPARISON 10 Chart 13: Staffing from General Fund (per 1,000 residents) Chart 14: Sworn Police Staff (per 1,000 residents) Chart 15: Sworn Fire Staff (per 1,000 residents served) OTHER BENCHMARKS: SERVICE OUTCOMES 11 Chart 16: Violent Crimes (per 1,000 residents) Chart 17: Fire Calls for Service (per 1,000 residents) Chart 18: Pavement Condition Index SLO COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT SURVEY: SERVICE OUTCOMES 12 Chart 19: How would you rate the job being done by City officials in providing services to the City’s residents? Chart 20: How would you rate the job being done by City officials in managing City funds? Chart 21: How would you rate the City of San Luis Obispo as a place to live? CONCLUSION 14 Best Managment Practices Source Data Attachment 2 B1 - 14 4 INTRODUCTION The City Council of San Luis Obispo adopted a Major City Goal for fiscal health, which includes a task to prepare a benchmark study that helps illustrate how San Luis Obispo is doing by comparing it to other like cities across a number of performance measures. This benchmark study evaluates 2012-13 data on financial performance such as revenue diversity, expense allocation, staffing costs, and debt management. Service costs do not always reflect service levels or efficiency, so the study also compares service outcomes like crime rates, fire response and pavement condition. The results indicate that San Luis Obispo is close to the median on most comparisons. Eight cities were chosen for comparison to San Luis Obispo (population 45,500, General Fund $47M) by the City Council: 1. Davis (66,500, $40M) 2. Monterey (28,300, $59M) 3. Napa (77,900, $64M) 4. Palm Springs (45,700, $65M) 5. Santa Barbara (89,700, $100M) 6. Santa Cruz (62,400, $66M) 7. Santa Maria (100,300, $48M) 8. Paso Robles (30,500, $23M) The comparison cities are from the same set used in the 2006 Benchmark Study with the exception of Paso Robles replacing Ventura. Each selected city share many characteristics, including: 1. Full service city that provides a wide range of core services directly, including: police, fire, street maintenance, planning, and parks and recreation. 2. County seat or largest city in the nearby vicinity. 3. Distinct regional identity separate from a large metropolitan area. 4. Major employment, commercial, cultural and government urban center. 5. Quality of life community. 6. Mid-size city, with populations ranging from 30,000 to 100,000. 7. Implemented or re-authorized a sales tax measure during the past 10 years. 8. College community and/or major tourism. 9. Slow growth; between -0.5% and 1.5% population change from 2012 to 2013. The objective is to provide a snapshot of how San Luis Obispo measures up to similar cities in California. The study also provides the opportunity to evaluate San Luis Obispo’s revenue sources in comparison with costs, services and community priorities. FACTORS THAT AFFECT BENCHMARK COMPARISONS Accurately measuring benchmarks between San Luis Obispo and the selected cities can be a difficult task. Comparisons do not tell the entire story because every city differs on a variety of issues, including but not limited to: geography, daytime versus resident population, accounting methods, and fund management. Geography Fire service in San Luis Obispo is impacted by mountains, freeways, railroad tracks and other unique topographical features. To meet the ideal four minute fire response time, the City’s Fire Department has to maintain and staff four separate fire stations, which can inflate costs when compared to other cities with less challenging geography and/or less fire stations. Attachment 2 B1 - 15 5 INTRODUCTION Daytime Population San Luis Obispo’s resident population is approximately 45,000, but the City realizes a peak population of 75,000- 90,000 citizens expecting services during “normal business hours.” In addition, the peak daytime population of nearby Cal Poly is 25,000 citizens that are also covered by contract City services, including Fire Department emergency response service 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Accounting Methods Every city budgets and accounts for service costs differently. For example, some cities account for internal services like printing, fleet maintenance, insurance and information technology using “internal service funds”, which charge user departments for their services. Other cities (like San Luis Obispo) account for internal service costs in the General Fund and use a cost allocation plan in distributing costs to other departments and funds. For public services like paving, street lighting, or storm drain maintenance, some cities account for these services in separate special revenue or enterprise funds, while others account for them solely in their General Fund. The “General Fund” can be a relative term, and those cities that use separate funds to account for services that others account for in their General Fund may appear to have lower General Fund costs. Fund Management The services that cities provide can be divided into two major groups: governmental and enterprise. Governmental activities include: police, fire, capital projects, planning and building inspections, street maintenance, recreation and park maintenance. Governmental activities costs and cash balances are typically tracked using the General Fund, Capital Outlay Fund, and other miscellaneous funds like Debt Service or Special Revenue Funds. Enterprise activities are fee-for-service operations ranging from water services to international airports. Enterprise Funds vary widely which makes them difficult to compare statistically. The majority of financial comparisons provided in this benchmark study focus on governmental activities since they are more uniform across the sample cities and consistently reported in a city’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). The following sections compare data sets that are consistently reported and defined the same way among benchmark cities. Most information is from audited financial statements and records published in 2012-13. Service San Luis Obispo Davis MontereyNapa Palm Springs Santa Cruz Santa Barbara Santa Maria Paso Robles Water XX X XXXX Sewer XX XXXXX Parking X X XX TransitXX XX Golf XXXX Solid Waste X X XXX Stormwater X X Marina X X Airport X X X Cemetery X Presidio X Housing X Comparison of Enterprise Services provided by Benchmark Cities Attachment 2 B1 - 16 6 FINANCIAL BENCHMARKS: RESOURCE COMPARISON Chart 1: General Fund per Capita Cities typically have two major governmental funds: the General Fund and Capital Outlay Fund. Other minor governmental funds can include Special Revenue Funds, like a Business Improvement District, or Debt Service Funds. The size of San Luis Obispo’s General Fund per capita is the median among benchmark cities. It is primarily used for operating programs (84%), debt service (5%), and capital improvement plan (11%) expenditures. Chart 2: Sales Tax, Property Tax & Transient Occupancy Tax: Percent of Total General Fund Revenues Chart 3: Sales Tax Revenues per Capita 35%45%55%65%75%85%95% Paso Robles Palm Springs Napa Santa Barbara San Luis Obispo Santa Maria Davis Santa Cruz Monterey Sales tax, property tax and transient occupancy tax (TOT) account for at least 40% of total General Fund revenues in all benchmark cities. These top 3 revenues account for only 62% of San Luis Obispo’s General Fund revenues, which implies that there is a diverse revenue base. This financial risk management tool allows San Luis Obispo to weather changes in the economy better than other municipalities that rely on only a few revenues to make up most of the total revenue base. San Luis Obispo has the strongest sales tax revenues per capita. It is the City’s top revenue source; about one-third of total General Fund revenues. The majority of cities have a local add-on sales tax (Measure Y in San Luis Obispo) that generates local revenue (ranging 0.25% to 1.0% per dollar). San Luis Obispo’s strong sales tax revenues are due to its regional sales draw, tourism, and nearby student shoppers. According to a recent sales tax study, 72% of every dollar the City collects in sales tax is paid by non- residents.$50$150$250$350$450 San Luis Obispo Palm Springs Paso Robles Santa Cruz Santa Barbara Monterey Santa Maria Napa Davis $200$600$1,000$1,400$1,800$2,200$2,600 Monterey Palm Springs Santa Barbara Santa Cruz San Luis Obispo Napa Paso Robles Davis Santa Maria Attachment 2 B1 - 17 7 FINANCIAL BENCHMARKS: RESOURCE COMPARISON Chart 4: Property Tax Revenues per Capita San Luis Obispo’s property tax revenues per capita are in the lower percentile of benchmark cities. Proposition 13, adopted by California voters in 1978, limits the amount of annual growth in assessed values to a maximum of 2% per year. This makes property tax a relatively static revenue source that grows slowly as ownerships change and new property values are assessed. Chart 5: Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) Revenues per Capita Chart 6: Ratio of Fees to Total General Fund Revenues TOT revenue is largely generated by visitors staying in hotels, which can indicate which cities have strong tourist economies. TOT is specialized because it focuses on one part of a local economy: tourism. It is not as broad-based as sales tax. Significant TOT rate increases would be needed to generate the same amount of revenue as a general sales tax; San Luis Obispo’s TOT rate would have to go from 10% to 21.9% to equal revenue from Measure Y. Significant increases to TOT could create a competitive disadvantage in the local market. A comparison of how much General Fund revenue is generated by service fees like building permits and business licenses. Increasing cost recovery through service charges is a local City Council decision, and has historically been part of San Luis Obispo’s budget-balancing strategy. However, fees should never exceed the actual total cost of providing services. San Luis Obispo is completing a new fee study in 2014 to ensure that fees are appropriate. $0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 Palm Springs Paso Robles Santa Barbara Napa Monterey Santa Cruz San Luis Obispo Davis Santa Maria $0$100$200$300$400$500 Monterey Palm Springs Santa Barbara Napa San Luis Obispo Paso Robles Santa Cruz Davis Santa Maria 0%5%10%15%20%25% Paso Robles Palm Springs Napa San Luis Obispo Santa Maria Santa Cruz Davis Santa Barbara Monterey Attachment 2 B1 - 18 8 FINANCIAL BENCHMARKS: COST COMPARISON Chart 7: Governmental Costs per Capita Governmental activities include costs for police, fire, planning, building inspections, capital projects, recreation and parks maintenance, and general government. All of the benchmark cities provide these essential services. Enterprise operations (fee for service) costs are not included in this comparison. What cities choose to include in enterprise operations varies widely making it a difficult cost category to evaluate. Chart 8: General Fund Operating Costs per Capita The General Fund is the primary operating fund for most cities. It is used for essential services (e.g. public safety, maintenance), but does not include other governmental activities like capital purchases and construction projects. Most cities maintain a separate Capital Outlay Fund for these costs. When compared to Chart 7, a significant difference may indicate a good portion of costs are non-operating expenses. Palm Springs’ governmental costs are about $1000 per capita more than its General Fund costs, which may indicate heavy investment in capital and/or non-essential services. $200$600$1,000$1,400$1,800$2,200$2,600 Santa Maria Davis Napa Paso Robles San Luis Obispo Santa Cruz Santa Barbara Palm Springs Monterey $200$600$1,000$1,400$1,800$2,200$2,600 Monterey Palm Springs Santa Barbara Santa Cruz San Luis Obispo Napa Paso Robles Davis Santa Maria Chart 9: Percent of Governmental Costs that are Interest Payments A comparison of how much interest benchmark cities pay on long-term debt. Cities use debt financing for long-term investments such as a fire station. Costs for debt obligations constrain available resources. 