Category: Public Engagement

Categories
Democracy Gov2.0 Governing Government Communication Journalism Local Government News Media public communications management Public Engagement Public Information Transparency

Educating the Public: A Brave New World

This is a reprint of a guest column I was invited to submit to Barrett & Greene Inc. published on 11/29/2023 (Adapted for the TDK blog, readers have the option between the “appetizer” version and the “main course” version.)

As an appetizer…

In a democracy, the news media’s vital role in disseminating government information faces challenges with the rise of social media. As technology transforms communication, government officials argue its advantages for efficiency, while journalists warn of unchecked government influence. Public trust in both government and news media compounds the issue. Acknowledging low trust levels, governments aim to engage residents through social media, with 55% of American adults using it for news. Caution is urged, advocating for greater coordination between public organizations and the media to ensure historic checks and balances endure. Recommendations for government managers include treating news media as constituent VIPs, using dedicated technology platforms for communication and information exchanges, and building media partnerships for informed public discourse to navigate challenges and uphold democratic principles.

As the main course…

Disseminating information about government and public affairs is a basic responsibility of the news media in a democratic society. The Founders believed it was important for a formal institution, independent of government, to have the responsibility to oversee, vet, and inform the public about government affairs and guarantee it constitutional protection.

However, with rapid advancements in digital communication, the landscape is changing. Social media supplements and at times circumvents the role of the traditional press as a means for state and local governments to get their messages across to a broad audience. This trend introduces new challenges and opportunities to inform, educate, and engage residents that impact government deliberations and policymaking. 

Many public officials argue that using these enabling technologies improves efficiency in delivering information to larger, more diverse populations they serve. The journalism community warns that when the government circumvents the news media, residents become vulnerable to government influence with unvetted information that may lack accuracy or contain slanted content. There are elements of truth to both perspectives.

Compounding the complexity of the issue are the historically low levels of public trust in both the government and the news media. In the context of a functioning democracy, acknowledging this reality becomes crucial in understanding the dynamics between the message and the messenger, and the public’s response. 

For the most part, the goal of governments is to inform and educate the residents they serve, and it’s not a surprise that they are increasingly inclined to meet the public on common ground. “The percentage of American adults who use social media for news, sometimes or often, is now at 55%,” according to Amy Mitchell, the Pew Research Center’s director of journalism. That’s up from the presidential election of 2016 when 42% of adults received at least some news from social media.

Enabling technologies present opportunities to expand the dissemination of public information, but caution must be taken. Government managers can play a pivotal role in enhancing the quality of public information and education. Here are three recommendations that advocate for cultural shifts within public organizations –which are never easy:

1. Treat the news media as a VIP member of your constituency.  Proactively utilize technology to work with the traditional news media in disseminating information to the public about your agency’s programs and policies.

Consider your department as one of many digital entry and dissemination points to the media and the public. Go from an information gatekeeper to an information gateway using technology to stream relevant content to a wider audience.

Work with your communication manager to build relationships with journalists through regular media briefings and position yourself as a point of contact for media inquiries that address your span of control within the administration.

2. Use a dedicated technology platform beyond social networks. A scalable, enterprise technology public engagement platform is essential to sharing information on a large scale. Each agency should have its designated portal providing easy access to information for the public and the media. 

Public engagement platforms benefit your agency and the news media in two ways. First, it is a proactive repository for information about your programs and policies the public and the media can easily access. Second, it serves as a collection point for public input and feedback. The information and exchanges amplify your message to a larger audience and can identify topics of interest the news media may want to follow up on. Your communications director and IT department are key internal partners.

3. Build news media partnerships for informed public discourse. Governments use public forums to inform residents about public policies and projects. The media’s role has been that of an observer. 

Partner with the news media to cosponsor public forums, both conventional and online, and share responsibility for managing public information and feedback. Each institution serves a different role and purpose as a public information provider. However, working together provides inclusive background and analyses which help build public support and trust and minimize misinformation. 

Be creative with the partnership in navigating community awareness around other critical public issues, such as misinformation education and digital media literacy campaigns.

The digital age has ushered in new challenges and opportunities for the primary institutional providers of public affairs information –the press and the public sector. While technological changes empower governments to play an increased role in information dissemination, trust must be preserved – a goal that is becoming ever more difficult.  

