Saint Paul’s CommunityEngagement System: CHALLENGES, POSSIBILITIES, REVIVAL FOR THE

DISTRICT COUNCILS

JULY 2018

CONTENTS

Acknowledgments........................................................................................................ 1

Introduction....................................................................................................................... 2

Methodology...................................................................................................................... 3

Disclaimer............................................................................................................................ 5

Executive Summary..................................................................................................... 6

Putting Principles into Practice........................................................................ 18

     Staff Meetings ......................................................................................................... 19

     Innovation Fund Equity Work ................................................................... 20

     Foundation................................................................................................................. 21

     Defining Equitable Engagement............................................................. 21

     Accountability and Support......................................................................... 21

     Board Members ................................................................................................... 22

Building Effectiveness............................................................................................. 23

Building Effectiveness Collectively................................................................ 24

     Resources................................................................................................................... 25

     Maximizing Existing Staff, Resources................................................... 26

     Relationships........................................................................................................... 27

     Focal Points.............................................................................................................. 28

     Identity and Communication.................................................................... 29

     Staff Retention........................................................................................................ 31

Building Effectiveness Internally..................................................................... 32

     Expand and Diversify Capacity.................................................................. 32

     Strengthen Identity............................................................................................ 34

     Be More Visible....................................................................................................... 35

     Make Accessibility a Reality......................................................................... 36

Building Effectiveness in Partnership with the City......................... 38

     Make a Commitment........................................................................................ 39

     City Financial Support for District Councils..................................... 40

     Maximize Available Resources................................................................... 41

     Invest in the System........................................................................................... 44

     History of Funding................................................................................................46

     (Re)define City Community Engagement Expectation......... 47

     Synchronize planning documents and processes..................... 49

The Next Step ............................................................................................................... 50

This project was made possible by a grant from the City of Saint Paul’s Innovation Fund.

This report was written by Michael Kuchta (District 10 Como) and Liz Boyer(District 14 Macalester-Groveland). This report was designed by KathrynMurray (District 12 Saint Anthony Park) and Britta Sherrill (District 14Macalester-Groveland).

The Steering Committee for this project included the report authors and Kathryn Murray (District 12 Saint Anthony Park), Kerry Antrim (District 6North End), Lisa Theis (District 2 East Side), and Lissa Jones-Lofgren (District5 Payne-Phalen).

Previous members: Deanna Abbot-Foster (District 4 Dayton’s Bluff), JulieReiter (District 13 Union Park), Monica Bravo (District 3 West Side),  SarahGoodspeed (District 12 Saint Anthony Park), Suyapa Miranda (District 12 SaintAnthony Park).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

1

INTRODUCTION

This report summarizes PhaseTwo of a project supported by theCity of Saint Paul’s InnovationFund. Phase One, reported to theCity Council in May 2017, had twocomponents. One reportdocumented the current state ofSaint Paul’s four-decade-oldDistrict Council system. A secondreport compared Saint Paul’ssystem with the formalcommunity engagement effortsin three other cities: Boston,Massachusetts; Portland,Oregon; and Seattle,Washington. (See the appendixfor report links).

The local component of PhaseOne summarizes the existingfinancial, staff, and volunteerresources of Saint Paul’s DistrictCouncils; some of the prominentways (historical and current) inwhich District Councils createlasting change in theirneighborhoods and the city; theday-to-day priorities of DistrictCouncils; and how DistrictCouncils and the residentvolunteers who drive them arewoven into the fabric of SaintPaul’s civic life. Phase Oneincludes 10 “lessons learned” --

principles to follow for effective,equitable community engagement(see Page 5) – and suggests 8tactics being used in other citiesthat Saint Paul could study andadapt.

Phase One focused primarily oncataloguing the capacity andoperations of Saint Paul’s DistrictCouncils. But during Phase Onediscussions, staff and boardmembers began to voice some ofthe challenges Councils face. Thatwas the starting line for this PhaseTwo project.

Phase Two gave staff and boardmembers (and, ultimately,additional communitystakeholders) the opportunity todiscuss the challenges they seefacing District Councils, bothcitywide and within individualorganizations. These Phase Twodiscussions then began to identifyspecific ways in which individualCouncils, city government, andDistrict Councils as a system canpursue policies and activities thatwill make the city’s communityengagement efforts moreeffective.

2

METHODOLOGY

This Phase Two project was guided by 11 staff members from 9 DistrictCouncils.

Project leadership team: Liz Boyer (District 14 Macalester-Groveland)and Michael Kuchta (District 10 Como Park).

Project Steering Committee: Kathryn Murray (District 12 SaintAnthony Park), Kerry Antrim (District 6 North End),  Lisa Theis (District2 East Side), Lissa Jones-Lofgren (District 5 Payne-Phalen).

Previous members: Deanna Abbot-Foster (District 4 Dayton’s Bluff),Julie Reiter (District 13 Union Park), Monica Bravo (District 3 WestSide),  Sarah Goodspeed (District 12 Saint Anthony Park), SuyapaMiranda (District 12 Saint Anthony Park)

 “Why do District Councils have a reputation for not doing importantwork? How could we improve this? How would this lead to achievingbetter equitable engagement?”“What problems are inherent in our system? How could we do itdifferently? How could we allocate funds differently? How would thislead to achieving better equitable engagement?”“Why don’t Councils relate well to each other anymore? How couldthis be improved? How would this lead to achieving better equitableengagement?”