2.1% of San Luis Obispo’s governmental costs are interest payments on long-term debt, which is the median, and about 5% below benchmark cities on the high end of the spending range. 0%1%2%3%4%5%6%7%8% Paso Robles Palm Springs Santa Cruz Davis San Luis Obispo Napa Santa Maria Monterey Santa Barbara Attachment 2 B1 - 19 9 FINANCIAL BENCHMARKS: COST COMPARISON Chart 11: General Fund Public Safety Costs per Capita Breakdown: San Luis Obispo’s police service cost per capita is $308, and fire service cost per capita is $191. This is close to median for both. San Luis Obispo’s Fire Department is unique because it is under contract to serve an area beyond the City boundaries; Cal Poly campus. The total “per capita” number for fire service costs was increased in Chart 11 by the number of beds on campus (6,500) to present a more accurate ratio of public safety costs per total residents served. 35%40%45%50%55%60%65% Santa Maria Paso Robles Santa Barbara Davis Napa Santa Cruz San Luis Obispo Monterey Palm Springs Public safety costs for police and fire services are the most significant General Fund allocations in San Luis Obispo, accounting for about 51% of general operating costs. When compared to the eight benchmark cities, San Luis Obispo is below the median (53%). Breakdown: San Luis Obispo’s public safety allocation is 30% Police and 21% Fire. This allocation ratio is consistent with most benchmark cities. The exceptions are Santa Maria (larger allocation to police) and Monterey (same allocation for both). Chart 10: General Fund Allocations to Public Safety $0 $250 $500 $750$1,000 Monterey Santa Barbara Palm Springs Santa Cruz San Luis Obispo Napa Paso Robles Davis Santa Maria Chart 12: General Fund Allocations for General Government 5%10%15%20%25%30% Napa Santa Cruz San Luis Obispo Palm Springs Santa Maria Davis Santa Barbara Monterey Paso Robles General government costs include staffing and resources that support all governmental activities. Examples include City Manager, Attorney, Clerk, Human Resources, Facilities Maintenance, Finance, and Information Technology. General government costs may also support enterprise activities. San Luis Obispo adopted a cost allocation plan that reimburses General Fund from Enterprise Funds for administrative support costs. The numbers shown in this chart for San Luis Obispo are net totals after reimbursements. $0 $250 $500 $750 $1,000 Monterey Santa Barbara Palm Springs Santa Cruz San Luis Obispo Napa Paso Robles Davis Santa Maria Attachment 2 B1 - 20 10 Chart 14: Sworn Police Staff (per 1,000 residents) Chart 15: Sworn Fire Staff (per 1,000 residents served) Chart 13: Staffing from General Fund (per 1,000 residents) FINANCIAL BENCHMARKS: STAFFING COMPARISON1 Chart 13 compares the number of regular authorized General Fund staff positions across all benchmark cities. NOTE: Compensation costs associated with staffing are not included in this study because a more detailed Compensation Benchmark Study is in progress that will be available to public and City Council in mid- August 2014. Please check slocity.org for this comprehensive comparison of salary and benefits, including a breakdown of employer versus employee healthcare contributions. Police staff are a subset of General Fund staffing. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the average number of sworn police officers per 1,000 residents is 1.8 for cities with a population between 25,000 and 100,000. San Luis Obispo has approximately 1.3 police staff per 1,000 residents (and has an even lower ratio if daytime population is considered). NOTE: Palm Springs and Davis do not report sworn police staffing numbers. Fire staff are also a subset of General Fund staffing. San Luis Obispo’s Fire Department is unique because it is under contract to serve an area beyond the City boundaries; Cal Poly campus. The total number of “residents” was increased in Chart 15 by the number of beds on campus (6,500) to present a more accurate ratio of sworn fire staff per total residents served. 2468 101214 Monterey Davis Santa Barbara Paso Robles San Luis Obispo Palm Springs Santa Cruz Napa Santa Maria 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Monterey Santa Barbara Paso Robles Santa Cruz San Luis Obispo Santa Maria Napa 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 Monterey Santa Barbara Palm Springs Paso Robles San Luis Obispo Santa Cruz Napa Davis Santa Maria 1 Compensation costs associated with staffing are not included in this study because a more detailed Compensation Benchmark Study is in progress that will be available in mid-August 2014. Please check slocity.org for this comprehensive comparison of salary and benefits, including a breakdown of employer versus employee healthcare contributions. Attachment 2 B1 - 21 11 OTHER BENCHMARKS: SERVICE OUTCOMES Chart 16: Violent Crimes (per 1,000 residents) According to the FBI, San Luis Obispo is one of the safest benchmark cities in terms of violent crime; murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery and aggravated assault. However, the FBI also reports that incidences of property crime in San Luis Obispo are the third-highest of all benchmark cities (Santa Cruz and Palm Springs are higher). This is one factor that led to an increased focus on Neighborhood Wellness and Downtown patrols. Two additional Downtown officers have been funded by San Luis Obispo’s Measure Y sales tax. Chart 17: Fire Calls for Service (per 1,000 residents) Chart 18: Pavement Condition Index Fire responses includes hazardous material spills, vehicle and vegetation fires, heavy rescues, structure fires and medical emergencies. San Luis Obispo’s low number of responses indicates that proactive fire prevention activities are working well. San Luis Obispo’s Fire Department is unique because it serves an area beyond the City boundaries; Cal Poly campus. The total number of “residents” was increased in Chart 23 by the number of beds on campus (6,500) to present a more accurate representation of fire responses per responsibility area. The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is a National standard on a 0-100 scale that indicates the quality of a city’s pavement. Generally the scale is: 100-70 Good/ Excellent; 50-70 At Risk; 0-50 Poor/Failed. The California Statewide Local Roads Needs Assessment concludes the average California road PCI is 66 (San Luis Obispo was 72). San Luis Obispo’s “Good/ Excellent” rating is directly related to the annual average pavement investment from Measure Y sales tax revenues. 50.0 100.0150.0200.0250.0 Monterey Palm Springs Santa Maria Santa Barbara Santa Cruz Paso Robles Napa San Luis Obispo Davis 40.050.060.070.080.090.0 Santa Maria San Luis Obispo Paso Robles Santa Barbara Davis Santa Cruz Monterey 0.02.04.06.08.010.0 Santa Cruz Santa Maria Palm Springs Monterey Santa Barbara Paso Robles Napa San Luis Obispo Davis Attachment 2 B1 - 22 12 SLO COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT SURVEY: SERVICE OUTCOMES Chart 20: How would you rate the job being done by City officials in managing City funds? In early December 2013, San Luis Obispo conducted a Community Assessment and Ballot Measure Issues Survey. The survey included community assessment questions for the purpose of tracking opinions over time on key issues to better understand if the City is “headed in the right direction.” Chart 25 is a repetitive question posed to the community over time. The trending response is that the City is doing an excellent/good job providing services to residents. Chart 19: How would you rate the job being done by City officials in providing services to the City’s residents? Chart 21: How would you rate the City of San Luis Obispo as a place to live? Chart 26 is a repetitive question posed to the community over time. The trending response is that the City is doing an excellent/good job managing City funds. Chart 27 is a repetitive question posed to the community over time. The trending response is that the City is an excellent place to live. More detailed results and key conclusions from the community assessment survey conducted by FM3 Associates are available at slocity.org. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% Excellent Good Fair Poor 2005 2006 2010 2011 2013 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Excellent Good Fair Poor 2005 2006 2010 2011 2013 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Excellent Good Fair Poor 2005 2006 2010 2011 2013 Attachment 2 B1 - 23 13 CONCLUSION San Luis Obispo residents are optimistic, confident in the management of their local government, and rate the level of service provided by City officials highly. This quality service and management is being delivered with revenues and costs that are close to the median when compared with the selected benchmark cities. The City’s financial operations had lower than average operating costs and debt levels. In some categories, such as fire service, being below average on costs is especially significant given service level differences among benchmark cities. Santa Maria does not provide advanced life support (paramedic) services, and Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz, and Napa do not provide advanced life support by all emergency response crews. Only San Luis Obispo and Paso Robles provide this service by all emergency response crews. The provision of advanced life support services increases costs related to personnel, training, administration, and equipment, and approximately 70% of San Luis Obispo’s fire emergency response activities are for medical emergencies. Comparison of service outcomes reveals that San Luis Obispo is among the safest communities in terms of violent crime and fire emergencies. San Luis Obispo’s pavement condition index - an indicator of street quality - is among the best of the benchmark cities (only Santa Maria had a comparable rating). Staffing levels are consistent with benchmark cities as well, with San Luis Obispo hitting the median or slightly above in the staffing areas selected for comparison. A more detailed Compensation Benchmark Study is in progress that will be available to public and City Council in mid-August 2014. San Luis Obispo was at the top of the benchmark range on one item: Sales Tax Revenue per Capita. This result indicates that sales tax is vital for delivering quality levels of service to the community. According to the 2013- 2015 City of San Luis Obispo Financial Plan, 37% of total General Fund revenue comes from sales tax, 15% from property tax, and 10% from TOT. A big portion of sales tax comes from a local revenue measure (Measure Y) that adds half-percent to the County sales tax rate. Measure Y generates $6.5 million annually or about 12% of total City Local Sales Tax Rate County Sales Tax Rate Add-On San Luis Obispo 8.00%7.50 % (San Luis Obispo County)0.50% Benchmark Cities Monterey 7.50%7.50 % (Monterey County)0.00% Napa 8.00%8.00 % (Napa County)0.00% Santa Barbara 8.00%8.00 % (Santa Barbara)0.00% Paso Robles 8.00%7.50 % (San Luis Obispo County)0.50% Davis 8.00%7.50 % (Yolo County)0.50% Santa Maria 8.25%8.00 % (Santa Barbara County)0.25% Santa Cruz 8.75%8.25 % (Santa Cruz County)0.50% Palm Springs 9.00%8.00 % (Riverside County)1.00% Other Cities in SLO County (Non-Benchmark) Atascadero 7.50%7.50 % (San Luis Obispo County)0.00% Arroyo Grande8.00%7.50 % (San Luis Obispo County)0.50% Grover Beach 8.00%7.50 % (San Luis Obispo County)0.50% Morro Bay 8.00%7.50 % (San Luis Obispo County)0.50% Pismo Beach 8.00%7.50 % (San Luis Obispo County)0.50% Comparison of 2013 Sales Tax Rates Attachment 2 B1 - 24 14 General Fund revenue in San Luis Obispo. 5 out of 8 benchmark cities also have add-on local sales tax measures, and four out of the remaining five cities in San Luis Obispo County do as well. All of the three benchmark cities without a local sales tax measure (Monterey, Napa, Santa Barbara) generate more revenue from property tax and TOT than San Luis Obispo. Measure Y has been in effect for seven years now and is set to expire in March 2015. Renewal would maintain the current sales tax rate of 8%. More information on Measure Y, including expenditures, public feedback, and timelines, is available at slocity.org. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Beyond benchmark comparisons, it is prudent to evaluate whether San Luis Obispo is implementing general best management practices (BMPs) for local governments. The City has adopted and implemented many BMPs for financial management, including: 1. Multi-year budgeting 2. Long-term fiscal forecasts 3. Integration of goal-setting into the budget process 4. Development of fiscal contingency plans 5. Use of generally accepted accounting principles and audits by independent certified public accountants 6. Effective ongoing monitoring of our financial condition 7. Long-term capital improvement plans 8. Use of comprehensive fiscal policies as the foundation for decision-making Many of these BMPs come from Fitch Ratings (one of the “big three” national credit rating agencies), who has formally integrated them into their rating systems. The City recently received affirmation from Fitch Ratings that City bond ratings are “AA” and “AA+”, and the rating outlook is stable. Fitch Ratings’ long term credit ratings are assigned on an alphabetic scale from AAA to D. The bond rating AA means that the City’s investment grade is “quality”. In reaching its decision, Fitch Ratings’ analysts noted factors that lead to their conclusion including (1) active budget monitoring by the City Council and staff, (2) comprehensive financial policies, and (3) the use of long-term budget planning to provide a solid framework for managing through unexpected budgetary challenges during the economic downturn. SOURCE DATA Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2003. Law Enforcement and Management Administrative Statistics Survey. California Department of Finance Demographic Research Unit. 2013. Population Data. California Polytechnic State University. 2014. Cal Poly Quick Facts. http://calpoly.edu. California Statewide Local Roads Needs Assessment. 2013. http://www.savecaliforniastreets.org. Cities of Davis, Monterey, Napa, Palm Springs, El Paso de Robles, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz, Santa Maria, San Luis Obispo. June 2012. Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports and Budget Documents. Federal Bureau of Investigations. 2012. Uniform Crime Reports. Fitch Ratings. 2014. https://fitchratings.com. FM3 Associates. 2013. City of San Luis Obispo Community Assessment and Ballot Measure Issues Survey. Strategic Economics. 2013. San Luis Obispo Retail Sales Analysis. CONCLUSION For questions or comments on this benchmark study, please contact James David, City of San Luis Obispo Administration, (805) 781-7151 or jdavid@slocity.org. Attachment 2 B1 - 25 Public Pathways A"Guide"to"Online"Engagement"Tools"for"Local"Governments" " Alissa Black and Bita Neyestani, California Civic Innovation Project January 2014 Introduction" The"technology"is"available."Residents"are"using"it"to"self> organize"neighborhood"groups."Non>profits"are"using"it"to" campaign"for"causes."Even"so,"municipalities"have"been" slow"to"adopt"online"tools"to"advance"civic"engagement." The"challenge"does"not"lie"with"the"tools;"it"lies"with"the" value"placed"on"engaging"the"public." " Engaging"the"public"can"be"a"time"intensive"and"costly" endeavor,"conditions"that"online"engagement"tools"do"not" entirely"alleviate."However,"online"tools,"or"engagement" opportunities"available"through"the"use"of"a"computer,"can" make"informing"the"public"and"involving"residents"in"the" early"stages"of"a"project,"through"input"and"decision> making,"more"productive."Online"engagement"might" require"city"resources"to"be"dedicated"to"facilitating"the" exchange"of"ideas"on"an"ideation"platform,"responding"to" questions"or"suggestions"sent"via"text"messaging,"or" establishing"collaborative"communication"with"residents" around"community"issues."In"all"cases,"the"tools"require" government"participation."Cities"that"are"not"currently" using"online"tools"to"engage"the"public"are"often"challenged" by"resource"constraints,"including"staff"time"and"technical" skills." " Some"of"the"obstacles"to"civic"engagement"from"a" resident’s"perspective"might"include"time,"transportation," confidence"and"information,"all"of"which"can"also"be" reduced"through"the"use"of"online"tools"by"providing"users" an"opportunity"to"contribute"or"engage"when"it's"most" convenient"for"them."Additionally,"residents"who"have" access"to"the"internet"or"a"smartphone"are"able"to" participate"from"their"home,"or"just"about"anywhere." Online"tools"also"offer"the"advantage"of"allowing"residents" to"contribute"to"a"discussion"or"post"an"opinion"without" the"pressure"of"public"speaking."Some"engagement" platforms"also"offer"an"educational"component"so"that" users"begin"an"engagement"activity"informed."" " However,"there"are"also"drawbacks"to"online"tools."The" engagement"experience"can"look"and"feel"different"than" offline"engagement."For"example,"an"online"survey"asking" residents"to"choose"between"two"possible"community" development"plans"might"result"in"hundreds"of"thumbs>up" and"thumbs>down,"but"only"receive"a"handful"of"comments" explaining"why"one"option"was"selected"over"the"other." Online"tools"allow"varying"levels"of"engagement"for" residents."A"student"might"not"have"the"time"to"enter"his" own"idea"for"reducing"carbon"emissions,"but"he"may"take" the"time"to"scan"the"other"ideas"and"“like”"the"ones"that" sound"cool."On"the"other"hand,"a"community"member" active"in"carbon"reduction"programs"might"spend"a" significant"amount"of"time"adding"original"ideas"and" commenting"on"others."While"online"tools"reduce" significant"barriers"for"some,"there"are"residents"in"every" community"who"do"not"have"digital"access"or"literacy"to" engage"online."According"to"the"Pew"Research"Center,"15%" of"American"adults"ages"18"years"and"older"do"not"use"the" New America Foundation Attachment 3 B1 - 26 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 2 " internet"or"email,"making"offline"engagement"strategies" imperative"to"ensuring"inclusion"in"government"programs" and"services."The"goal"is"to"blend"online"and"offline" strategies"so"that"everyone"can"participate"in"ways"that"are" comfortable"and"accessible"to"them."" " Civic"engagement"is"a"loaded"term"and"one"that" encompasses"many"different"aspects"of"public"life."This" report"uses"a"broad"definition"of"civic"engagement">>"the" collective"work"of"individuals"and"civic"groups"directed"at" positive"community"change."This"report"is"meant"as"a" guide"for"government"staffers"wishing"to"develop"a"civic" engagement"strategy"for"a"standalone"project"or"their" entire"city."It"is"most"useful"if"the"purpose"for"the" engagement"is"already"determined."For"example,"a"county" might"want"to"inform"property"owners"of"new"laws" affecting"property"tax"payments."One"could"also"imagine"a" city"instituting"a"community"policing"policy"and"wanting"to" empower"the"public"to"determine"how"to"implement"it"for" their"neighborhoods."In"each"of"these"examples,"a" government"staffer"might"use"this"report"as"guidance"to" inform"a"strategy,"learn"about"online"tools"used"in"other" communities,"and"determine"how"to"measure"the"success" of"an"online"engagement." " As"an"organizational"concept"for"evaluating"online" engagement"tools,"this"report"modified"the"International" Association"of"Public"Participation’s"(IAP2)"Spectrum"of" Public"Participation,"a"five>point"continuum"of" participatory"processes:"inform,"consult,"involve," collaborate,"and"empower."The"modified"spectrum"used"in" this"report"was"also"informed"by"the"engagement" frameworks"presented"by"Matt"Leighninger"in"Using&Online& Tools&to&Engage&–&and&be&Engaged&by&–The&Public,"and"by" April"Manatt"in"Hear&Us&Now?:&A&California&Survey&of&Digital& Technology’s&Role&in&Civic&Engagement&and&Local& Government."Both"reports"categorize"online"engagement" tools"by"their"engagement"purposes."For"example," Leighninger"describes"tools"meeting"the"following" objectives:"collaborate,"survey"attitudes,"and"prioritize" options."Within"the"three"objectives,"online"tools"such"as" ideation"platforms,"wikis,"gaming,"mapping"and"shared" workspaces"are"discussed."Similarly,"Manatt’s"report" provided"a"tiered"framework"for"analyzing"various"online" tools,"distinguishing"between"the"various"levels"of" engagement"each"tool"provides."The"three"tiers"are" information"and"service,"service"and"engagement,"and" democratization"and"empowerment."These"tiers"move" along"a"spectrum"that"begins"with"information"and" concludes"with"empowerment,"very"much"aligned"with"the" IAP2"spectrum." " Framework"for"Evaluating"Online"Engagement" Tools" This"report"leverages"the"spectrum"concept"as"a"way"of" describing"how"tools"and"engagement"strategies"can"build" onto"one"another,"often"requiring"more"resources"as"they" become"more"collaborative."The"spectrum"begins"with" informing"the"public."Information,"when"provided"in"easy> to>understand"formats,"can"surface"issues,"describe"points> of>view,"and"aid"the"public"in"making"decisions,"allowing" for"deeper"engagement"opportunities." " Starting"at"one"end"and"moving"along"the"spectrum" illustrates"a"progression"or"deepening"of"civic"engagement." For"example,"informing"the"public,"the"first"strategy" presented,"is"typically"a"one>directional"form"of" communication"where"government"“pushes”"information" or"data"out"to"residents."Advancing"from"informing"to" collaborating"requires"a"feedback"loop,"whereby" government"is"not"only"“pushing”"information"out"to" residents,"but"also"receiving"information"from"them."As" one"moves"along"the"spectrum"the"engagement"strategies" shift"from"basic"engagement,"to"co>production"of"policies" and"programs,"to"government"as"a"platform"for"community" empowerment." " The"framework"outlined"in"the"table"on"the"following"page" is"offered"as"a"method"to"begin"thinking"about"how" governments"are"currently"engaging"the"public,"the" purpose"for"engagement"(at"a"project"or"city"wide"level)," and"a"roadmap"for"what’s"possible." Attachment 3 B1 - 27 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 3 " " " " " Online"Engagement"Spectrum" Engagement"Strategy"Description"Common"Tools" Inform'This"basic"level"of"engagement"is"critical"and"sometimes" overlooked"as"governments"strive"to"adopt"more"collaborative" engagement"strategies."Providing"information"about"issues," services,"meetings,"decisions,"and"policies"in"a"timely"and"easy> to>understand"manner"requires"staff"time,"and"in"some"cases" coordination"across"multiple"departments."Ensuring"that" accurate"and"relevant"information"is"provided"to"the"public"can" lead"to"more"engaged"residents"because"transparency" generates"greater"trust"in"government,"and"the"public"will"be" better"informed"about"upcoming"opportunities"to"engage"and" better"understand"the"issues"being"raised." • websites" • info>graphics" • multi>media"(video,"images)" • simulators" Consult'One"of"the"most"recent"online"engagement"strategies"used"by" governments"is"to"crowdsource"ideas"and"seek"public"input"into" proposed"policies"or"programs."This"trend"of"using"online"tools" to"gauge"public"opinion,"or"to"identify"creative"solutions"to"a" pressing"community"problem"requires"multi>directional" communication."When"implementing"tools"to"consult"with"the" public,"government"must"be"responsive"to"comments,"ideas,"and" feedback." • ideation"platforms" • social"media">"when"used"to" exchange"ideas"and" comments" • citizen"reporting"apps" Cooperate'This"strategy"requires"continual"collaboration"with"the"public" throughout"the"life"of"a"project,"decision,"or"policy."Not"only"is" the"public"involved"in"decision>making,"but"also"residents"are" involved"in"exploring"alternatives"and"implementing"solutions." This"form"of"engagement"differs"from"the"“consulting”"strategy" because"it"requires"government"not"only"to"consult"with"the" public,"but"also"to"collaborate"with"residents"on"the"solution." • wikis" • collaborative"writing" platforms" • mapping"tools" Empower'The"community"is"a"resource"that"should"be"leveraged"by" government"to"solve"community"issues."By"empowering" residents"to"solve"local"issues,"and"by"placing"final"decision> making"and"implementation"in"the"hands"of"the"public," government"plays"a"supportive"role,"rather"than"a"lead"role." This"level"of"engagement"is"rare"because"it"requires" government"to"relinquish"responsibility"for"a"solution"and"trust" the"public"to"provide"it."Tools"that"connect"neighbors"or" support"peer>to>peer"networking"are"usually"a"community’s" way"of"empowering"itself"without"government"intervention." • Application"Programming" Interfaces"(API)" • community"planning"games" • neighborhood"networking" sites" . Attachment 