To restore public trust, both the government and the news media must build meaningful relationships with the residents they serve and with each other. Improving their roles as public information providers becomes the first and most crucial step in navigating the complexities of governing in the digital age while upholding the principles of democracy.

Categories
Democracy Journalism Local Government News Media PIO Public Engagement Public Information

Reimagining the PIO-Journalist Relationship to Build Trust and Inform Society

As an appetizer…

I attended my first 3CMA Annual Conference in Orlando. My presentation tackled the crucial task of rebuilding trust in government, the media, and democracy. I emphasized the roles of government communicators and journalists in informing and educating the public about public affairs and stressed the need for greater cooperation between them. The historic friction between these groups has eroded, mirroring societal polarization. Technological shifts and declining public trust in both institutions have strained their effectiveness and public trust. To rebuild, both must engage their communities and each other. Increasing transparency and modernized, expanded engagement are key, and leveraging technology to bridge the gap. Collaboration is essential for a more informed, educated, and engaged public.

As the main course…

I attended the 3CMA Annual Conference in Orlando last month, marking my first attendance. My familiarity with this great organization of government communicators and marketers dates back to my days as a Public Information Officer (PIO) with the City of Louisville.

Continue reading “Reimagining the PIO-Journalist Relationship to Build Trust and Inform Society”
Categories
Public Engagement

Revolutionizing Public Engagement: A Look Back at Neighborhood America’s Impact

As an appetizer…

Neighborhood America, a gov tech pioneer in Naples, FL, was a 1990s startup. It transformed government-citizen relations. In 2002, I joined this innovative team. They pioneered online public engagement when it was novel, creating a controlled digital space mirroring traditional meetings. Their achievements included online public comment collection for post-9/11 World Trade Center reconstruction and aiding the U.S. National Parks Service on Flight 93 National Monument. They also enabled communication for Hurricane Katrina survivors working with CNN. While tech evolved, Neighborhood America’s legacy inspired other online public engagement platforms and start-ups. In an era of trust-building, digital civic engagement thrives, shaping an empowered future.

As the main course…

In the rapidly evolving landscape of government technology, few stories stand as emblematic of innovation and foresight as that of Neighborhood America, a groundbreaking gov tech company based in Naples, FL. Founded in the 90s by visionary leaders CEO Kim Patrick Kobza and CIO Bankston, the company embarked on a journey that would reshape the way governments and citizens interacted. I joined this innovative team in 2002.

Continue reading “Revolutionizing Public Engagement: A Look Back at Neighborhood America’s Impact”
Categories
Civic Engagement Government Communication PIO Public Engagement Public Information

Treat Residents as Stakeholders, Not Customers by “Channeling” Community Engagement

The challenge for successful communication and information-sharing

As an appetizer…

This article compares communication strategies between public institutions, particularly local governments, and the private sector. While both sectors aim to engage their audiences, they differ significantly in purpose and approach. Local governments often struggle due to resource limitations and legal constraints, unlike private businesses which aim to make themselves accessible and distinct. Social media plays a role but poses challenges for governments due to scattered accounts and limited staff resources. An omnichannel approach can improve government communication. It’s crucial to recognize that residents are stakeholders, not customers, and prioritize meaningful participation to build trust and enhance civic infrastructure in local communities.

As the main course…

Most public and private organizations have a communication and information-sharing (CIS) strategy for their audiences. Businesses interact with prospective and existing customers. Public institutions interact with constituents and residents.

Continue reading “Treat Residents as Stakeholders, Not Customers by “Channeling” Community Engagement”
Categories
Branding Local Government Public Engagement

The Power of Branding: The Public Engagement Asset

When it comes to branding, jurisdictions should consider public engagement as part of their strategy. 

Read as an appetizer…

Public organizations and their jurisdictions should integrate public engagement into their branding strategy, mirroring how businesses manage their brand image. A positive community brand attracts businesses, conventions, and tourists and relies on residents’ trust in their local government. Trust is foundational for public institutions and crucial for political participation and social cohesion. Yet current data shows growing public mistrust of government. To help (re)build trust, increasing transparency and community cooperation is essential. Public engagement, facilitated by technology platforms, enhances transparency, fosters involvement, and boosts trust, positively impacting a government’s brand and image. Creative communication strategies and the right technology enable an open, progressive local government to build and maintain a strong brand.