The Steering Committee and a contracted facilitator, Barbara Raye, led:

The second staff discussion, on Feb. 1, 2018, involved 18 participants from12 Councils. It focused on these questions, which evolved out of topicsraised in the first staff discussion:

“How can we cooperate on day-to-day operations?”“How do we spread the word on coordinating communication,messaging, storytelling?”“How do we strengthen relations and maximize our impact inworking with the city and beyond?”

Two discussions with District Council staff.   The first staff discussion, on Nov. 8, 2017, involved 23 participants from 16Councils. It focused on these questions:

3

“What are you working on and what do you care about?”“What does good public engagement look like to you?”“What is your perception of District Councils, and how are werelevant to you (or not)?”“How can we collaborate or partner with you in your work?”

Two focus groups and additional one-on-one conversations with 10“community stakeholders” who were identified by steering committeemembers. Most of these stakeholders had no ongoing relationship withtheir District Council. The conversations with stakeholders centered aroundthese questions:

Two discussions with volunteer District Council board members.       These discussions were on March 30 and April 1, 2018. Combined, thesediscussions involved 70 participants from 16 Councils. The boarddiscussions focused on these questions:

“How can we build resources and capacity as a District Councilsystem?”“How can we build power and strength through collaboration witheach other?”“How do we engage people and organizations who are not currentlyinvolved in our work?”

In addition, the project led an in-depth conversation on May 9, 2018, amongDistrict Council staff and Joe Mendyka, Saint Paul’s community engagementcoordinator. The project leadership team met with Toni Newborn, the chiefequity officer in the administration of Mayor Melvin Carter III, and hadinformal discussions with various City Council members during the project.Steering Committee members also reviewed a variety of reports and studiesthat assessed Saint Paul’s citizen participation efforts through the past fourdecades. However, to maintain a fresh perspective, these reports (and theirrecommendations) were not reviewed until after this report was drafted. Inthat way, this project ensures that the recommendations contained here arecontemporary, not recycled from the past. Nonetheless, it has become obviousthat some issues – such as equitable outreach, funding, staff turnover, andconsistent City support – have been challenges throughout the history of SaintPaul’s citizen participation efforts.

4

DISCLAIMERThis report is informed by discussions with staff, board members, and othersinvolved with or interested in Saint Paul’s District Council system, includingconversations with City staff and officials. Although it is influenced bymultiple viewpoints, ultimately, the report deliberately takes a DistrictCouncil perspective. It is intended to serve as a starting point forconversation, collaboration, and progress toward a more effective, equitablecommunity engagement commitment in Saint Paul.

The specific recommendations and comments are based on the consensus ofSteering Committee members after the input gathered through the processdescribed herein. This report should not be interpreted as representing otherDistrict Council staff or volunteers individually or as a whole. This report doesnot commit Councils, staff, or leadership to any specific action. Opportunitiesto pursue or implement components of this report will arise if therecommendations are deemed worthwhile, and only after further discussionof specific actions.

1.     Is well-resourced with consistently reliable funding. 

2.    Includes intentional cooperation and communication among        neighborhood organizations and city departments.

3.    Combines geographic engagement with culturally-based outreach that        crosses geographic lines to reach traditionally under-represented        populations.

4.    Combines project-based engagement from city departments with        grassroots resident-based engagement supported by independent        neighborhood organizations. 

5.    Seeks partnerships among city staff, neighborhood organizations and        institutions, residents and businesses, foundations, and others.

6.    Supports long-term community building in neighborhoods, not simply        reaction to one-time projects driven by city departments.

7.    Is deliberate, intentional, legitimate, and visibly credible, not just a        required box on a checklist.

8.    Looks for opportunities to innovate.

9.    Makes expectations and realities clear to all involved, early in the        process.

10.  Honors the commitment, expertise, and sincerity of resident volunteers. 5

10 Rules for Effective, EquitableCommunity Engagement

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

It is easy to identify challenges that Saint Paul’s District Councils face.Lack of vision, however, is not one of them. Increasingly, the staff andboard members of District Councils are ready for revival. They are readyto help the city’s community engagement process evolve into one thatis more robust, effective, and inclusive. They want opportunities whereneighborhoods can act collectively, have an impact citywide, and beginto unite in common purpose. They are seeking opportunities in whichCouncils can better fulfill their responsibilities as a bloc, rather than ontheir own, while still maintaining their individual identities. In short,the leaders of District Councils want to collaborate.

Citizen participation, community engagement, or by whatever name isin vogue, is at a pivotal, transformational phase in Saint Paul. DistrictCouncils, City staff, elected officials, and allies need to demonstratethat we can work constructively, in good faith, with commitment, andwith the highest intentions, to deliver genuine opportunities. Theresidents of our city -- our neighbors now and in the future -- deserveour best effort so all their voices and wisdom will be counted.