3 B1 - 28 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 4 " Informing"the"Public" In"1994"the"White"House's"website"launched,"making" information"about"the"executive"branch"accessible"online." Now,"almost"20"years"later,"city"government"websites"are" an"essential"component"to"informing"the"public"about" policies,"events,"council"hearings,"and"services."The" advantage"of"sharing"information"online"is"that"it"does"not" have"to"remain"static;"a"number"of"cities"are"now"providing" real>time"data"and"information"to"their"residents"via" government"websites."This"stage"of"engagement"is"critical" because"higher"levels"of"knowledge"are"statistically" significantly"associated"with"more"civic"engagement," according"to"a"recent"study"published"by"researchers"at" Sacramento"State"University1.""In"addition,"most"municipal" governments"have"the"resources"to"maintain"a"basic" website,"but"their"ability"to"offer"a"more"robust" engagement"platform"may"be"constrained." " Engaging"Content" Some"programs"require"informing"the"public"beyond" posting"static"information"on"a"city"website."For"example," when"a"program"requires"understanding"complex" information"or"policies,"utilizing"video"to"provide" information"in"an"easy"to"understand"format"can"be"an" effective"strategy."Los"Angeles"County's"Flood"Control" District"created"a"short"illustrated"video"to"explain" sedimentation"and"flood"control"tactics"used"throughout" the"county."The"goal"was"to"educate"the"public"about" sedimentation,"a"process"with"which"most"residents"are" not"familiar.""The"project"aimed"to"reduce"public" apprehension"toward"flood"control"policies."" "" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" 1"Barker,"Nalder"et"al."(2013)."Civic&Engagement&and&Local& Fiscal&Attitudes:&2013&Survey&of&Californians."Retrieved" from"Sacramento"State"University."" " " " " " " " " " " " " Image"1:"Los"Angeles"County"Flood"Control"District's"YouTube"video"on"sedimentation." Video"production"might"be"beyond"the"resources"available" in"some"cities."So,"some"alternative"ways"to"develop" engaging"content"include"ensuring"the"content"is"accurate," easy"to"understand,"includes"images,"and"is"easily" searchable."Government"information"and"data"can"also" become"more"engaging"by"utilizing"gaming"as"a"way"of" educating"the"public"about"a"specific"set"of"topics,"like"city" budgets"or"zoning"requirements."The"State"of"California" and"the"City"of"Los"Angeles"used"a"game"developed"by"Next" 10.""Entitled"the"California"Budget"Challenge,"the"game"is" designed"to"provide"the"users"(residents)"with"information" about"the"government"entity’s"budget,"and"then"challenges" users"to"balance"the"budget."The"act"of"balancing"the" budget"requires"that"the"user"make"tradeoffs," understanding"that"a"decrease"in"taxes"will"result"in"less" money"that"might"go"to"other"government"services"like" education."This"budget"game"is"used"primarily"as"an" educational"tool"that"engages"the"public"through" simulating"real"tradeoffs"that"policy>makers"face"when" striving"for"a"balanced"budget." " " " " " " " " " Image"2:"Screenshot"of"California"Budget"Challenge." Attachment 3 B1 - 29 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 5 " Budgets"are"not"the"only"incomprehensible"municipal" document."Laws"can"be"extremely"challenging"to"read"and" comprehend"because"they"are"not"written"in"easy>to> understand"language."It"can"be"hard"to"find"specific"and" relevant"laws"because"most"ordinances"are"provided"in" PDFs"(portable"document"format)"that"do"not"allow"for" simple"document"searching."To"ease"the"burden"of"reading" complicated"laws"The"OpenGov"Foundation"built"a"tool" used"by"the"City"of"Baltimore"that"opens"law"to"everyone." BaltimoreCode.org"transforms"the"Baltimore"City"Charter" and"Code"from"unalterable,"often"hard>to>find"online"files" and"updates"them"into"user>friendly,"organized"and" modern"website"formats"in"accessible"language."The"goal" of"providing"more"accessible"law"is"to"add"clarity,"context," and"public"understanding"of"the"laws’"impact"on"Baltimore" citizens’"daily"lives."The"City"of"Baltimore"was"the"first"to" become"an"open"law"city,"but"other"cities"are"catching"up." San"Francisco"is"also"working"with"the"Foundation"and" residents"to"open"San"Francisco's"law"by"making"them"user" friendly." " Policymaking"is"another"area"where"simulators"and"games" can"help"residents"and"government"officials"to"better" understand"the"implications"and"impacts"of"policies."The" Commonwealth"of"Massachusetts"recently"partnered"with" a"civic"tech"company"to"launch"Outline.com,"debuting"in" January"2014."Outline"is"a"public"policy"simulator"that" helps"people"visualize"the"impact"that"public"policies,"such" as"health"care"reform"and"school"budget"changes,"will"have" on"local"economies"and"communities."While"this"tool"is" planned"for"use"at"the"state"level,"it"can"be"used"at"all"levels" of"government"to"inform"and"engage"residents"around" policies"that"impact"their"communities." " Data"and"Real>time"Information" Government,"like"private"industry,"is"powered"by"data." Every"service,"transaction,"legislation,"and"council"hearing" generates"data"that"is"useful"to"the"public"and"government." When"thinking"about"civic"engagement,"data"offers" transparency"around"government"operations."As"open"data" takes"hold"of"government"at"every"level,"it"is"important"for" local"government"to"shift"from"simply"making"it"“open”"to" understanding"how"to"use"it"as"an"engagement"tool."For" example,"the"City"of"Palo"Alto"publishes"its"budget"data" online"via"the"Open"Budget"website."The"site"contains"raw" data,"which"is"most"useful"to"software"developers," journalists"and"others"who"know"how"to"manipulate"data." In"addition,"the"site"features"charts"and"graphs"that"make"it" easier"for"residents"to"understand"how"the"city"spends"and" receives"money." " " " " " " " Image"3:"Screenshot"of"the"City"of"Palo"Alto’s"Open"Budget"platform." Open"data"is"another"form"of"engaging"content,"it"can"be" offered"in"the"rawest"format,"via"data"feeds,"or"it"can"be" visualized"into"graphs"and"maps"to"make"it"easier"for" residents"to"understand."In"the"same"way"that"informed" residents"are"likely"more"engaged"residents,"open"data" aids"in"keeping"residents"informed."For"more"information" on"developing"an"open"data"policy,"check"out"the"Sunlight" Foundation’s"Open"Data"Policy"Guidelines"and"a" subsequent"post"on"the"dos"and"don’ts"of"copying"and" pasting"boilerplate"open"data"language." " Open"Budget,"the"data"platform"used"to"provide" transparency"into"the"City"of"Palo"Alto’s"finances,"is"only" one"of"many"open"data"portals"used"throughout"the" country."Socrata’s"open"data"portal"powers"open"data"sites" at"the"federal"and"local"level,"including"Los"Angeles,"San" Francisco"and"Alameda"County"in"California."For"cities"like" Santa"Cruz,"California"and"Lexington,"Kentucky"it"was" important"to"adopt"an"open"source"product,"meaning"the" technology"can"be"used"without"any"license"fees"and" ensures"that"the"city"retain"all"rights"to"the"data"and" metadata"entered"into"the"portal."These"cities"opted"to"use" CKAN,"an"open"source"data"portal"developed"by"the"Open" Knowledge"Foundation."" Attachment 3 B1 - 30 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 6 " Getting Buy In According"to"the"City"of"Palo"Alto’s"Chief"Information" Officer,"Jonathan"Reichental,"PhD,"the"difficulty"with" establishing"a"platform"like"Open"Data"Palo"Alto"is" implementing"a"cultural"change"within"a"city"government."" He"stated"in"an"interview,"“the"technological"aspect"of" establishing"such"a"platform"is"not"as"difficult"as"one"would" imagine"and"once"you"begin"the"process"you"realize"it"has" value."In"addition,"the"cost"is"not"very"high"and"the" platform"can"be"up"in"a"few"weeks.""" " In"Dr."Reichental’s"opinion"implementing"open"data" transparency"is"the"right"thing"to"do,"not"just"for"Palo"Alto," but"for"all"agencies."He"believes,"“Open"Data"Palo"Alto"is"a" mindset,"a"philosophy,"a"technology,"a"process,"a"culture"–" there"are"many"aspects"to"it"that"you"have"to"consider.”"" " Dr."Reichenthal"provided"some"tips"for"government" staffers"undertaking"open"data"initiatives:" • Start%small">"There"is"no"need"to"make"all"the"city’s"data" available"at"once."Launch"with"what"is"available"and" commit"to"opening"more"data"over"time." • Tell%stories">"It"is"important"to"get"the"city"manager"and" city"council"on>board"and"a"good"way"to"do"that"is" through"telling"stories"about"how"other"cities"and" counties"have"been"successful." • Show%benefits">"When"first"launching"an"open"data" program"there"won’t"be"benefits"to"tout"so"use"evidence" from"the"federal"government’s"open"data"program"that" has"been"underway"for"almost"five"years."It"is"also" important"to"demonstrate"benefit"to"the"public,"and"Palo" Alto"found"that"once"the"city"embraced"open"data"the" community"also"got"behind"it." • Go%for%it!% " Taking"open"data"even"one"step"further,"providing"access" to"real>time"information"and"data"can"be"a"powerful"tool"to" engaging"the"public"and"keeping"them"informed."Real>time" data"is"practical"when"the"data"are"changing"constantly," like"public"transportation"departure"and"arrival"times."But" real>time"information"can"also"be"critical"when"responding" to"disasters"and"emergencies,"like"providing"up>to>date" information"on"evacuation"center"locations"during"a" hurricane"or"providing"real>time"information"regarding" public"safety"during"an"emergency."" " “Open"Data"Palo"Alto"is"a"mindset,"a" philosophy,"a"technology,"a"process,"a"culture" –"there"are"many"aspects"to"it"that"you"have" to"consider.”" " For"cities"and"towns"that"lack"the"technical"resources"or" skills"to"develop"an"open"data"portal,"most"of"the"examples" listed"in"this"guide"are"offered"by"civic"technology"firms"as" subscription>based"services"with"minimal"technical" requirements"from"government"administrators."As"the"City" of"Palo"Alto’s"Chief"Information"Officer"stated,"the" technology"is"the"easy"part;"it’s"the"process,"culture,"and" mindset"changes"that"will"present"the"biggest"hurdles." Making"open"data"work"requires"persistence,"strong" leadership,"resources,"a"concrete"transparency"vision,"and" a"strong"commitment"to"making"open"data"a"part"of"the" city"or"county’s"civic"engagement"plan." " As"an"additional"way"of"informing"the"public"via"real>time" data,"a"number"of"cities,"like"Fresno,"California,"broadcast" hearings"live"from"City"Council"chambers"and"provide" recordings"of"council"meetings"through"a"video"archive." Even"some"smaller"cities,"like"Watsonville,"California," provide"audio"recordings"of"council"meetings"for"residents" who"are"not"able"to"attend"meetings"in"person." ChicagoCouncilmatic.org,"a"tool"built"by"OpenCity"and" currently"used"in"Chicago,"allows"users"to"search,"browse," subscribe"and"comment"on"everything"Chicago’s"City" Council"has"done"since"2011"using"data"scraped"from" Chicago’s"Legislative"Information"Center."While"a"local" government"might"not"launch"a"Councilmatic"site"for"its" city,"determining"the"best"method"for"releasing"data,"as" Attachment 3 B1 - 31 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 7 " well"as"the"frequency"and"format"of"that"data,"are" important"considerations."" " Consulting"with"the"Public"for"Ideas"or" Advice" In"existing"local"governance"structures"there"is"typically"an" opportunity"to"consult"with"the"public"and"gather"resident" input"at"public"forums,"council"hearings,"and"town"hall" events."While"face>to>face"engagement"is"an"essential"part" of"any"government"engagement"strategy,"oftentimes"those" forums">>"particularly"council"hearings">>"do"not"allow"for" the"sharing"of"ideas"at"early"stages"of"a"project"or"while" defining"the"problem."Most"often"members"of"the"public" are"invited"to"speak"for"three"minutes"each"during"a" hearing"in"which"a"final"decision"to"adopt"or"reject"a"policy" is"being"considered."Using"online"engagement"tools"has"the" advantage"of"making"it"easier"to"engage"the"public"at" earlier"stages"in"the"decision>making"process."" " For"example,"an"ideation"platform,"or"a"website"that"allows" residents"to"submit"ideas"to"their"local"government," engages"residents"in"the"early"idea"formation"stages"of"a" policy"or"project,"as"opposed"to"collecting"comments"at"the" end"of"the"process"during"a"council"hearing"where"the" public"input"options"are"either"“for”"or"“against”"the" proposed"action."Online"and"SMS"based"tools"also"reduce" some"of"the"barriers"to"participation,"like"transportation"to" meetings,"childcare,"time"constraints,"and"other" inconveniences"common"to"meetings"held"during"business" hours"at"government"offices."However,"there"are"also"a" number"of"drawbacks"to"these"tools."In"some"cases," residents"who"participate"online"juggle"multiple"tasks,"or" fail"to"“listen”"to"others’"opinions"in"the"forum"or" discussion."In"other"cases,"residents"may"not"have"enough" supporting"information"to"make"an"informed"contribution."" Still,"local"governments"ought"to"weigh"these" disadvantages"against"the"possibility"of"engaging"new," sometimes"hard>to>reach"groups."One"government"staffer" told"us"that"in"his"experience,"online"engagement"tools" attract"people"who"may"not"attend"an"in>person"event,"and" can"open"up"the"discussion"to"those"with"more"moderate" viewpoints,"as"opposed"to"the"narrow"interests"that"often" consume"council"hearings." " Social Media as an Engagement Tool Social"media"can"be"a"strategic"tool"for"cities"providing" real>time"information"to"the"public."A"large"majority"of" cities"use"Facebook"and"Twitter"not"only"to"provide" information"to"the"public,"but"also"to"respond"to"comments" or"tweets"directed"at"them."But"information"provided" through"Facebook"and"Twitter"require"residents"to"have" accounts"with"those"companies,"so"it"is"important"for" government"to"identify"additional"ways"of"providing"real> time"information;"such"as"data"portals,"websites," application"programming"interface"(APIs),"and"streaming" video."These"alternatives"to"Facebook"and"Twitter"are" important"to"ensuring"the"broader"public"has"access"to"the" information."" " The"City"of"Oakland"is"using"an"online"ideation"tool," EngageOakland,"to"collect"ideas"from"residents"and"gather" responses"to"specific"questions"through"the"use"of"surveys." EngageOakland’s"largest"successes"are"those"regarding" community>specific"projects"that"the"city"is"developing"or" issues"that"include"a"public"meeting"component."For" example,"the"city"posed"a"question"and"survey"about"a"dog" park"project"and"314"surveys"were"completed">>"a"far" greater"response"than"the"number"of"residents"able"to" speak"during"a"typical"council"meeting."In"stark"contrast"to" the"dog"park"project,"only"56"of"the"1,300"people"who" viewed"the"site"completed"an"EngageOakland"survey" asking"residents"to"prioritize"projects"in"Oakland’s"budget." In"this"case"the"survey"proved"too"complicated"or"time" consuming."" " While"the"exact"numbers"are"unknown,"the"EngageOakland" project"team"observed"that"online"presence"either" motivated"residents"to"attend"a"public"meeting"and/or" workshop,"or"kept"those"who"had"attended"meetings" interested"in"the"process."In"essence,"as"a"result"of"the" Attachment 3 B1 - 32 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 8 " online"engagement"platform"residents"became"engaged" about"a"particular"policy,"ordinance,"or"issue"early"on,"and" the"online"presence"allowed"a"forum"for"those"who"have" other"life"obligations"to"stay"involved." Image"4:"Screenshot"of"the"EngageOakland." Another"common"tool"used"in"local"governments"to"gather" online"input"from"residents"is"Open"Town"Hall."The"online" platform"allows"governments"to"maintain"control"of"the" public"engagement"process,"and"focus"on"feedback"from" constituents."The"City"of"Rancho"Cordova,"California" decided"to"engage"citizens"through"the"use"of"Open"Town" Hall"when"residents"requested"that"their"City"Council" loosen"restrictions"on"raising"chickens."One"of"the"reasons" the"city"decided"to"use"the"online"platform"was"to"capture" more"moderate"voices"than"those"on"the"extremes"who" were"most"motivated"to"attend"traditional"hearings."A"total" of"335"people"visited"the"site,"the"city"received"46" comments"from"residents,"and"received"an"additional"20" comments"through"other"channels."The"city"used"mostly" online"resources">>"like"the"city’s"website"and"NextDoor">>" to"market"the"forum."" " City"staffers"in"Rancho"Cordova"believe"using"Open"Town" Hall"to"consult"with"residents"on"this"particular"issue"was"a" success"because"the"online"forum"garnered"a"high"level"of" engagement"on"an"issue"with"a"relatively"low"level"of" significance."In"an"email"exchange,"one"city"staffer"stated" that"“input"was"broad"ranging"and"many"people"with" moderate"opinions"weighed"in">>"these"people"probably" would"not"have"attended"an"evening"meeting"at"City"Hall." The"city"was"able"to"use"the"forum"to"keep"people"engaged" and"a"follow>up"public"workshop"drew"25"community" members">>"this"is"a"high"turn>out"for"a"relatively"low"level" issue"in"our"community.”"" " Avoiding Pitfalls We"asked"Nicole"Neditch,"the"former"City"of"Oakland" Online"Engagement"Manager,"to"provide"some"advice"to" other"government"staffers"considering"using"an"ideation" platform"in"their"civic"engagement"strategy."Below"is"her" advice"to"avoiding"some"of"the"problems"Oakland" encountered"during"its"first"few"months"using" EngageOakland:" • Focus%on%community8specific%projects">"For"example," asking"broad"questions"about"reducing"carbon" emissions"throughout"the"city"might"not"be"specific" enough."The"question"could"be"made"more"specific"by" asking"“What"ideas"do"you"have"for"reducing"X,"the" cause"of"the"most"carbon"emissions"in"our"city.”" • Simple%is%better">"Keep"interactions"user>friendly"and" uncomplicated." • Tie%campaigns%together%to%specific%activities% occurring%in%the%community">"This"will"help"drive" participation"on"the"site"and"provide"some"momentum" to"the"campaign."For"example,"if"mobile"food"vendor" permitting"is"a"topic"for"upcoming"council"meetings,"ask" the"question"to"the"online"community"in"advance"of"the" council"meetings."This"will"bring"an"engaged"offline" community"online"and"provide"valuable"information"to" the"government"in"advance"of"decision>making." • Don’t%put%all%your%eggs%in%one%basket">"Besides"online" engagement,"engage"members"of"the"community" through"in>person"forums"and"venues." • Bridge%the%public%gap">"Many"residents"fall"off"the"band" wagon"because"of"life"priorities"but"through"online"tools," if"they"have"access,"they"can"stay"connected,"informed" and"express"their"opinions"without"having"to"attend" every"public"meeting."" Attachment 3 B1 - 33 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 9 " " Cooperating"with"the"Public"and"Civic" Groups" Determining"the"right"engagement"strategy"can"be"difficult." However,"by"assessing"the"desired"level"of"involvement" and"desired"outcomes"can"help"to"begin"narrowing"down" engagement"options,"strategies,"and"eventually"online" tools."If"what"the"government"is"seeking"is"a"process"with" public"involvement"in"all"stages"of"a"project,"and"resident" engagement"in"identifying"and"determining"alternatives"to" a"proposed"plan"or"policy,"then"it"might"be"looking"for"tools" that"allow"it"to"collaborate"with"the"public"to"determine" locations"for"specific"services,"like"bike"share"stations,"or" draft"policies"that"impact"residential"quality"of"life." " There"continues"to"be"a"significant"number"of" people"in"the"country"that"are"not"able"to" access"the"internet,"even"with"the"uptake"of" smartphones." " When"it"came"time"for"the"City"of"Cincinnati"to"implement" its"bike"share"program"the"local"government"used" Shareabouts,"an"online"tool"that"allows"residents"to" identify"on"a"map"where"they"would"like"bike"sharing" stations."Based"on"the"over"300"suggestions,"and"nearly" 2,000"votes,"the"city"determined"that"35"of"the" recommended"bike"share"station"locations"could"be" implemented."Similarly"when"the"City"of"Chicago"wanted"to" collaborate"with"residents"to"identify"the"best"locations"for" bike"sharing,"they"also"used"Shareabouts"to"allow"residents" to"drop"pins"on"a"map"of"Chicago,"indicating"preferences" for"bike"share"locations."" " Because"both"Chicago"and"Cincinnati"were"committed"to" using"the"input"from"the"public"to"determine"the"bike" locations,"within"standard"city"planning"constraints,"the" tool"allowed"for"a"cooperative"relationship"beyond"just"a" consultative"one."Had"either"city"presented"the"community" with"the"option"of"ranking"predetermined"bike"share" locations,"the"tool"would"then"have"been"limited"to"simply" providing"Chicago"or"Cincinnati"with"input"from"the"public."" " " " I" " " " Image"5:"Screenshot"of"the"City"of"Chicago’s"Bike"Share"map." Identifying"tools"that"are"accessible"to"residents"and" understanding"the"limitations"of"the"community"is" important"when"developing"an"engagement"strategy." According"to"a"Pew"Research"study,"56"percent"of" American"adults"own"a"smartphone,"and"of"those" smartphone"owners,"34"percent"mostly"go"online"using" their"phones."For"Americans"with"household"incomes" below"$30,000"the"percentage"owning"a"smartphone"drops" to"43"percent,"and"adults"over"65"years"or"older,"only"18" percent"reported"owning"a"smartphone."This"data" illustrates"that"there"continues"to"be"a"significant"number" of"people"in"the"country"that"are"not"able"to"access"the" internet,"even"with"the"uptake"of"smartphones."" " However,"a"larger"majority"of"American"adults,"79"percent," use"their"cell"phones"for"text"messaging."For"the" populations"noted"above,"people"with"household"incomes" below"$30,000"and"adults"ages"65"and"older,"86"percent" and"76"percent"reported"owning"a"cell"phone,"respectively." Most"communities"have"residents"who"are"not"able"to" access"the"internet,"either"at"home"or"on"mobile"devices," and"for"that"reason"government"should"consider"the"use"of" engagement"tools"that"offer"SMS,"or"text"messaging,"as"a" critical"part"of"an"engagement"strategy"that"is"inclusive"of" those"without"internet"access."" " Textizen"is"an"SMS>based"engagement"tool"currently"used" by"multiple"cities"to"engage"citizens"in"various"ways," including"polling"community"members"to"develop"policies" based"on"public"input,"and"to"gauge"public"opinion"on" Attachment 3 B1 - 34 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 10 " proposed"service"changes."Cities"have"used"Textizen"to" gather"input"from"residents"on"where"bus"routes"should"be" located,"to"prioritize"public"school"spending,"and"to" generate"ideas"for"cities’"general"plans."For"example,"in" Chicago"the"tool"was"used"by"the"Chicago"Public"Schools"to" plan"facility"and"service"improvements"with"two"city>wide" surveys."Over"2,000"people"participated"in"the"surveys." Based"on"the"input"from"the"public"via"the"SMS"tool,"the" school"district"developed"a"plan"inclusive"of"the"priorities" identified"in"the"surveys." " " " " " " " " " Image"5:"Screenshot"of"the"City"of"Chicago’s"Bike"Share"map." " Image"6:"Textizen"poster">"Chicago"Public"School"campaign." Increasingly,"governments"are"also"engaging"organized" groups,"not"just"individual"residents."Neighborhood" associations"and"governments"often"collaborate"to"share" data"to"make"better"policy"decisions."The"City"of"New" Orleans"recently"partnered"with"Civic"Insight,"a"tool"that" leverages"government"and"community"data"to"identify"at> risk"and"blighted"properties"throughout"the"city."Armed" with"the"newly"available"government"data,"residents"are" better"equipped"at"working"together"to"determine"how"to" proceed"with"safety,"upkeep,"and"advocacy"to"ensure" blighted"homes"are"known"to"the"city"and"action"discussed" and"collectively"pursued."" " The"result"for"New"Orleans"has"been"more"resident" advocacy"for"the"removal"of"abandoned,"blighted"buildings" and"the"rehabilitation"of"blighted"properties"where"the" owners"are"either"hoping"to"return"or"need"assistance"to" make"improvements."By"getting"everyone"on"the"same" page,"Civic"Insight"makes"it"easier"for"government"staff," motivated"citizens,"and"local"organizations"to"collaborate" more"effectively"through"the"use"of"shared"data,"a"common" online"platform,"and"pooled"resources"to"improve"the" quality"and"value"of"their"neighborhoods." " " " " " " " " " Image"7:"Screenshot"of"Civic"Insight." Online"engagement"tools"are"more"powerful"than"simply" an"outlet"for"determining"governmental"service"provision." When"used"creatively,"online"engagement"tools"can"extend" their"reach"into"the"realm"of"collaborative"policy"making." This"work"requires"significant"resources,"leading"to"few" implementations"at"the"local"level."However,"it"has"been" tested"at"the"federal"level,"with"considerable"sucess."" " Online"engagement"tools"are"more"powerful" than"simply"an"outlet"for"determining" governmental"service"provision." " Following"President"Obama’s"Open"Government" memorandum"in"January"2009"the"White"House"Office"of" Science"and"Technology"launched"a"collective"writing" platform,"MixedInk,"that"encouraged"people"to"comment" and"draft"portions"of"the"Open"Government"Directive,"such" as"discussing"transparency"principles"and"defining" transparency."The"final"version"of"the"collaborative"writing" projects"were"then"used"in"the"Open"Government"Directive" issued"by"the"President."" " This"model"of"co>producing"policy"does"not"have"to"be" unique"to"the"federal"government;"there"are"numerous" Attachment 