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.