Read as the main course…

Note: This is a reprint of a blog post contributed to PublicInput.com) 

ReaJust as companies work to improve the image of their brand, many local governments do the same.  Creating and maintaining a favorable community image has always been a key component of any economic development strategy. Typically falling on local chambers of commerce and convention and visitors bureaus, promoting a positive community brand helps attract businesses, conventions, and tourists.

Continue reading “The Power of Branding: The Public Engagement Asset”
Categories
Civic Engagement Local Government Public Engagement

Public Engagement and the CIO

(This is a reprint of a blog post contributed to PublicInput.com)

CIOs and IT see a greater role in public engagement

Modern-day government is adding democracy to their list of CIO priorities. In the 2020 State CIO Survey conducted by the National Association of State CIOs (NASCIO), “Digital services and emerging technologies” took over as the #1 priority replacing cyber security which had held that spot for four years. While CIO/IT engagement with citizens has addressed many public policy areas, those exchanges were never as critical as in their new role that began in March 2020.

When COVID-19 struck, public officials retreated from conventional public engagement practices for the health and safety of themselves and for the members of their communities. Despite this, the imperative for local governments to remain open and continue dialog with residents and facilitate their participation in deliberations remained –particularly in times of crises

Many local governments were unprepared technologically and procedurally for a seamless transition from conventional, in-person meetings to virtual ones. As a result, the circumstances propelled by the pandemic set the stage for an incredible transformation in the IT government space.

CIOs and their teams became the central government employees in public meetings. They were the architects and managers to build and at times run the platforms for public bodies and the public to virtually connect and collaborate.

The expanding CIO role is being recognized by government leaders who are realizing their value beyond traditional technologists and as key players and enablers in the future of government-citizen collaboration.

“We have also seen concrete evidence that technology is expected by the general public and important for communicating and engaging at scale.”  CIO quote from NASCIO survey

Leveraging Technology

Most CIOs and IT staff were challenged early on in the pandemic to cobble together multiple technologies to replicate and comply with traditional in-person meetings and requirements.

Today, many have found end-to-end solutions offering the best fit to bring more diversity, equity, inclusion, and meaning to public engagement and decision-making processes.

Expanding the role and influence of CIOs and IT to ensure the government has a secure and manageable platform that improves both the quantity and quality of collaboration with residents offers both an opportunity and a challenge.

In this year’s NASCIO survey, “with responses being collected a full year after the pandemic began, one answer overwhelmingly stood out as the biggest driver for state governments’ need to digitize: ‘better online experience for citizens.’”

A survey from Emerging Local Government Leaders (ELGL) echoed this at the community level. Asked which areas of government where software and technology adoption were made during the pandemic would become permanent, 83% of respondents identified “community engagement.”

What does this new role of “democracy enabler” mean for CIOs and for their departments?

This larger role illustrates the importance of technology solutions to public engagement in governing today. The responsibility to contribute to successful engagement is spread across a broader spectrum of government employees, each contributing their talent to the process.

Public engagement is more than collecting input and feedback from residents. It is a central theme for public institutions to build and rebuild trust among constituents and the opportunity to collect more informed input from subject matter experts in their communities that lead to better decision-making for the whole.

Expect to see an ongoing role for IT as local governments continue to utilize virtual methods along with conventional forms of public engagement to provide residents and public officials with a blended, or hybrid environment that takes advantage of the benefits offered using both formats.

Categories
Public Engagement

IAP2 Tech Panel Discusses Virtual Engagement

(This is a reprint of a blog post contributed to PublicInput.com)

PublicInput had the pleasure of joining other public engagement tech companies on a virtual panel at the 2021 IAP2 North America Conference. Sharing our experiences, insights and predictions surrounding virtual public engagement with our colleagues and practitioners is always an enjoyable and productive experience.

Dr. Kristin Williams with PublicInput, joined Aaron Bernard of Spatial Media, Ward Ferguson of Jambo and Joseph Thornley, of 76Engage. Aaron’s Spatial Media colleague, Rohan Aurora, moderated the panel that addressed three questions concerning the impact of the pandemic on public engagement, adapting new technologies to existing engagement practices, and future predictions.