3 B1 - 35 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 11 " opportunities"for"city"staffers"to"revamp"public" commenting"policies"into"collaborative"writing"exercises" early"on"in"a"project’s"formation."Some"policies"that"more" easily"lend"themselves"to"co>production"are"those"that" involve"areas"or"topics"in"which"residents"are"inherently" knowledgeable"through"their"experience"living"in"the" community."These"might"include"neighborhood"planning," local"ordinances,"or"other"quality"of"life"areas." " Empowering"the"Community" By"empowering"residents"to"solve"local"issues"together"in" partnership"with"government,"and"by"placing"final" decision>making"and"implementation"in"the"hands"of"the" public,"city"leaders"can"construct"a"more"adaptive," responsive"government."When"the"community"as"a"whole" is"empowered,"governmental"services"more"often"reflect" the"community’s"will"than"when"engagement"tools"reach" only"small"segments"of"the"population"and"when"the" government"serves"as"intermediary."This"level"of" Citizen Reporting Tools Online"civic"reporting"tools"are"often"transactional"in"practice."A"resident"spots"a"pothole"and"submits"a"request"via" the"city’s"mobile"app"and"the"city"responds"by"either"fixing"the"pothole"or"determining"the"level"of"importance"the" request"warrants"by"the"number"of"other"requests"received."While"it"may"not"sound"like"constructive"engagement,"the" apps"and"websites"that"allow"residents"to"submit"requests"for"city"services"are"a"powerful"way"of"engaging"residents," not"only"in"monitoring"the"city’s"assets,"but"in"educating"the"public"about"city"services"and"the"processes"that"the"city" must"perform"to"resolve"the"request."" " These"tools"are"most"often"leveraged"by"government"to"gather"one>directional"information"from"residents,"and" sometimes"extended"to"consulting"with"residents"on"where"to"deploy"city"services"and"resources."In"addition,"citizen" reporting"also"has"the"potential"to"impact"and"inform"government"decision>making"by"providing"data"on"where"the" public"wants"services"(via"complaints)"and"data"on"where"service"is"needed,"aiding"in"identifying"longer>term"capital" improvement"projects." " One"of"the"first"apps"to"provide"a"forum"for"citizens"to"report"non>emergency"neighborhood"issues"and"monitor"the" results"of"their"report"was"SeeClickFix."SeeClickFix"users"can"report"non>emergency"neighborhood"issues,"such"as" potholes"or"graffiti"and"receive"alerts"of"improvements"made"as"a"result"of"notifications."A"similar"app,"Citizens" Connect,"allows"Boston"residents"to"contact"the"city"government"at"any"time"regarding"neighborhood"issues,"such"as" potholes,"litter,"neglected"sidewalks,"damaged"signs,"and"graffiti."Through"their"mobile"phone"citizens"can"use"Citizens" Connect"to"become"the""city's"eyes"and"ears.”"For"example,"a"user"can"document"a"sidewalk"overgrown"with"weeds" and"trash"by"taking"and"submitting"a"picture"of"the"sidewalk"to"city"officials."" " Citizen"reporting"tools"like"SeeClickFix"and"Citizens"Connect"collect"and"generate"massive"amounts"of"data"that" government"and"residents"can"use"to"determine"if"performance"is"improving"or"declining"in"certain"neighborhoods," draw"correlations"between"types"of"requests"and"resulting"crime"in"the"area,"and"plan"for"future"city"projects"to" address"chronic"neighborhood"problems."Only"when"cities"leverage"citizen"request"data"to"inform"their"decision> making"do"the"citizen"reporting"apps"truly"become"engagement"tools."" Attachment 3 B1 - 36 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 12 " engagement"is"rare"because"it"requires"government"to" relinquish"responsibility"for"a"solution"and"trust"the"public" to"provide"it."Tools"that"connect"neighbors"and"support" peer>to>peer"networking"are"usually"a"community’s"way"of" empowering"itself"without"government"intervention."" " Open"data"is"not"strictly"about"informing"the"public."It"also" extends"to"empowering"residents"to"build"apps"using"the" data"provided"by"the"city."However,"moving"open"data" from"informing"the"public"to"empowering"takes"a" concerted"effort"on"the"part"of"the"government,"through" offering"clean"and"easily"downloadable"data,"effective" marketing,"and"programming"that"introduces"data"to"the" community."For"example,"the"City"of"Palo"Alto"worked" directly"with"a"community"member"requesting"building" permit"data"to"develop"an"application"called" buildingeye.com."This"app"plots"building"permits"onto"a" map"so"that"people"can"easily"learn"about"building"projects" near"them." " " " " " " " Image"8:"Screenshot"of"buildingeye.com" Raw"open"data"is"not"only"utilized"by"app"developers;" researchers"and"community"organizations"also"use"open" government"data"to"inform"policy"recommendations"and" aid"in"researching"community"issues."In"Oakland," California"the"Urban"Strategies"Council"conducted"research" for"the"African"American"Male"Achievement"Initiative" using"data"from"Alameda"County"and"the"Oakland"Unified" School"District,"among"other"agencies."Without"access"to" the"data"the"research"would"not"have"been"as" comprehensive"or"as"informed."In"this"case,"open"data"led" to"policy"changes"at"the"school"district"level"that"addressed" the"issues"identified"in"the"Urban"Strategy"Council’s"report." The"project"resulted"in"a"true"data"driven"decision>making" process"led"by"community"organizations"and"foundations" leveraging"government"data."""" " A"number"of"tools"used"by"neighbors"to"communicate"and" solve"community"problems"have"emerged"over"the"past" few"years."These"tools"are"useful"for"government"staffers" because"they"empower"residents"to"tackle"local"issues" without,"or"with"limited"government,"intervention." Community"networking"tools,"like"NextDoor"and" NeighborLand,"are"more"emergent"at"the"neighborhood" level"and"less"dictated"by"government."However,"the"City"of" San"Jose"partnered"with"NextDoor"to"provide"the"platform" to"communities"across"the"city."The"city’s"goal"was"to" improve"community"problem"solving"by"using"its"existing," limited"resources"for"community"building."It"is"too"soon"to" tell"the"results"of"the"project"and"available"data"from"the" city"on"whether"it’s"achieved"this"goal"were"not"found."The" City"of"San"Jose"believes"that"empowering"residents"comes" from"a"shift"from"treating"residents"like"customers"of" governmental"services,"to"respecting"them"as"citizens"who" can"be"a"part"of"the"solution"to"deeply"entrenched" problems.""" " In"New"Orleans,"NeighborLand"launched"with"online"and" offline"community"building"exercises,"asking"“What"do"you" want"in"__________?”"The"online"tool"allows"neighbors"to" post"ideas,"gather"with"other"neighbors"online"and"take" action."The"National"Food"Truck"Coalition"led"a"campaign" that"attracted"hundreds"of"neighbors"to"gather"on" Neighborland,"leading"to"offline"meetings"and"agreement" to"push"for"changes"in"New"Orleans’"mobile"food"vending" laws."The"group"of"neighbors"collaborated"with"an"elected" official"and"pushed"legislation"through."This"engagement" strategy"in"New"Orleans"was"led"by"neighbors"and" community"groups,"relying"on"government"for"legislative" reform,"but"essentially"empowering"the"public"to"take" action"on"issues"that"matter"locally." " " " " Attachment 3 B1 - 37 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 13 " Image"9:"Source"NeighborLand.com" Gaming"can"also"be"a"tool"that"empowers"residents"by" including"aspects"of"community"social"networking," education,"and"fun"into"government"processes"like" community"planning."CommunityPlanit"makes" collaborating"with"neighbors"easy"and"fun."Users" accumulate"points"and"badges,"encouraging"a"wide" spectrum"of"the"public"to"participate"in"the"planning" process."For"example,"CommunityPlanit"was"used"in" Augustus"Hawkins"High"School"in"Los"Angeles,"California" to"empower"the"school"community"to"determine"how"the" high"school’s"social"media"policies"might"help"students" determine"their"lives"online."Through"fun,"interactive,"and" educational"tools,"residents"are"able"to"develop"the" school’s"social"media"policies"and"practices"that"have"an" impact"in"their"lives." " " " " " " " " " Image"10:"Screenshot"of"CommunityPlanit." " Tidepools"is"a"project"that"was"initiated"by"the"community" and"eventually"leveraged"by"government"as"a"program"to" develop"skills"among"residents"in"the"community." Tidepools"is"a"collaborative"hub"for"mobile"mapping"and" social"data,"integrating"feeds"from"multiple"information" sources"into"time>based"maps,"and"re>skinnable"custom" applications."The"Open"Technology"Institute,"an"institute" CCIP"is"part"of"within"the"New"America"Foundation," incorporated"an"SMS"texting"system"for"residents"to"text" their"needs"and"resources"to"Tidepools"maps"maintained" by"the"Red"Hook"Initiative,"the"community"organization" that"hosted"tidepools"and"helped"develop"it." Neighborhoods"use"Tidepools"to"collect,"store"and" visualize"their"data"on"local"servers,"merging"the"digital" and"physical"space"of"their"community."Residents"can"then" access"Tidepools"and"their"community"data"over"a"local" network,"even"without"a"permanent"connection"to"the" Internet."Residents"of"Red"Hook,"Brooklyn,"have"used"it"to" bring"together"real>time"transit"data,"stop>and>frisk"police" activity,"community"events"and"job"opportunities."" " Ways"of"Measuring"Success" Government"staffers"typically"measure"the"success"of" online"engagement"tools"by"recording"the"number"of" participants,"the"level"of"participation,"and"the"outcomes"of" that"engagement."Evaluating"civic"engagement"success"is" dependent"on"the"applied"engagement"strategy"and" purpose"for"engagement."For"example,"governments"that" want"to"do"a"better"job"explaining"the"budgeting"process"to" residents"by"opening"budget"data"and"providing"an"easy> to>understand"infographic"might"measure"success"by" evaluating"the"number"of"people"who"downloaded"the" infographic"or"downloaded"the"budget"data."However," cities"wanting"to"generate"ideas"for"specific"projects"might" evaluate"the"activity"on"the"city’s"engagement"platform"and" measure"success"by"whether"a"resident’s"idea"resulted"in" the"city"pursuing"a"project."Measuring"success"of"online" civic"engagement"tools"is"also"determined"by"engagement" strategy"(informating,"consulting,"empowering,"etc.)"and" the"city"resources"available"to"measure"impact"and" outcomes." " As"with"the"IAP2"Public"Engagement"Spectrum,"the" continuum"for"measuring"success"is"not"completely"lateral." It"is"possible"to"jump"between"informing"the"public"in"one" Attachment 3 B1 - 38 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 14 " phase"of"a"project"to"launching"an"online"tool"aimed"at" resident"empowerment"in"the"final"phases"of"the"project." With"that"in"mind,"when"reviewing"the"measurements"on" the"following"page,"please"be"reminded"that"projects"could" include"any"or"all"of"these"as"evaluation"criteria." Determining"the"metrics"in"advance"of"the"engagement"is" ideal"because"it"allows"for"gathering"any"necessary" baseline"data"and"allocating"appropriate"resources"to"post> project"information"and"data"gathering"required"for"a" proper"evaluation."" " Attachment 3 B1 - 39 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 15 " "" " ""Success"Measurements" Engagement"Strategy"Engagement"Goal"Possible"Success"Measurements" Inform'the'public' Providing"information"to"the" public"about"government" services,"council"meetings," upcoming"events,"and" resources"is"the"first"step"to" developing"an"engaged" community." Make"government" information"easy"to" understand,"accessible," and"available"to" residents." • Access"to"information" a) number"of"users,"analyzed"by"desired" audiences/groups" b) number"of"pageviews" c) number"of"shares"or"pingbacks" d) number"of"data"downloads" e) repeat"visitors" • Outcome"measurements" a) reduction"in"requests"for"information"(requires" baseline"data"on"volume"of"requests"on"the"subject" or"content"that"is"being"used"for"the"specific" engagement)" b) more"informed"residents"at"offline"event/meeting" regarding"specific"topic"(i.e."flood"control"policies)" c) more"informed"residents"in"subsequent"online" engagement"projects"(i.e."providing"ideas"about" general"fund"spending)" d) targeted"groups"reached/informed?"