This project recommends some very specific actions that individualsand organizations can take. We classify potential solutions,recommendations, and constructive action steps in three broadcategories:

Building effectiveness collectivelyBuilding effectiveness internallyBuilding effectiveness in partnership with the City

6

PUTTING PRINCIPLE INTO

PRACTICE

The work done in carrying out this Innovation Fund project already has begunproducing the commitment and collaboration among District Councils thatthis report envisions. There is clear evidence that the culture and outlook ofDistrict Councils as organizations is shifting. It is evident in the way mostCouncils are viewing themselves as colleagues, rather than competitors, andin the frequency in which most Councils look for opportunities to put thatprinciple into practice. This shift can be documented in three areas:

                                      In recent years, fewer than half of all Councils participated onany regular basis in the monthly, citywide District Council staff meeting. Duringthis project, however, Steering Committee members took on the responsibility ofreconvening these meetings. They provided a more-robust infrastructure than inthe recent past. The result: considerably stronger participation. This year, everymeeting has been attended by staff from at least two-thirds of the Councils;every Council has been present at one time or another. This increasedparticipation generated additional benefits: stronger trust and relationships, arenewed sense of shared mission, and capacity for additional projects acrossCouncils.

Staff meetings.

                                Getting all 17 District Councils to agree on anything is practicallyunheard of. So it is hard to overstate the significance when all 17 Councils agreedto submit a joint application for the City’s annual Innovation Fund. Instead ofcompeting against each other for funds, the Councils agreed to split the grantevenly in 2018, 2019, and 2020. They committed to work simultaneously to buildequitable engagement into their day-to-day operations, and to ensure that equitybecomes a priority in every neighborhood in the city, from the ground up. Theagreement includes a shared definition of what constitutes equity work; commitsCouncils to working on three specifics type of change; and builds in mutualsupport and accountability.

Equity work.

                                         For the first time since the early years of Saint Paul’s citizenparticipation initiative, District Council board members from across the city hadan opportunity to meet, compare notes, uncover common ground, and shareaspirations. These conversations revealed a widespread desire by board membersto meet more regularly with each other and become resources for each other. Theconversations also revealed a desire for opportunities where Councils – that is,neighborhoods – can act collectively and have an impact citywide, not just ontheir own turf.

Board members.

7

BUILDING EFFECTIVENESS

COLLECTIVELY

In many ways, Saint Paul’s District Council system is more fragmented thancoordinated. It is 17 independent nonprofit organizations, committedprimarily to their geographically designated areas. Reality often forcesCouncils to compete for funding and other resources.

Discussions with District Council staff and board members, however, reveal adeep desire to work together, rather than compete. They want to meet theneeds of their specific neighborhoods, but want to do more than just protecttheir own turf.

The more than 500 board members and staff who “are” the District Councilsbelieve collaboration can address the nitty-gritty operations of how Councilswork. Collaboration can guide the principles of how Councils prioritize theiractions. Collaboration can outline how they hold themselves accountable tothemselves, to their communities, and to each other. Among areas that holdthe most promise for collaboration:

Standardized, specialized, and regular training that is relevant tothe distinct work and roles of District Councils.Mentorship, in which Councils and their leaders utilize eachother’s expertise and experiences to build collective wisdom.Support for each other on issues and during organizationalchallenges.Ensuring that District Councils play a fundamental role in the ServeSaint Paul initiative to inspire volunteerism and leadershipdevelopment.

                          The paid and unpaid individuals on District Council staff, boards,and committees represent tremendous human capital. Effectively tappingtheir potential requires:

Resources.

Eliminating duplication.                                                             Because District Councils are 17 individualorganizations, staff naturally duplicate efforts when they perform the sameroutine administrative, financial, and communication work separately. Thislimits time available for organizing residents and dealing with neighborhoodissues. Councils can explore reversing this by pooling “back office” tasks andcreating readily accessible “toolkits” of best practices and resources.

CHAPTER 1 PREVIEW

8

                                    Strengthening individual relationships is vital if Councilsexpect to collaborate successfully. Tactics to make these relationshipsinstitutional, so they survive the routine turnover of boards and staff, caninclude annual board summits, quarterly leadership meetings, anddeveloping a “compact:” an agreed-upon set of values, expectations, andprinciples to guide meetings, interactions, and how Councils work together.

Relationships.

                                Councils should pursue intentional alliances around commonissues, interests, or circumstances. They should, at a minimum, buildgeographic alliances when they are physically adjacent or share City Councilwards. But these focal points could also be topical (regardless of whetherCouncils are contiguous) or around issues where Councils can collaborate onwider structural changes.

Focal points.

                                                                        Councils need to create – and adhere to – aninspiring, common narrative to share with residents, media, elected officials,foundations, and potential allies. This messaging should provide consistentlanguage in public presentations, on Council and City websites, and providethe foundation for broader multi-media efforts in which Councils and theircommunity members describe (in their own words) the value of DistrictCouncils’ work and accomplishments. Councils should also look foropportunities to hold joint activities that raise their profile across geographicboundaries.

Identity and communication. 

                                      Councils need to work individually and collectively to reducetraditionally high rates of staff turnover, which reached 70 percent in the lastthree years. This level of attrition costs Councils, neighborhoods, and the citycontinuity, consistency, and institutional knowledge. Key areas to addressinclude the dynamics of board-staff relationships and improving staff payand benefits.

Staff retention.

