Laserfiche WebLink
<br />the community and gather feedback and point of view of a group they do not normally interact <br />with during board meetings. Members of the board were tasked with asking festival goers <br />person the opportunity to answer with their own words. The board <br />any additional information regarding a definition of natural resources or examples of natural <br />resources in the city. Answers to the question were written one at a time on a chalkboard and <br />pictures were taken (Appendix A.1) of each person that participated in the activity. <br /> The results of the chalkboard activity were then compiled into a simple bar chart <br />(Appendix A.2) in order to present at a later board meeting. We ran our meeting according to <br />ut from the community. We created an agenda and <br />attempted to follow the prescribed format throughout. Some community input steered the <br />conversation away from the intended purpose but we were able to get back on topic after <br />allowing the attendee to voice their opinion. The meeting concluded with an approved <br />resolution to take the community feedback to the city and integrate it into developer <br />guidelines. <br /> <br />What We Learned <br /> The activities (community chalkboard event and board meeting) were selected because <br />they are two very different approaches to community engagement. In this in-class <br />demonstration we wanted to test both in their effectiveness in communicating the value of <br />natural resources in Ramsey. While initially thinking that one would stand out as a more <br />effective approach, we learned that both approaches have their benefits and that they should <br />be used together. This paired approach to community engagement can effectively <br />communicate the value of natural resources to both Ramsey residents and developers. <br /> The chalkboard activity was great at getting into the community and hearing how <br />residents of Ramsey view natural resources and how they interact with them in their own lives. <br />Each response, while personal, started to form a larger view of natural resources in the city and <br />attaching it to their response is a powerful tool. In one sense it can be good because people can <br />then see themselves and feel a stronger connection to the project. However, it can also create <br />pressure and a forced commitment to a response a person may not have given much thought <br />to. Overall, we thought the image of the person with their response was an effective <br />engagement tool, especially when it came to the board meeting. <br /> The Environmental Policy Board meeting is a more formal engagement method. It is <br />traditionally not great at engaging the community, so to help solve that barrier, we presented <br />the images of residents at the Ramsey Happy Days Festival with their responses to the question <br />we asked. By showing these images we helped bridge the gap between the informal community <br />event and the formal policy meeting. It was also a way to show community members that their <br />responses and thoughts about natural resources were being used to directly inform policy <br />decisions in the city. This is important in creating transparency, building community trust, and <br />holding the board accountable for representing the community. <br /> <br />19 <br /> <br />