(i.e."seniors," youth,"etc.)" Consulting'on'Ideas'or' Advice' Seeking"input"from"the" public"about"upcoming" policy"decisions,"service" changes,"or"project"ideas"is"a" way"of"engaging"the"public"in" the"early"stages"of"a"project." Consultation"can"lead"to" public"involvement"in"the" decision>making"process"at" various"stages"of"a"project." To"ensure"proper" engagement"in"decision> making,"residents"must"be" included"in"the"early"stages" of"a"project"or"policy" formation,"provided'with" adequate"information,"and" be"consulted.'' Generate"ideas"and" feedback"on"local" government"projects," community"programs,"" or"spending."This" strategy"can"also"lead" to"better,"more" informed"decisions." • Preceding"engagement"strategy"measurements"(see"above)" • Level"of"online"engagement">"resident" a) number"of"activities"on"the"site,"including:" i) number"of"profiles/accounts"created" ii) number"of"ideas"posted" iii) number"of"comments" iv) number"of"likes" • Level"of"online"engagement">"government"staff" a) frequency"of"comments"or"responses"by" government"staff" b) revisions"to"the"project"resulting"from"resident" comments"or"ideas" • Level"of"offline"engagement" a) number"of"participants"at"corresponding"offline" events/meetings" • Outcome"measurements" a) Did"a"city"project"result"from"a"resident"idea?"Did"a" resident"idea"inform"a"project"or"process?" b) Was"resident"feedback"utilized"in"making"a" decision?"" c) Is"the"public"involved"in"decision>making?" . Attachment 3 B1 - 40 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 16 " """"""""""""Success"Measurements"(continued)" Engagement"Strategy"Engagement"Goal"Possible"Success"Measurements" Cooperating'with' Residents'and'Civic'Groups' This"strategy"requires" continual"involvement"with" the"public"throughout"the"life" of"a"project,"decision,"or" policy."Not"only"is"the"public" involved"in"decision>making," but"they"are"also"involved"in" exploring"alternatives"and" implementation." Work"side>by>side"with" the"public"to"ensure"the" project"or"policy" reflects"community" needs"and"desires." Public"opposition"is" minimized." • Preceding"engagement"strategy"measurements"(see"above)" • Frequency"of"discussion"between"users"(dialogue)" a) civility"of"exchanges"" b) diversity"of"points"of"view"represented" • Frequency"of"discussion"between"users"and"government"staff" (dialogue)" • Staff"moderation"of"discussion" a) dedicated"moderator?" • Ways"in"which"collaboration"is"occurring" a) online">"are"online"methods"appropriate?"" b) offline">"is"it"also"happening"offline?" • Outcome"measurements" a) were"alternatives"created"and"reviewed"with"the" public?" b) did"a"better"project"result"from"the"collaboration?" (better"could"mean:"reflects"the"community,"faster," cheaper,"less"opposition,"better"ideas,"better" alternatives)" c) were"new"relationships/"connections"formed?" d) were"new"partnerships"with"the"city"and"civic" groups"created?" Empowering'the' Community' The"community"is"a"resource" that"should"be"leveraged"by" government"to"solve" community"issues."By" empowering"residents"to" solve"local"issues," government"plays"a" supportive"role,"rather"than" a"lead"role."This"stage"of" engagement"exemplifies" government"as"a"platform." Promote"community" resilience"and" community"building"by" supporting"community" problem>solving." • Preceding"engagement"strategy"measurements"(see"above)" • Outcome"measurements" a) Number"of"apps"built"from"open"data" b) Number"of"neighborhood"projects"resulting"from" online"collaboration"and"connection" c) Assess"government"role"in"each"project" i) Did"government"staff"appropriately"facilitate?" ii) Were"required"resources"provided?" d) Does"the"public"feel"empowered"by"the"process?" (through"surveying"residents)" . Attachment 3 B1 - 41 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 17 " Visibility"Measurements" One"of"the"most"common"mistakes"when"deploying"online" tools"is"the"notion"that"“if"you"build"it,"they"will"come.”" That"is"just"not"true."Marketing"and"visibility"are"crucial"to" ensuring"that"the"government"engages"residents"online." Strategic"marketing"can"aid"in"targeting"specific"groups"of" people"to"engage,"such"as"residents"from"specific" neighborhoods"or"young"people."For"residents"who"might" not"have"home"access"to"the"internet,"partnerships"with" community"organizations"can"help"in"publicizing"online" tools"and"complementary"offline"meetings"and"events."The" visibility"of"the"platform"is"one"of"the"strongest" determinants"of"the"number"of"participants." " “If"you"build"it,"they"will"come.”"That"is"just" not"true." " Vast"amounts"of"research"and"best"practices"have"been" produced"on"community"outreach"and"targeted"marketing," this"report"does"not"attempt"to"provide"those"here,"rather" the"bulleted"list"below"serves"as"a"guide"to"developing" metrics"for"outreach." " • Number"of"times"site/program"mentioned"in"the"local" press" a) Local"media"is"an"important"partner"in"civic" engagement."Most"towns"also"have"a"number" of"smaller,"local"blogs"that"could"be"useful" partners"as"well."" • Number"of"tweets"using"program"hashtag"or"mention" program" a) Some"cities"create"hastags"(ex."#hashtag)"for" projects"they"are"promoting"and"seeking" engagement"with"the"public."" • Number"of"likes"on"Facebook"page/"government" Facebook"page" a) If"the"local"government"has"a"Facebook"page" promoting"the"online"tool"through"posts," pictures,"and"resident"comments"could"lead"to" more"people"visiting"its"online"engagement" tool." • Visibility"on"government"homepage" a) Government"homepages"can"be"great"places"to" advertise"the"site."" • Ad"placement"on"community"television"and"radio,"and" number"of"viewers" a) A"significant"number"of"people"still"hear"about" politics"and"government"news"through" television"and"radio."Consider"promoting"the" government’s"engagement"platform"on"a" community"access"channel." • Click>through"rate"on"Facebook,"Twitter,"Google"ads" a) If"the"residents"the"town"wants"to"engage"are" on"Facebook"then"consider"placing"Facebook" ads"and"monitor"the"click>through"rate"to" determine"if"it"is"a"successful"marketing" strategy." " It"is"important"to"recognize"that"while"visibility"can"drive" getting"people"to"the"online"engagement"tool,"there"are"a" number"of"other"factors"that"determine"the"level"of" engagement"on"the"site."Check"out"the"City"of"Oakland’s"Tip" Box"on"page"8"for"ways"to"engage"the"public"once"they" show"up." " Conclusion" As"online"engagement"tools"evolve"and"new"tools"come"to" market,"government"will"be"under"increasing"pressure"to" create"opportunities"for"online"engagement."As"discussed" in"this"guide,"the"advantages"and"impact"from"engaging"the" public"are"a"result"of"the"overall"civic"engagement"strategy," of"which"online"tool"selection"is"only"a"small"piece."For" starters,"government"staffers"pursuing"civic"engagement" should"determine"the"purpose"for"engagement,"such"as" planning"for"park"improvements"or"determining"how"best" to"allocate"a"federal"community"block"grant."Once"the" purpose"for"engagement"is"clear,"this"guide"will"help"in" determining"an"online"tool"to"use"and"planning"for" evaluating"the"engagement"program." " Attachment 3 B1 - 42 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 18 " Some"may"believe"that"online"engagement"tools"are" cheaper"and"easier"to"deploy"successfully"than"offline" engagement"approaches."Neither"belief"is"true."Some" online"engagement"platforms"are"relatively"inexpensive" when"compared"to"large>scale"town"hall"events,"but"they" do"have"associated"costs"and"require"staff"time"for" moderation,"community"management,"marketing,"and" evaluation."" " Depending"on"where"your"city"is"on"the"spectrum"of" engagement,"starting"with"a"plan"to"better"inform"the" community"can"have"a"significant"impact"and"positive" results."If"your"city"is"already"doing"a"good"job"of"keeping" the"public"informed"with"accessible"and"easy>to> understand"information"and"data,"then"planning"for"a" deeper"engagement"that"requires"consulting"or" cooperating"with"the"public"could"benefit"not"only"the"local" government,"but"also"build"connections"among"residents"in" the"community,"moving"one>step"closer"to"empowering"the" community. Attachment 3 B1 - 43 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 19 " """""""""""" """""""""""" Online"Tool"or"Company"Known"Uses"in"United"States"Link"to"tool"Cost" Informing'the'Public" BaltimoreCode.org"Baltimore,"MD;"San"Francisco,"CA"http://baltimorecode.org/"Free"or"fee"for" service" CKAN"Open"Data"Portal"Santa"Cruz,"CA;"Houston,"TX;" Denver,"CO;"Lexington,"KY;" Virginia;"Colorado"State" http://ckan.org/instances/"Free"or"fee"for" service" California"Budget"Challenge"Federal"government;"California" State;"Los"Angeles,"CA;"Oakland," CA;"County"of"Alameda,"CA;" Wellington,"FL;"Philadelphia,"PA" http://next10.org/california> budget>challenge" Fee"for"service" ChicagoCouncilmatic"Chicago,"IL"http://chicagocouncilmatic.org /" Free"or"fee"for" service" Engaging"video"content"Los"Angeles"County"Flood" Control"District" http://bit.ly/1jKsZir"Fee"for"service" Open"Budget"Palo"Alto,"CA;"Salinas,"CA;" Monterey,"CA;"Riverside,"CA;" Bishop,"CA;"Thousand"Oaks,"CA;" Simi"Valley,"CA;"Dublin,"CA;"Bell," CA;"Sierra"Madre,"CA;"Richfield," MN" http://bit.ly/1jKw2qT"Fee"for"service" Outline.com"State"of"Massachusetts"http://outline.com/"Fee"for"service" Socrata"Open"Data"Portal"San"Francisco,"CA;"Baltimore," MD;"Austin,"TX;"Metro"Chicago," IL;"New"York"City,"NY;"King" County,"WA;"Cook"County,"IL;" State"of"Oregon;"Seattle,"WA;" Chicago;"Il;"Wellington,"FL;" Alameda"County,"CA;"Somerville," MA" http://www.socrata.com/"Fee"for"service" Streaming"Council"Video"Fresno,"CA"and"numerous"other" municipalities" http://bit.ly/18HAHrY"Fee"for"service" Appendix"1:"Research"Methodology" Research"for"this"report"was"conducted"primarily"through"online"searches"for"civic"technology"currently"used"by"local" governments"and"residents"to"enhance"engagement."In"addition,"research"included"a"review"of"literature"focusing"on"online" civic"engagement"and"interviews"with"local"government"leaders"and"online"tool"creators." " Appendix"2:"List"of"Online"Civic"Engagement"Tools"Mentioned"in"Report" " " Attachment 3 B1 - 44 New America Foundation California Civic Innovation Project page 20 " """""""""""" """""""""""Civic"Engagement"Tools"(continued)" Online"Tool"or"Company"Known"Uses"in"United"States"Link"to"tool"Cost" Consulting'with'the'Public'for'Ideas'or'Advice'' EngageOakland"Oakland,"CA;"San"Francisco," CA;"Las"Vegas,"NV"and"over" 400"communities." http://www.engageoakland.com/"Fee"for"service" Open"Town"Hall"Rancho"Cordova,"CA;"Fremont," CA;"Douglas"County,"NV;" Marin"County,"CA;" Metropolitan"Transportation" Council,"CA;"and"numerous" other"communities." http://www.opentownhall.com/"Fee"for"service" Cooperating'with'the'Residents'and'Civic'Groups" CivicInsight"New"Orleans,"LA"http://civicinsight.com/"Fee"for"service" MixedInk"White"House"Open" Government"Initiative" http://www.mixedink.com/"Fee"for"service" Shareabouts"Chicago,"IL;"Cincinnati,"OH"http://openplans.org/work/share abouts/" Free"or"fee"for" service" Textizen"Chicago"Unified"School" District,"IL;"Milwaukie,"OR;" Philadelphia,"PA;" Hillsborough,"FL" https://www.textizen.com/"Fee"for"service" Empowering'the'Community" APIs"and"open"data"can"lead" to"various"apps,"websites," and"research" Ex."Open311"API"http://open311.org/"N/A" Community"PlanIt"Los"Angeles,"CA;"Salem,"MA;" Philadelphia,"PA;"additional" international"projects" https://communityplanit.org/"Unknown" NeighborLand"Numerous"municipalities"https://neighborland.com/"Free"or"fee"for" service" NextDoor"Over"100"cities"https://nextdoor.com/"Fee"for"service" Tidepools"Red"Hook,"Brooklyn;"Gezi"Park" Protests"in"Turkey;"Allied" Media"Conference"in"Detroit" http://tidepools.co/"Free" . " Attachment 3 B1 - 45 ! ! California!Civic!Innovation!Project! The!California!Civic!Innovation!Project!