9

BUILDING EFFECTIVENESS

INTERNALLY

Although part of a larger “system,” District Councils are independent 501(c)3organizations with their own fiscal, governance, and managementresponsibilities. As such, there are actions that each Council can takeindividually to build greater effectiveness and capacity within their ownorganization.

Financial and in-kind support.                                                                           Regardless of whether the Citystrengthens its commitment to the District Council system financially andotherwise, individual Councils should look to widen and deepen the tangiblesupport they receive from their communities, from foundations, from localcolleges and universities, and from other institutions. This should includedeliberate and targeted appeals for financial donations, as most nonprofitsdo. Councils should also identify specific technical needs, then seek expertiseamong local residents or institutions that can offer their time or services probono, as parts of class projects, or under similar arrangements.

Volunteers.                             Councils should make options available for volunteers beyondserving on the board. Providing meaningful volunteer experiences reducesthe burden on staff and current board members, which reduces theopportunity for burnout, which makes them more effective in core areas.Short-term projects or special events often provide an entry into theorganization for talented and committed community members, give them away to make an impact in an area they care about, or allow the Council toaccomplish a task it otherwise could not take on. Unsuccessful candidates fortheir board should be approached and asked if there is another way they arewilling to be involved. When appropriate, Councils can expand the expertiseof one of their committees by holding a joint committee meeting withanother Council. Councils should not focus exclusively on internal needs, butalso look at broader opportunities for leadership development, includingrecruiting to place community volunteers on the city’s 30 boards andcommissions.

                                                                                Turnover and loss of institutionalknowledge are significant challenges for District Councils. Especially asCouncils more successfully engage under-represented residents, it is crucialto provide leadership paths and groom new activists who demonstratecommitment and potential. In addition to making sure these new volunteers

Provide leadership development.

CHAPTER 2 PREVIEW

10

receive citywide District Council training, individual Councils should be sureto utilize formal staff and volunteer development opportunities through suchsources as the Serve Saint Paul initiative, Wilder’s Neighborhood LeadershipProgram, or the University of Minnesota’s Center for Urban and RegionalAffairs.

                                                  Individual Councils and Councils systemwide canimprove their visibility and the perception that residents hold of them. Thefact is, District Councils are unknown or misunderstood by too many people.It is a daunting challenge to overcome, especially for organizations that don’thave extensive communication capacity or PR firms on retainer. But Councils– and City staff and officials – should not be shy about promoting DistrictCouncil accomplishments and taking credit for what they achieve. Ratherthan simply reacting to issues that arise around them, Councils shouldidentify a vision for the themselves and their communities, including theirgoals and values.

Strengthen identity.

                                        Higher visibility in the community must include makingoutreach routine. Councils must go beyond simply holding meetings. Theymust dedicate staff or volunteers to outreach: door-to-door, at locations oractivities where residents already hang out, at community events sponsoredby other organizations, or simply by setting up “office hours” in a local park,business, or public housing community. Councils will need to dedicateparticular effort, persistence, and patience to reaching residents who areimmigrants or live in rental communities. Consistent, successful outreachwill require partnerships with a variety of existing community activators,culturally based organizations, and businesses. While doing this, Councils willhave to simply listen: Instead of going in with a set agenda or prescribedsolution, they need to go in with open eyes, open ears, and an open mind. Thiswill be how their organizations become more equitable, more inclusive, andmore accurately reflect their communities as a whole. It will transform notonly who is at the table, but what priorities and whose priorities are discussedat the table.

Be more visible.

                                                                   Traditional ways of doing “Council work” donot always provide community members an easy way to get involved. Inparticular, Councils need to examine how they hold meetings and, as much aspossible, modify what they do. First, recognize that the timing of meetings –typically on a weeknight – can exclude huge numbers of community memberswho face work, family, or other commitments. Similarly, the location ofmeetings can be an obstacle. To counter this, Councils should occasionallyschedule meetings on a different day, at a different time, and in a differentlocation. They should look at other ways to involve more people, includingproviding child care and livestreaming or recording and archiving theirmeetings. At the meetings themselves, recognize that the formality, 

Make accessibility a reality.

11

BUILDING EFFECTIVENESS IN

PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY

As the City of Saint Paul re-imagines community engagement, this projectencourages City officials to recognize District Councils as the natural and bestcenterpiece for a comprehensive, citywide network of resident engagementthat is based in and driven by the neighborhoods. No matter how much Citydepartments and City staff improve their internal community engagementprotocols and expectations, Councils could and should provide the nucleus forgenuine partnerships with City departments, other geographically basedorganizations, and constituency-based organizations. 

It is hard to imagine how project-driven, drop-in engagement from City Hallcan match the ongoing presence, long-term commitment, and local wisdomand context that result from the core work that District Councils do. Drop-inengagement cannot produce the relationships and leadership developmentthat District Councils produce. Therefore, this project recommends that SaintPaul demonstrates a genuine commitment to and a stronger attitude ofcollaboration with the District Council system it created.

rigidity, and adherence to parliamentary procedure can be too confusing, toointimidating, too uncomfortable, and flat-out unwelcoming for too manysegments of the community. Councils should take a deep, objective look attheir meetings: the room set-up, the structure, the processes and languageused. Then, whenever, possible, they should modify how they do meetings tomake them as informal, welcoming, and neighborly as possible, as often aspossible. Councils also need to examine how they manage the conflict thatcan be the natural result of providing a forum to work through issues. Thegoal here, as much as possible, should be to channel people and their energytoward solutions, not endless debate.