Below is a summary of the exchange that ensued.

Question #1 – The Pandemic: 

What were the impacts and trends that emerged in engagement?

This was a retrospective question to explore lessons learned. A general observation from the panelists addressed how unprepared technologically and procedurally many public institutions were to respond when conventional, in-person engagement and deliberations were halted. However, everyone acknowledged and credited local governing bodies for their quick actions and creativity, along with a seasoned group of public engagement practitioners to respond and adapt to the dire circumstances and the need for continuity of our public institutions.

Panelists noted the presence of new government staff who not only attended the virtual public meetings (VPMs) but were also running them on behalf of their organizations: the CIO or IT department. Their chief role was to ensure virtual meetings would be convened with as little disruption as possible.

The panelists cited their own experience working with customers and feedback from public engagement practitioners about the challenges to integrating technology platforms in their proceedings, however, there is general acceptance of their benefits for using virtual public meetings in the future and interest in blending them with in-person deliberations currently and to continue after the pandemic subsides. These views were also noted in a study by Engaging Local Government Leaders (ELGL) and others that found support to continue the use of virtual meetings and mirrors the thoughts of PublicInput.

Data collected over the past 18 months demonstrate VPMs are having a positive impact on public engagement. And with the resurgence of the COVID Delta variant governments are not in a hurry to cast aside their role in governing and democracy. VPMs provide a sustainable option for increasing public participation and offer jurisdictions an effective input and feedback tool to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion in their deliberations.

Providing a “win-win-win-win” scenario benefiting public engagement practitioners, governing bodies, govtech solution providers, and residents, the panelists were optimistic about wider adoption and a bright future for VPMs.

Question #2 – Adaptation: 

What are people doing today that could be improved with tech?

The moderator asked panelists to share advice with the attendees from what they have learned and are seeing in virtual public engagement practices. Panelists suggested that 2020 was a tumultuous year for public participation due to the pandemic, the social injustice protests surrounding police reforms and a divisive, polarized presidential election followed.

“We are at a pivotal point in the relationship between the government and constituents,” noted Dr. Williams. There was mutual agreement that trust in government and trust in society had suffered and one way to help rebuild trust was through greater transparency, inclusive participation and accountability. And solutions to address those challenges will have to come through greater use of technology to encourage and facilitate greater collaboration between government and residents.

Panelists also discussed the benefits and potential liabilities for governments using social networks as public engagement platforms versus the government’s own and managed engagement platform. There was some disagreement on this topic between PublicInput’s Williams and Jambo’s Thornley. Thornley argued against their use as it provides private social networks with free data from the public. Williams suggested there were some roles for social networks in public engagement as communication and information providers. Both panelists agreed to continue the conversation beyond the IAP2 session as this is an important, unresolved topic surrounding data ownership, security, and privacy.

Question #3 – The Future: 

What does the future look like for engagement and technology?

The moderator suggested the panelists address this hypothetical question by identifying social and technological trends that have and could impact the future of public engagement. As an example, the moderator asked how tech support might foster or potentially present challenges to engagement practices.

There was total agreement among the panelists that a new era of public engagement and representative democracy is emerging thanks in part to a changing culture and enabling technologies. This includes new models for how governance and public engagement are administered and how to use media tools to rebuild public governance.

The panelists returned to the experiences of local governments during the pandemic and the use of VPMs and their potential to be at the center of public participation. This discussion included trending topics in public engagement around growing interest in blended, or hybrid models of public engagement that combine conventional, in-person methods with virtual models.

Panelists suggested as the new technologies become more ubiquitous and more user-friendly, the heavy emphasis on CIOs and IT will fade with the administration of these platforms directed by staff who traditionally played a role in public engagement.

Finally, panelists cited the opportunity to increase and expand the use of virtual public engagement to opportunities beyond council meetings and public project feedback to tap into the knowledge of their residents for contributions to solutions for the many socio-economic challenges local governments and communities are facing.

Categories
Local Government Public Engagement

Public Engagement Effectiveness

(This is a reprint of a blog post contributed to PublicInput.com)

Enterprise Public Engagement

Applying enterprise approaches to public engagement helps government increase input and feedback for better decision-making, inclusion, and efficiency.