(CCIP)!aims!to!diffuse!innovation!in!California!local!governments!through!researching! and!recommending!organizational!and!emerging!practices!that!enable!the!creation!and!adoption!of!innovative!policies,! technology,!and!programs!that!deepen!community!engagement!and!accelerate!civic!innovation.!Our!research!and!practical! exploration!aims!to!break!down!barriers!to!innovation!within!municipalities!allowing!for!deeper!relationships!between! residents!and!government.!CCIP!was!launched!in!the!Spring!of!2012!with!support!from!the!James!Irvine!Foundation.! ! Authors! Alissa!Black!directs!the!New!America!Foundation's!California!Civic!Innovation!Project.!Based!in!the!Bay!area,!Ms.!Black!is! exploring!the!use!of!innovative!technologies,!policies,!and!practices!that!engage!disadvantaged!communities!in!public!decision! making!throughout!California.!! ! Bita!Neyestani!is!a!former!intern!for!the!California!Civic!Innovation!Project.!She!is!a!graduate!of!Pepperdine's!School!of!Public! Policy!where!she!specialized!in!International!Relations!and!Regional!and!Local!Policy.!.! ! ! ! ! ©!2012!New!America!Foundation! ! This!report!carries!a!Creative!Commons!license,!which!permits!reRuse!of!New!America!content!when!proper!attribution!is!provided.!This!means!you!are!free! to!copy,!display!and!distribute!New!America’s!work,!or!include!our!content!in!derivative!works,!under!the!following!conditions:! ! Attribution.!You!must!clearly!attribute!the!work!to!the!New!America!Foundation,!and!provide!a!link!back!to!www.Newamerica.net.! Noncommercial.!You!may!not!use!this!work!for!commercial!purposes!without!explicit!prior!permission!from!New!America.! Share!Alike.!If!you!alter,!transform,!or!build!upon!this!work,!you!may!distribute!the!resulting!work!only!under!a!license!identical!to!this!one.! ! For!the!full!legal!code!of!this!Creative!Commons!license,!please!visit!www.creativecommons.org.!If!you!have!any!questions!about!citing!or!reusing!New! America!content,!please!contact!us.! Main Office New America NYC 1899!L!Street,!NW!!!199!Lafayette!St.! Suite!400!!!!Suite!3B! Washington,!DC!20036!!!New!York,!NY!10012! Phone!202!986!2700!!!! Fax!202!986!3696! ! Attachment 3 B1 - 46     Copyright ©2014 by the International City/County Management Association (ICMA). All rights are reserved by  ICMA. This document, its content, or any portion thereof may not be reproduced, published, transferred, or  used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of ICMA.   Our cutting-edge performance management and analytics program includes 900 key input, output and outcome measures, with the option for customized measures as well. The following represents a sample of our measures. Community Attributes  Major facilities in the jurisdiction  Form of government  Jurisdiction location (e.g., urban, suburban, rural)  Largest employment sector  Population breakouts by age  Commercial/residential land use  Fire ISO Rating  Purchasing threshold policies  Number and size of brownfield sites  Frequency and method of solid waste collection  Vacancy rates Culture and Leisure Library Services  Number of registered borrowers  Expenditures per capita  Total number of FTEs per 1,000 population served  Citizen ratings of the public library services  Patron internet usage per terminal  Circulation and visitation rates Parks and Recreation  Parks and recreation expenditures per capita  Total developed park acreage  Citizen ratings of the quality of parks  Citizen ratings of recreational opportunities  Park maintenance expenditures per acre  Parks and recreation net revenue per capita  Park acres per 1,000 population Attachment 4 B1 - 47     Copyright ©2014 by the International City/County Management Association (ICMA). All rights are reserved by  ICMA. This document, its content, or any portion thereof may not be reproduced, published, transferred, or  used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of ICMA.   Internal Services General Government  Percentage of individuals below poverty level  Unemployment rate  General fund expenditures per capita  Citizen rating of the quality of all local government services  Median household income Human Resources  Average working days for external recruitment, requisition to conclusion of interview  Sick leave hours taken per work hour  Employee rating of human resources overall service quality  Number of FTEs jurisdiction-wide per 1,000 population  Turnover rate  Percentage of new full-time employees completing probationary period Information Technology  IT expenditures per capita  Expenditures for IT per endpoint served  Average calendar days to 311/CRM request resolution  Help desk requests resolved within designated timeframes  Employee rating of the IT quality of service  Dollar value of government transaction payments received electronically Procurement  Working Days from requisition to purchase order  Dollar amount of purchases per central procurement FTE  Percentage of protests sustained  Dollar amount of purchases made via purchasing card/credit card as a percentage of all purchases Risk Management  Third party vehicle liability, number of accidents  Average calendar days from receipt of liability claim to claim closure  Police vehicle accidents per 100,000 miles driven  Workers compensation claims per 100 jurisdiction FTEs  Number of workers compensation days lost to injury per 100 FTEs Attachment 4 B1 - 48     Copyright ©2014 by the International City/County Management Association (ICMA). All rights are reserved by  ICMA. This document, its content, or any portion thereof may not be reproduced, published, transferred, or  used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of ICMA.   Neighborhood Services Code Enforcement  Code complaints, average calendar days to voluntary and forced compliance  Total code cases available for resolution during the reporting period  Code enforcement expenditures per capita  Code enforcement cases per FTE  Citizens rating of the extent to which code violations are a problem  Percentage of cases resolved by voluntary and forced compliance Permitting, Land Use, and Plan Review  Development permits, inspections and plan review expenditures and revenue  Number of building permits issued  Average calendar days from development permit application to issuance  Number of development inspections  Average calendar days from request to development inspection  Number of plan reviews conducted  Citizen ratings of the quality of permitting services Public Safety Fire & EMS  Total fire/EMS expenditures per capita  Number of active volunteer/paid-on-call firefighters  Sworn FTEs per 1,000 population  Percentage of emergency fire responses within designated times from dispatch to arrival  Total BLS responses, ALS responses, and cardiac arrest patients per capita  Percentage of cardiac patients with pulsatile rhythms upon delivery to a hospital  Citizen rating of the quality of fire services  Flamespread in residential fires  Total residential fire incidents per 1,000 population  Citizen rating of the quality of EMS Services Police Services  Average response time for top priority calls  UCR crimes and arrests per 1,000 population  Citizen rating of safety in their neighborhood after dark  Percentage of dispatched police calls that are top priority  Number of police responses per sworn FTE Attachment 4 B1 - 49     Copyright ©2014 by the International City/County Management Association (ICMA). All rights are reserved by  ICMA. This document, its content, or any portion thereof may not be reproduced, published, transferred, or  used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of ICMA.    Percentage of UCR Part I property and violent crimes cleared  NIBRS crime rate  Sworn police overtime as a percentage of total compensation  Police expenditures per capita Public Works Facilities Management  Total square feet of facilities maintained  Administrative/office facility custodial and repair services expenditure per square foot  Electricity and natural gas expenditures for all jurisdiction facilities  Percentage of jurisdictions using various energy conservation strategies  Employee rating of facility custodial cleaning services  Number of energy-efficient jurisdiction-owned buildings  Residential utility usage (water, electricity, natural gas)  Jurisdiction facilities: Percentage of kWh from renewables Fleet Management  Total vehicle expenditures by category  Employee rating of the quality of fleet maintenance service  Preventive and other maintenance expenditures per vehicle  Percentage of vehicles exceeding replacement criteria  Preventative and other maintenance expenditures per mile driven Highway and Road Maintenance  Road rehabilitation expenditures per capita and per paved lane mile  Paved lane miles assessed as satisfactory as a percentage of lane miles assessed  Snow and ice control hours paid vs. the number of days of snow or freezing conditions  Citizen rating of the quality of street repair services  Operations and capital expenditures Solid Waste  Refuse, recycling and yard waste expenditures per account  Net recycling revenue per account  Residential recycling, refuse and yard waste tonnage per account  Complaints of missed pickups per refuse account  Percentage of yard waste disposal method used Percentage of waste stream diverted  Citizen rating of the quality of refuse collection services  Citizen rating of the quality of recycling services Attachment 4 B1 - 50     Copyright ©2014 by the International City/County Management Association (ICMA). All rights are reserved by  ICMA. This document, its content, or any portion thereof may not be reproduced, published, transferred, or  used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of ICMA.   Social Services Housing  Total dollar value of rental assistance  New low-moderate income housing units needed  Average calendar days from receipt of the application to completion of a full rehabilitation project  Public housing occupancy rates  New low-moderate income housing units completed as a percent of units needed Obesity Prevention  Percentage of jurisdictions with state/non-local policy applicable to jurisdiction food sales  Percentage of jurisdictions with retailer incentives to offer healthier choices in underserved areas Youth Services  Recidivism rate  Percentage of infants, children and youth who are the subjects of a case opened for investigation and substantiated  Subsidized childcare slots filled as a percentage of children eligible  Youth detention bed days over capacity as a percentage of total bed days Select Custom Measure Categories In addition ICMA’s comparative catalog of 900 measure key measures and calculations, communities may also purchase custom measures. Custom measures may be selected from ICMA’s extensive library or developed by the community.  Emergency service request measures for facilities  Arson measures  Fire unit hour utilization measures  Vehicles using alternative fuel by type  Expanded fleet categories  Materials recycled by type  Street sweeping measures  Street lighting measures  College-town measures  Convention center and performing arts center measures Attachment 4 B1 - 51 Page intentionally left blank. B1 - 52