CHAPTER 3 PREVIEW

12

                                                    Too often, the City seems to have an institutionalambivalence toward District Councils. In the initial public draft of the City’s2040 Comprehensive Plan, District Councils are rarely mentioned. Thesteering committee for the City’s evolving pedestrian plan has 29 members,but not one position is designated for District Councils. The City’s directfunding for District Councils is stagnant and, in some ways, eroding. Theposition of Community Engagement Coordinator lacks focus and a definedmission. Collaboration with District Councils by City staff and officials seemsto be selective, inconsistent, and depend largely on the individual involved orthe issue at hand. In some cases, City staff seem to prefer their professionalexpertise over the ground-level and day-to-day expertise and insights thatDistrict Councils can offer on neighborhood dynamics or a particularsituation. These are all areas that constructive collaboration can and shouldreverse.

Make a commitment.

                                                                                                                                    In 2018, DistrictCouncils will receive $1,088,371 through their Community Engagementgrants, which is their main source of City funding. Funding for individualCouncils ranges from $51,873 up to $109,475, based on metrics such aspopulation, poverty levels, jobs, and non-English speakers in the district. Formost Councils, this is not enough, on its own, to support full-time staff andessential office costs. As Phase One of this project documented, DistrictCouncils do a significant amount of outside fund-raising. Councils, as awhole, provide a 3:1 “return on investment” – attracting $3 in outside fundingfor every $1 the City provides. But City support, in perception and in realterms, has decreased over time. In 2006, for example, primary funding toDistrict Councils (which, at that time, was divided into CommunityEngagement and Crime Prevention grants) was $1.2 million. If that fundinghad been adjusted for inflation, District Councils would be receiving anadditional $300,000 in City funding than they actually receive today.

Strengthen City financial support for District Councils.

13

                                                                        The City can do more than provideadditional funding to help Council staff and volunteers become more efficientand effective:

Maximize available resources.

                                                                 The City routinely seeks matching fundsfor infrastructure projects, economic development, or other initiatives.It does not take the same approach to community engagement. If it did,the City could achieve more with the money it already invests. Thisadditional funding could provide District Councils additional resources.Whether through foundations or other levels of government, includingRamsey County, the City and District Councils should pursue jointrequests to outside funding sources.                                                                                                                                              Useexisting money to allow Councils to lead the community engagementefforts during public “open houses” and “information sessions” thatare part of City projects.                                                                                             Some of the basic City grantsthat District Councils rely upon (including Community Engagement andCOPP) forbid spending in areas such as food and fund-raising. Both ofthese restrictions hinder Council work. The City should eliminate, or atleast reduce, these kinds of restrictions whenever possible.                                                                                                                           CityEngagement, COPP, STAR, and All-In contracts all utilize differentapplication and reimbursement processes. Standardizing and upgradingthese processes could reduce the administrative burden and duplicationof effort required by Council staff (and probably City staff, too). Thestandardized application method developed by the Minnesota Council ofFoundations could be a model.                                                                          District Councils often lack fullinformation on projects they are asked to weigh in on, because theydon’t have access to the core files and systems where this information isstored. Councils need the same information as City staff. Sharepoint,Amanda, GIS, rental property contact information, property ownershipinformation through Ramsey County – these all are databases thatCouncils could utilize, but currently lack the access, training, orsubscriptions to use.                                                                                                             Most Councils do nothave the funding or staff skills to communicate in languages beyondEnglish even occasionally, let alone regularly. Councils and the Cityshould collaborate on building a corps of competent translators andinterpreters for the major languages spoken in each neighborhood.

Leverage existing funding.

Steer funding to District Councils, not outside consultants.

Eliminate restrictions on city funding.

Reduce paperwork and streamline grant processes.

Share information and access.

Develop translation and interpreter services.

14

                                                    As described above, the City’s direct funding forDistrict Councils is decreasing in real terms. Among other impacts, thiscontributes to staff turnover that is 70 percent over the past three years. Thisis not sustainable. A high-achieving system requires a commitment to faircompensation; an increase in City funding has to be one piece. In addition,most District Council staff lack such vital benefits as health insurance andretirement funds. The City should help Councils – as a system -- exploreopportunities to provide benefits to their employees. Investing in the systemalso makes the City a necessary partner in creating and implementing a corelevel of standardized training for Council staff, board members, and keyvolunteers – and for City engagement staff, too. Finally, City departmentsneed to maximize their relationships with District Councils. This can includebringing in Councils as equal partners early on to strategize with City staff onwhat to anticipate and how to handle engagement around a specific project orinitiative. In can include holding more meetings in neighborhoods ratherthan Downtown, establishing regular procedures that involve DistrictCouncils in City programming and outreach, and establishing a point personin each department who will be the primary contact for District Councils.

Invest in the system.

                                                                                 The City’s original 1975 guidelinesthat set up District Councils prohibited residents younger than 18 fromvoting in District Council elections. Many District Council by-laws stillreflect that prohibition. If that prohibition is, in fact, still City policy, itshould be eliminated.                                                             Just as District Councils are heldaccountable by their residents and through their City contracts, werecommend a structured, 360 review process in which District Councilscan collectively review the engagement processes of each Citydepartment; highlight individuals and approaches that are getting itright; and identify those that are not.