The IBM Center for The Business of Government connects research to practice in helping to improve government and to assist public sector executives and managers in addressing real-world problems with practical ideas and original thinking to improve government.  The“Seven Drivers Transforming Government” is the culmination of research with current and former government leaders that identifies seven drivers for transforming government in the years to come.

PublicInput is applying a selection of those drivers to interpreting the future of one of the government’s most important success components: public engagement.

Effectiveness

IBM Center for The Business of Government

Applying enterprise approaches to achieve better outcomes, operational efficiency and a leaner government.

Approaches to Engagement

When asked for examples of public engagement, many people may suggest a town hall or council meeting where members of the public are allotted a brief opportunity to provide public comments to their elected officials. Others may point to government initiatives around transportation or environmental projects where governments seek input or feedback from impacted residents.

Few people, if any, suggest an example of public engagement as a 24/7/365 service between the government and their constituents. On the surface, daily engagement sounds like a pretty massive undertaking. Engagement practitioners often wonder, can something like this be accomplished and what benefits can be realized for a government and a community engaged in on-demand collaboration around important policy issues.

The answer is a government with the ongoing goal of being more effective, both in terms of its operations and results.

Effectiveness

Effectivity has been demonstrated through the use of technology across government agencies –known as the adoption of enterprise solutions– to deliver mission-support services seamlessly across program and organizational boundaries.

The Future of Performance

IBM Center for The Business of Government

. . . the future of government performance relies not simply on greater efficiency, but also on increasing capacity to work effectively

How does this apply to public engagement? 

We saw firsthand at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic the critical challenge for state and local agencies to effectively use technology to continue their deliberations with public officials and the community. To continue public meetings in many jurisdictions, it took emergency executive orders, supporting legislation, and a corps of talented and hard-working CIOs and IT departments across the nation. Not only was the government less efficient in carrying out the basic function of public engagement, it was also noted among many jurisdictions and governing bodies as an ineffective way to inform constituents and to solicit input on public issues.

As the pandemic continued, most governing bodies adopted some form of information and/or communication technologies to continue meetings and public engagement, even without the efficiency or effectiveness required or desired. Today, a new era of public engagement and representative democracy is emerging through the use of dedicated public engagement technology platforms.

From these platforms, governments are realizing the benefits of blending virtual and conventional approaches to public engagement that increase and diversify participation. Data collected through the use of new public engagement models to organize and centralize public governance are creating more effective processes that can be realized across multiple departments.

Positive, Significant, & Lasting Change

 

IBM Center for The Business of Government

To achieve positive, significant, and lasting change, government leaders must focus on sound implementation. The focus on implementation involves the meaningful integration of operations across agencies via an enterprise approach.

24/7/365 Engagement

Governments need to consider what an enterprise approach to public engagement could look like with a 24/7/365 public engagement process. It will take a rethinking of how we use technology and how we define public engagement.

It will require the government and the public to change the narrative when it comes to public engagement. Instead of being selective where public participation or comments are sought, the government should be engaging the public on issues in every department every day. This cannot be accomplished without the use of technology solutions. Fortunately, we have the technology capable of enterprise deployment.

Governments must also consider how they can be more effective through more engagement. There is a vast ocean of knowledge among the residents in a community. Many who possess skills and expertise about challenges the government faces every day surrounding public policies would offer their input or feedback if given the right mechanism to contribute to it.

At PublicInput, we agree with those thought leaders who advocate governments should constantly be thinking about how they can tap into the community’s energy and enthusiasm and leverage that with public work being performed by the government on their behalf.

Enterprise Government

 

IBM Center for The Business of Government

. . . enterprise government focuses on mission support and emphasizes streamlining and integration of administrative services, as well as processes and functions that share common elements.

Public engagement can be a shared service —government-wide or department-wide– as a system that can be standardized, produced, and delivered, aligning enterprise approaches with problem-solving. That is, public engagement should look and operate the same across all government sectors and agencies offering governments a centralized, organized, managed, and reported system made more efficient through an enterprise solution.

Government Transformation

IBM Center for the Business of Government

Enterprise approaches that leverage modern management and technology systems and practices can enable progress across the public sector. The evolution of enterprise government can give fresh momentum to improving effectiveness and driving transformation in government. 

Adding “engagement” to public administration along with the basic framework of economy, efficiency, and effectiveness is a principal way of practicing the work of governance with more inclusion and equity creating more informed decision-making.

