Budgetary Power to the People

[marmar]

from In These Times:


Budgetary Power to the People
An experiment with direct democracy on Chicago’s South Side.

BY Joel Handley


It’s a January night in the 5th Ward of Chicago, and a small group of ward residents have gathered at Alderman Leslie Hairston’s office in the South Shore neighborhood to evaluate a long list of ideas on how to improve the ward’s transportation system. All can agree that something needs to be done about the dangerous intersection near a neighborhood club on 55th street, where drivers can’t see pedestrians in the walkway until after they’ve accelerated around a curve. As they discuss the different options—pedestrian crossing signs? a stop sign? a roundabout?—they estimate how much each would cost, and consider complicating factors, like the fact that the eastern edge of the intersection is located in the neighboring ward.

The meeting is part of the 5th Ward’s attempt at implementing participatory budgeting, a process that allows citizens to choose how municipal funds could be best spent in their communities. In this case, the funds are the ward’s so-called “menu money”—the $1.3 million allotted annually to every ward to spend on small infrastructure projects, like fixing pot holes or installing pedestrian walkways. In the past, aldermen and ward staff have had full discretion in deciding what projects to fund. But this May, for the first time, 5th Ward residents will have the opportunity to vote directly on how the money should be spent.

The vote in May will be the culmination of a near yearlong process during which community members brainstorm potential uses of the money, narrow down the options and develop detailed project proposals. The ward is currently in the second stage: paring down over 170 ideas to create 32 proposals that ward residents will ultimately vote on.

The three community representatives gathered in Alderman Hairston’s office are members of the transportation committee, one of six committees tasked with evaluating ideas and developing proposals. (The other five committees are arts and culture, parks and recreation, centers and spaces, public safety and streets.) A total of 40 ward residents have volunteered to serve as community representatives, choosing which committee to join based on their individual experience—for example, Robert Daniels says he joined the transportation committee because he takes public transit everywhere he goes. But as the transportation committee discusses the project ideas residents have submitted—more benches at bus stops, sidewalk repairs, disability access ramps on walkways—they’re finding that many may fall under the jurisdiction of city agencies like the Chicago Transit Authority, a condition that Alderman Hairston says makes them ineligible for ward menu money. By the end of the meeting, the transportation committee has narrowed the list of ideas down to three: replacing broken reflective poles at a bike path, connecting two independent bike paths and installing a stop sign at a notoriously dangerous pedestrian crossing. ...................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://inthesetimes.com/article/14665/budgetary_power_to_the_people/

[Igel]

1. Let's check back in 5 years.

I've seen a lot of programs that I've really liked started to great praise but crash and burn as the excitement dies down. Suddenly "grass roots" becomes "a small but dedicated cadre" which becomes "a small group out of touch with the majority".

Sometimes the small group is ousted by a large group and the cycle repeats. Sometimes the program's just tossed out because on average it's not working any better than the old way of doing things and sometimes is working much worse.

Sometimes the program doesn't work past the first few meetings, as the original group can't find a way past a deadlock as two equally meritorious projects need funding but only one can be funded.

It's the same with education "reforms": The first year works, after that the results fairly quickly to the old average.