Encourage participation by youth.

Institute a “360 review.”

15

City officials, District Council representatives, and the currentCoordinator meet to create a clear job description and annual workplanThe City moves toward creating a cohort of community engagementspecialists within key departments; this cohort would work with theCoordinator and with District Council staff to develop and implementstandard engagement expectationsDistrict Councils have a formal role in developing performancemetrics for and evaluating the work of the Community EngagementCoordinator and City engagement specialists

(Re)define City community engagement expectations.                                                                                                                                   The positionof what is now called the  Community Engagement Coordinator has been aconundrum for decades. What is clear to District Council staff and boardmembers is that the current structure is not working as well as it needs to.Therefore, this project recommends that:

Synchronize planning documents and processes.                                                                                                                      The oversight (sofar) by the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan to include District Councils inany meaningful way is only one example of where citywide andneighborhood planning is out of sync. A more strategic and thoughtfulalignment of these resource-intensive planning cycles would lead togreater efficiency and, very likely, produce plans that have a greater rootingand ownership in the community.

16

This project recommends some very specific actions that individuals andorganizations can take to develop a community engagement process that ismore robust, effective, and inclusive. In many areas, however, it isintentionally vague on many of the details; determining those details is therole of collaboration.

The 1975 documents on which Saint Paul’s planning districts are foundedcontain this policy statement: “Citizen participation is a process, not astructure.”  With that principle in mind, and as a first step toward greatercollaboration, this project recommends creating a formal work group tonurture collaboration. This work group should include the CommunityEngagement Coordinator; representatives from District Councils; arepresentative from the Mayor’s office; representatives from Parks andRecreation, Planning and Economic Development, Police, Public Works,Safety and Inspections, and other City agencies as appropriate; andrepresentatives from constituency-based organizations or other communityorganizations as appropriate.

A significant finding of this project is that the simple act of coming together,face to face, to hold meaningful discussions around shared mission istransformational. Doing so sparked a growth in trust and collaborationamong District Councils. The next step is to ignite this spark within the largerecosystem of engagement in Saint Paul. 

THE NEXT STEP

17

PUTTING PRINCIPLE INTO PRACTICE

In addition to the recommendations and ideas identified in this report, twothings are clear: the value of the annual Innovation Fund, and the value ofprocess itself.

In Phase 2, the mere process of working through and carrying out the projectsparked a shift in the culture and outlook of District Councils as a collection oforganizations. The examples below are clear evidence that District Councils asa whole can adapt, can embrace change, and are open to a morecomprehensive leadership role in and beyond their specific neighborhoods.This is a shift that, if seized upon, has lasting implications for the future ofcommunity engagement in the City. None of this likely would have happenedwithout the availability of the Innovation Fund.

The Innovation Fund is supposed to support collaborative work that DistrictCouncils would find difficult, if not impossible, to do on their own, and thekind of work that has citywide impact.

The first hints that the Innovation Fund could indeed spur innovation camewith the Healthy Transportation for All initiative in the Fund’s early years.Phases 1 and 2 of this Community Engagement project and the 2017-2020projects on Equity (see Page 20) are further evidence of what Councils canachieve in this framework.

The most immediate impact of this Phase 2 project is the noticeable change inthe way most Councils view themselves as colleagues, rather thancompetitors, and the frequency in which most Councils look for opportunitiesto put that principle into practice. This project itself took a deliberateapproach to create a Steering Committee with wide geographicrepresentation and individual members who, at least initially, were notalways on the same page. The growth in trust, shared responsibility,collaboration, and common vision exhibited by Steering Committee membersis an example of what District Councils can accomplish citywide, if there isgenuine commitment, support, and desire.

This transformation in mindset was identified as a need both by staff and byboard members. It has yielded direct results in at least three other areas: staffmeetings, equity work, and board members.

18

STAFF MEETINGS

For years, District Council staff metmonthly in what is known as theEDCO meeting – for “executivedirectors” and “communityorganizers.” In recent years,however, interest and attendancedwindled. Eventually, fewer than halfof all Councils participated on anyregular basis. The meetingsvanished, at least as a monthlyexpectation. This was caused in partby staff turnover among directorswho had played key convening roles,in part by a change in staff in thecity’s community engagementcoordinator position, and in part by agrowing sense among Council staffthat the meetings lacked purposeand were a waste of their time.

Through discussions that weredesigned by the Phase 2 SteeringCommittee, District Council staffidentified what would make thesemeetings worth attending again.They prioritized potential topics,enough to set an agenda for at least ayear.

This project’s Steering Committeemembers have been trusted toconvene the meetings for theforeseeable future – providing amore-robust infrastructure than inthe past. Staff have begun workingon a “compact,” a set of principlesand commitments to guideinteractions among Councils. Sincethe revival of the monthly EDCOmeeting, participation has beennoticeably stronger: each meetinghas been attended by staff from atleast two-thirds of the Councils, andevery Council has been present atone time or another.

