Chapter 4 Public Hearing Techniques and Strategies 

Successful advocates:

1) Define the problem - achieves the objectives of a) defining the problem in simplest of terms b) identify the best strategy and tactics for the mission c) clarify concepts and resolve ambiguities d) minimize confusion e) put the problem in perspective f) discover useful peripheral information

Use information to:

1) determine whether the problem is an issue, policy, or project

2) defining the problem

3) determining the heart of the problem - separates debate from tangential arguments -hidden agendas often obscure the real issues

4) obtain as much information about the problem as possible - examine history of problem - look for analogies

5) define the advocacy position - exactly what does the advocacy group want to see happen

Finding information:

1. legislation: Congressional Record, Thomas (Library of Congress) Calendar of Federal Regulations, Federal Register, trade, professional, or other groups willing to provide info

2. EIS's

3. Permit application (contains information on the project)

minutes of meetings, public hearings, and official actions, comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances, etc

4. Media coverage

Regulations and Procedures Are Important!

1) affect the selection of strategies for the hearing process

2) agencies often make mistakes in the process (can be used to your advantage)

3) non-compliance with NEPA may occur (this is basis for Legal Theory Strategy)

4) non-compliance with Federal and State executive orders, FOIA, anti-secrecy laws, conflict-of-interest policies, and open-meeting laws specifying notice, times and locations of public hearings indicate selection of Legal Theory Strategy

What to Do:

1) Outline the provisions of the act or law that applies to the specific public hearing

Public hearing required:

1) applying for and administering federal grants

2) setting state and local budgets

3) 48 states have Administrative Procedures Act

4) granting permits before physical development

Determining Strategy is Important!

1) forces advocates to think through how to influence outcome

2) usually the source of an advocacy group's failure

How to select strategy? Consider the following:

1) The nature of the problem

2) The decision-makers-their authority, thinking styles and voting records (know them well!)

Thinking styles

analyst - interested in best way to solve a problem

realists - fact oriented

idealists - value sincerity and less likely to go with cost/benefit

pragmatists - prefer to get on with the job

synthesist - must understand the essence of the issues by examining different perspectives

3. The public perception of the problem

-public awareness may dictate strategy (e.g., Fairness strategy)

4. The opponents and supporters of the proposed solution

-some groups are more comfortable with certain strategies, (e.g., businessmen prefer Public Consensus or Legal Strategy

5) The media perception of the problem

Most Public hearing discussions fall into one of 6 types of problems:

1. What the public wants - The Public Consensus Strategy

premise: public officials prefer to act in concert with their constituents

used when no clear "right" or "wrong" action has emerged—numbers decide the correct decision

tactics: large numbers of persons testifying

petitions

marches

other evidence of mass support

disadvantage - requires superior leadership and organization to marshal a large number of volunteers

advantage - very effective…and may be used in conjunction with other strategies

2. The public interest - The Public Interest Strategy

premise: there is a public interest (considered good) that can be distinguished from private interests (considered bad)

often used for environmental, health, safety, and natural resource issues

disadvantage - difficulty of identifying the public interest of a proposal—concepts of public interest and public good is tentative and tenuous

advantage - attractive for public officials, the media, and the public, works well in combination with the Public Consensus strategy, the Legal Theory strategy, and the Fairness Strategy

3. Proper procedure - The Legal Theory Strategy -probes for non-compliance of regulations or procedures

-requires familiarity with regulations and frequently demands the services of a qualified attorney

-implies the threat of litigation

-claim of improper notice, inadequate opportunity to be heard, lack of a quorum, inappropriate action of chairman, violation of a regulatory procedure

advantage - independent from public consensus

disadvantage - cost

4. Equitable treatment for all citizens - The Fairness Strategy

premise - basic human desire of public officials to make a fair decision

-aim is to persuade decision-makers that only fair outcome is the one that favors a particular group

-disadvantaged groups often use this strategy (the claim of "unfair" is often heard)

-may be used to request that government intervene to protect certain groups

disadvantage - community polarization often results

advantage - appeals to the base instinct (ideal) of public officials

5. Making wise decisions - The Mistake Strategy

prophesizes dire results as a consequence of a decision

6. Finding a compromise solution - The Mitigation Strategy

depends on the preference of public officials to please as many constituents as possible and on the desire to get something done—it is a reconciling, conciliatory strategy

most effective when initiated early in the public participation process

disadvantage - must be a sense of urgency for resolution of a conflict and willingness of all parties to reconcile differences (won’t work if one party feels confident that he/she will win a total decision)