Redevelopment group faces growth hurdles
Lolita Harper
Eighty people. Eighty opinions. Eighteen months to agree.
Those are the parameters -- give or take a month or person -- that
the Community Redevelopment Action Committee has to work with as it
forges a plan for the future of the city’s Westside.
On the fourth Thursday of every month, a conference room at the
Neighborhood Community Center on Anaheim Avenue is packed with 10
tables, each seating about eight residents or property owners who
want a say in the future of the Westside. Also in the room are a
handful of objective players like a City Council liaison, a team of
city-hired private facilitators and curious onlookers.
In February, the City Council -- acting as the Redevelopment
Agency -- voted unanimously to appoint anyone who wished to
participate in deciding a common direction for redeveloping the
Westside.
The goal is to come to a widely accepted consensus on what should
be done in terms of improvement in that area.
The reality is that community consensus about a complicated
subject like redevelopment is an arduous process that has frustrated
some involved.
Many members say the facilitators from Civic Solutions, Inc., play
too large a role in the discussion and stifle the opinions of
individual members.
“We don’t get to talk about anything we want to do; they just keep
telling us what they are going to do,” resident Janice Davidson said.
“From what I understand, they are just there to keep us from blowing
our steam to others, but now we feel frustrated that we don’t get to
discuss what we want.”
If members are patient, they will begin to see the tried and
proven results of such a consensus-building process, said Jennifer
Lillie, a co-facilitator from Civic Solutions. The consensus building
process being employed is structured and formatted and has been
developed over the years, with many different groups across the
country, Lillie said, some that are 20 times the size of the
redevelopment committee.
“We are not making this up as we go,” she said.
Lillie stressed that there is an inherent educational period at
the beginning of the process in which the facilitators play a large
role in teaching the new form of communication. But once the group
becomes familiar with the method, the facilitator’s roles will change
and the group will lead the public discourse.
The process works like this: The large committee of nearly 80
people is divided into more manageable groups of eight. The groups
have been chosen by the facilitators to make sure a cross section of
the community is represented at every table, Lillie said. Given the
topic of discussion, the groups talk among themselves and report
their findings -- or consensus -- to the entire committee.
“This way, everyone has access to the varied perspectives,” Lillie
said.
Resident Eric Bever said he was surprised by the format of the
meetings because he had expected the committee would have a more
traditional structure with designated offices and a regimented
structure. He feels the “group process” has simplified the issue too
much.
“We are capable adult people and we are not getting the
opportunity to run our own committee,” Bever said.
Lillie defended the process, saying it was designed to explore
various levels of possible solutions, rather than have to vote one
way or another on a proposed item.
“There are gradients of agreement and, sometimes, the more we
explore the needs of a group at large, the easier it becomes to find
consensus,” Lillie said.
Committee member Tom Egan said he is happy with the process and
feels the city is getting its money’s worth. Egan said he has read
enough about consensus building and seen the method used enough times
to know the committee is heading down the right path.
“It will take some time to get to know each other and trust each
other, but it will happen,” Egan said. “It is no different than a
family in a car trying to decide what movie to go to. There will be
disagreements and arguments and then finally they will agree.”
City Manager Allan Roeder agreed, reminding people that it is only
the beginning of a very long and deliberate process.
“There is a time to educate and a time to act,” Roeder said. “And
the time to educate has to come before any action.”
Members like Davidson, Bever and John Feeney say they are already
educated and are anxious to make an impact. All three members were
involved in previous city plans to chart a course for the Westside --
plans that were ultimately ignored.
“We asked for an accelerated program because we have already been
through this twice,” Davidson said.
While the facilitators are trying to move as quickly as possible,
consideration must also be given to committee members who are
brand-new to the process, Lillie said.
“This group is feeling very anxious because many of them were
involved in the process before and are frustrated that they have to
start from scratch again,” Lillie said. “I really empathize with
those who have been dealing with this issue for years, but the
council has appointed 80 people -- not just eight -- and we have to
take into account everybody’s level of understanding of the issue.”
Roeder also noted that there is a wide variety of opinion of what
constitutes the Westside. Many of the committee members are involved
because they want to preserve a specific aspect of the Westside,
while others want broad-scale change, he said.
Councilman Gary Monahan, who serves as the council liaison but has
no influence on the decisions made, said he was weary of appointing
such a large group in the first place. He is more than willing to see
the process through to the end but is not sure where the group is
headed.
“As time goes on, they will get where they need to go or they will
hit some sort of road block at which time the council will have to
get involved and clean things up,” Monahan said.
Council involvement is the last thing Monahan and his fellow
council members want, he said, which is why they hired Civic
Solutions, Inc., in the first place. The facilitators play a very
important role, but it is a role that must diminish over time, he
said.
“This is exactly what we are paying for, but, at some point, the
facilitators are going to have to step back and let the committee
take some action,” Monahan said.
Lillie ensured that Monahan’s desired outcome is part of the
natural progression of the process. In fact, the change is already
evident.
“Our encouragement is that we are already seeing group dynamics
changing and consensus building, even if it’s rocky at the
beginning,” Lillie said.
* LOLITA HARPER covers Costa Mesa. She may be reached at (949)
574-4275 or by e-mail at lolita.harper@latimes.com.
All the latest on Orange County from Orange County.
Get our free TimesOC newsletter.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Daily Pilot.