19

INNOVATION FUNDEQUITY WORK

Getting all 17 District Councils toagree on anything is practicallyunheard of. This is especially true ifthe topic affects budgets or impactscapacity for work already being done.So it is hard to overstate thesignificance of what happened thisyear: All 17 District Councils agreed tosubmit a joint application for theCity’s annual Innovation Fund.Instead of competing against eachother for funds, the Councils agreedto split the grant evenly. They agreedto do this for the next three years:2018, 2019, and 2020.

Why did they do this? It is hard tooverstate the significance of that,too. All 17 Councils are eager tocommit additional resources so theycan do serious work on buildingequitable engagement into their day-to-day operations. By workingsimultaneously, the Councils intendto ensure that equity becomes apriority in every neighborhood in thecity, from the ground up.

The spark for this Council-basedequity work came from a separate2017 Innovation Fund project, led

by the District 1 Community Council.Those funds provided a grant for sixDistrict Councils to begin or advancetheir local equity initiatives. Thesuccess of that “pilot project”encouraged other Councils to push thework citywide in future years. Theseconversations -- which broughtunprecedented agreement on theapplication, goals, andimplementation -- happened becauseCouncils were at the table together.They were at the table together as aresult of this Phase 2 project.

After Councils reached the equityagreement among themselves, theypushed their proposal through CityHall when it languished in thetransition after the 2017 municipalelections. Upon final City approval,Councils created a universal templatefor a work plan, which provides astandard framework of accountability,regardless of where each Council is intheir individual process.

The work plan for the equity projectcreates the outline described on thenext page.

20

Equitable engagement is a deliberateapproach to ensure that allcommunity members have access to aDistrict Council’s decision-making,planning, and programming.

Equity work uses research andcommunity engagement to betterunderstand the nature and extent ofinequalities, and the historicaldecisions that led to the emergence ofdisparate opportunities and results.

Equity becomes a key value as DistrictCouncils evaluate actions andoutcomes. Racial equity should be atthe core of this work. But efforts alsoshould address additional disparitiesthat councils encounter in theirneighborhoods. Examples couldinclude disparities based on income,age, gender, immigration status, oramong renters and homeowners.

Foundation:

Defining equitable

engagement:

District Council staff andvolunteers will more accuratelyreflect the communities theyserveDistrict Councils will review andadopt policies and practices thatintentionally create space forresidents who currently areunder-representedDistrict Councils will pursuesystemic work that reflects theneeds and priorities of residentswho have been under-represented historically

Accountability and

support:

District Councils will participatein a network of peer support andbest practices with each other orsimilar grassroots, place-basedorganizations.

Beyond the equity work supported by the Innovation Fund, a small

group of Council staff are taking the lead in seeking matching funds

from area foundations and other sources, so neighborhoods have

even more support and opportunities for effective, equitable

engagement. A parallel effort proposes seeking funds for a citywide

“poster project.” This project would engage artists to lead community

conversations in each planning district. The conversations would give

residents an opportunity to examine and define their historical and

contemporary community identities. The hoped-for result: a series of

17 posters illustrating the vision residents have of Saint Paul and their

neighborhoods in the 21st century.

21

BOARD MEMBERS

Unknown to them, this goal parallelswhat was standard practice in theearly years of Saint Paul’s citizenparticipation initiative. In those earlyyears, board presidents met quarterly.The City and/or major institutionssponsored several “betterneighborhood forums,” which wereretreats or assemblies of DistrictCouncil staff and/or board members.

District Council staff are followingthrough by scheduling an initialseries of “happy hours” and “coffeehours” for board members and otherkey volunteers. What happens atthese informal events will dictatewhat forms future networking takes.

Just as this Phase 2 project creatednew opportunities for conversationand cooperation among DistrictCouncil staff, it also createdunprecedented opportunities forvolunteer board members fromacross the city to meet, comparenotes, uncover common ground, andshare aspirations. Theseconversations among board membersinform many of the findings andrecommendations of this report.These conversations also revealed awidespread desire by board membersto meet more regularly with eachother and to set up other ways ofserving as resources for each other. 

22

BUILDINGEFFECTIVENESS

As staff, board members, and communitystakeholders examined their individual organizationsand the citywide system as a whole, it was easy toidentify challenges that District Councils face. Somechallenges are structural; others are relational. Someare internal; others are external. Some are self-inflicted; others are largely beyond their control. Someare a matter of perspective. Some result fromdeliberate decisions; others result from inertia. Someresult from a lack of resources. Some result from lackof vision.

Lack of vision, however, is not evident inconversations with District Council staff and boardmembers. The main challenge becomes identifying,researching, prioritizing, then actually implementingand ingraining these potential solutions.

With those goals in mind, this report classifiespotential solutions, recommendations, and actionsteps into three broad categories:

Building effectiveness collectivelyBuilding effectiveness internallyBuilding effectiveness in partnership with thecity

23

BUILDINGEFFECTIVENESSCOLLECTIVELY

The District Council system may seem like a “system”to a newcomer or from the perspective of City Hall. Onthe ground, however, it is not a coordinated system.Instead, it has evolved into a system that isfragmented. It is 17 independent nonprofitorganizations committed primarily to theirgeographically designated areas of the city.Maximizing their effectiveness locally can, in reality,force Councils to compete against each other forfunding, for other resources, or for being a priority onsomeone’s work list.