Categories
Democracy Local Government Public Engagement State Government

Virtual Meetings & State Legislatures

(This is a reprint of a blog post contributed to PublicInput.com)

More state legislatures are enabling virtual public meetings as an option for deliberations and public engagement.

Historically, government officials have been required to meet in person to deliberate about the public’s business. This has been particularly true for meetings that included constituents and their elected representatives. Some states even have laws requiring officials to attend meetings in person.

Face-to-face meetings between elected officials and the public are important.

This is because elected officials can’t ignore people that are right in front of them talking about a problem or a policy. It also helps them put a “face” to a certain issue or law. The public’s physical presence at a meeting can be very impactful when making decisions and could affect the outcome.

Times and technology have changed and public attendance at council meetings or committee meetings usually represents those who have a strong opinion for or against the issue that is being debated and may not represent the voice of the whole community.

The Pursuit of Alternative Means

In March 2020 as the COVID-19 virus became a pandemic, state and local governments were forced to shutter their buildings and halt their in-person proceedings. Alternative means had to be pursued to conduct the public’s business and for the continuation of governance.

For years, the public has had options to view or listen to their governing bodies’ proceedings electronically, whether online, televised, or by radio and officials were physically present in those proceedings. Now, the elected and the electorate would need to segregate from each other and conduct their meetings virtually. Yet, some states had laws that required meetings of public bodies to have the officials present which prevented them from attending virtually.

With the growing pandemic, states had to act fast to enable the government to continue to operate and in a way that would not violate their open government laws surrounding access, participation, and transparency of public meetings.

Executive orders became the norm in most states to enable their governments to continue operations, including holding virtual proceedings. Those emergency orders, however, had deadlines so it was up to state legislatures in those states that restricted virtual attendance to create formal alternatives for convening public meetings.

Fast forward to the summer of 2021

With a year and a half of a continuing (and resurging) pandemic, along with 18 months of positive data about the effectiveness of virtual public meetings (VPM), decisions by state and local governments to meet virtually have taken hold across the nation on whether or not there were legal restrictions preventing them. Today, VPMs as an alternative or complement to in-person meetings are launching a new era of public engagement for governments and for residents.

Recall that not all states have laws requiring in-person attendance by officials that prevent VPMs and therefore do not require legislative action to approve their use. Wyoming is a good example of a state that switched to VPMs over the last year and a half, including hybrid models, to ensure continuity of services and decision-making along with public outreach.

For those states that either required officials’ in-person attendance or wanted to revise legislation to ensure VPMs were included in their public meeting requirements, 17 states had bills filed over the last year that included language pertaining to VPMs, according to BillTrack50, a free research and tracking service of state and federal legislation and legislators from LegiNation, Inc.,

So far, four of the 17 states have signed and enacted legislation to support VPMs (California, Georgia, Nebraska and Utah), while seven are still in committees or have been approved by one chamber and crossed-over to the other. These states include Hawaii, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, South Carolina and Washington. Bills addressing VPMs in six states died in committee or failed on the floor: Florida, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, Nevada and Texas.

A New Way to Govern

With or without needed changes to laws to enable VPMs across state and local jurisdictions, many public officials and residents are realizing the benefits along with the challenges of adjusting to VPMs and hybrid models that blend VPMs with in-person meetings.  Residents are enjoying the ease and convenience to learn about and engage their public officials without the challenges to their schedules including traveling to a meeting for whatever reason they may have.

Public officials are seeing the ranks of public participation swell and increased diversity among attendees. Key challenges facing public bodies such as inclusion to hear from more voices in the community are being facilitated using VPMs. The public’s personal preferences surrounding communicating and sharing information with public officials are being met and with greater ease. That helps build more trust between public officials and residents.

Whether out of necessity or in response to a disaster, state and local governments and their constituents are finding VPMs provide a new and welcoming way for governing and advancing democracy in their jurisdictions.

 

Categories
Covid-19 Democracy Public Engagement virtual public meeting

The Cracks in Most Virtual Public Meetings Revealed by COVID-19

(This article was originally posted as a guest blog for PublicInput during Sunshine Week 2021)

Every state has open government laws regarding requirements and policies for public records and public meetings. A year ago, during Sunshine Week 2020, most states enacted emergency orders to rescind those laws due to the COVID-19 pandemic. For state and local governments, in particular, agencies and personnel were faced with an unprecedented challenge to manage operations remotely including their public engagement.

Access to and management of public records and public meetings became a major challenge for the public sector as well as for the public. Bringing together public officials virtually had its own challenges –technical and procedural. However, when it came to ensuring the public would be able to participate in those meetings, chaos emerged.

Technology is supposed to create efficiencies for its users. However, in many cases, virtual public meetings required more staff than conventional public meetings and from agencies that typically do not play a major role in these meetings.

Digital transition and adoption by government have lagged behind the private sector. For two decades, that focus has been prioritized on government’s transactional relationships with the public, e.g., (taking and processing payments, documentation, information searches, and exchanges) and less on interactional relationships, i.e., public engagement, even though end-to-end solutions are available. And the pandemic exposed these shortcomings in a big way.

As the government scrambled to comply with their legal requirements to ensure public and press access to public meetings, we saw three models of virtual public meetings emerge:

  1. Fail: Many jurisdictions wanted to forego all compliance with their open government laws regarding: records and meetings. And many decided not to make the effort if it wasn’t required, and if it was, performed the very basic response to meet the minimum requirements. Lacking the technology capabilities, the training, or just the initiative, the results were poor and unproductive leaving both the government bodies and the public with a lousy experience. Losing the public wasn’t the only consequence. Losing their trust at a critical time during a pandemic is something not easily regained.
  2. Frankenstein: This model emerged from most governments that made efforts to comply with laws and procedures by piecing together multiple technology solutions to handle the tasks. Think about an orchestra: many instrument sections to perform one musical piece. As Miami’s CIO, Mike Sarasti said on Twitter after a March 25 commission meeting, they “used @zoom_us for in-meeting participants, then attendee view was sent out to usual @Granicus, Twitter, FB Feeds. @Qualtrics for Form-based feedback, voicemail via @Cisco setup, @WeTransfer for vid submission. Add a fair share of talented co-workers, & you’re good.” That’s a lot of government cooks in the kitchen. This model is proving unsustainable due to its inefficiency, expense, and unpredictability.
  3. Future: This model represents those governments and agencies that realized and took advantage of end-to-end technology solutions specifically created to manage virtual public meetings/engagement and meet their legal and political responsibilities (like other GovTech solutions developed to handle different administrative responsibilities and requirements in other agencies). Benefits have included increased participation and inclusion, more manageable public input, greater efficiency and productivity, and trust.

One thing we have learned from successful virtual meetings over the last year is that given the opportunity to participate, the public will. However, the quality of the experience will determine whether they return.

Virtual meetings, when working, are being accepted by the public and by the public institutions convening them. Many public officials (especially elected ones) have expressed their desire to return to in-person meetings for that face-to-face experience. However, successful virtual public meetings have made an impressive impact as a way for governments to engage the public and vice versa.

An early concern in the pandemic was that due to the turmoil being created by virtual public meetings, once the virus subsided, governments would return exclusively to in-person meetings, missing the opportunity to create a new era of public engagement. However, that is not happening. New policies and laws are being changed or created to include the continuation of virtual public meetings that can complement or be held in lieu of in-person meetings.

In Boston, efforts are underway to make remote, virtual participation in public hearings and meetings a permanent fixture of city government. Legislation proposed in Nebraska will allow local governments to hold meetings via “virtual conferencing.” Similar efforts are being pushed in South Carolina and other states and local jurisdictions.

An engaged and informed public has economic and civic benefits, and virtual public meetings meet new communication and information needs and expectations of constituents.

The opportunity for governments will be how to structure their public participation to continue virtual public meetings and combine them with in-person meetings as they continue their transition in the digital age of public engagement and democratic practices.

Think of the virtual public meeting as the heart of citizen engagement.

Former Washington State representative Renee Radcliff Sinclair speaking about government transparency and trust said this week: “The COVID-19 pandemic has tested us all in ways we never imagined. And while its long-term societal impacts probably won’t be known for some time, in the short term it has substantially eroded our trust in our cornerstone institutions, including government… So, the question becomes, how do we build back that trust? By giving the public a front-row seat to its proceedings.”