Discussions with District Council staff and boardmembers, however, reveal a deep desire to worktogether, rather than compete. These individuals –paid and volunteer – “are” the District Councils. Theircurrent mindset: Opportunities where Councils canexercise power and influence, and better fulfill theirresponsibilities, as a bloc, rather than as individuals,while still maintaining their individual identities.They want to meet the needs of their specificneighborhoods, but don’t want to just protect theirown turf. They want opportunities where Councils –that is, neighborhoods – can act collectively, have animpact citywide (in some cases, even farther!), andbegin to unite different parts of the city in commonpurpose. In short, the leaders of District Councils wantto collaborate.

CHAPTER 1

24

Collaboration can address the nitty-gritty operations of how Councils work. Itcan guide the principles of how Councils prioritize their actions. It can outlinehow they hold themselves accountable to themselves, to their communities,and to each other. Holding the sustained conversations and laying thegroundwork for the structural changes that collaboration implies will not beeasy. The work stretches the capacity and time of individuals who already arestretched. It could, in some cases, require participating Councils to delegatesome autonomy. It certainly will require intentionality, transparency and,most importantly, trust. But the potential is thrilling. Here are areas that holdthe most promise for collaboration among District Councils.

ResourcesCombined, Saint Paul’s District Councils have more than 500 paid and unpaidindividuals on staff, on their boards, or participating regularly in theircommittee work. That is tremendous human capital. Here are some actionsteps to effectively tap the tremendous potential of those individuals:

Training. Create and implement a core level of standardized training forstaff, board members, and key volunteers that is tailored to the distinctivework that district councils do. This training should include topics relevantto leaders of any well-run nonprofit, including fiduciary responsibility andthe expectations and responsibilities of board members and leadership.But it should also include topics such as zoning literacy, financial literacy,norms for public meetings, cultural responsiveness, and being active in anadvocacy organization. Staff training, in particular, should focus notmerely on necessary tasks, systems, finances, operations and other hardskills, but also on actual engagement skills and asset-based approaches toCouncil work.

Mentorship. Councils and their leaders can take steps to utilize eachother’s expertise and experiences to build collective wisdom on betterengagement. At the simplest level, it could mean brainstorming to createchecklists on what works in handling common challenges that Councilsface. Topics could include transportation and development issues,handling the negativity of social media, and tactics for guiding communityconversations away from fear and emotion toward informed solutions. At adeeper level, experienced staff and board members could act as advisersand consultants to Councils struggling with a controversy in theircommunity.

25

Support. Councils are unique organizations in unique neighborhoods, butthey have the same mission. This common mission creates a duty toprotect each other when one Council is under duress. This also suggests anopportunity to support each other when one Council is facing an issue(such as licensing or variances) that can set a precedent for otherneighborhoods. It provides the possibility of sending board and staff asemissaries to each others’ meetings – whether simply to broaden eachothers’ horizons, or because it can be more effective to hear a potentialsolution from the outside rather than from the inside. Another option: Gainperspective by appointing a board member from another Council to thehiring committee for a key staff position.

Serve Saint Paul. District Councils could play a fundamental role in MayorMelvin Carter’s proposed Serve Saint Paul initiative. District Councilsalready engage more than 500 volunteers citywide and reach exponentiallymore. They are proficient not only at providing meaningful, constructiveways for volunteers to contribute to their communities, but at developingleadership and connections at the neighborhood level. Whether on theirown or in combination with other neighborhood- or constituency-basedorganizations, District Councils could and should play a central role in thisinitiative.

Because District Councils are 17 individual organizations, staff naturallyduplicate efforts when they perform the same routine administrative,financial, and communication work separately. These administrativeoperations can easily dominate staff time. Time spent on administrative tasksrestricts how much effort Councils can dedicate to actual community outreach,organizing, and engagement. Councils can explore steps to reverse this:

Maximize existing staff, resources

Pool “back-office” duties. Bookkeeping, contract administration andcompliance, and communication are tasks where it seems possible forCouncils to hire shared staff or contractors. Boards and staff should exploresetting up “hubs” in which shared administrators handle these kinds oftasks across multiple districts. Delegating tasks in this way could free uptime and money that directors and organizers could dedicate toengagement. (Several councils already perform a version of this by poolingtheir liability insurance.)

26

Create resource toolkits. Councils should reduce situations where staff,often working independently and in isolation, inadvertently re-create thewheel by rediscovering something a staff member somewhere elsealready solved. Council staff citywide should create and have access to adatabase of best practices; sources of interns, community servicevolunteers, student researchers, project-driven grants, speakers, vendors,translation and interpretation services; and “go-to” people in citydepartments, foundations, other activist organizations, colleges anduniversities.

Historically, District Council staff and board members too often have letpersonalities or inertia get in the way of common work. Strengtheningindividual relationships is vital if Councils expect to collaborate successfully.Making these relationships institutional is vital if collaboration expects tosurvive the routine turnover of boards and staff. Some action steps:

A “compact.” District Council staff create and commit to an agreed-uponset of values, expectations, and principles to guide meetings, interactions,and how they work together. (This compact already is being drafted.) Board summits. Council staff organize an annual, citywide summit forboard members in which board members learn about each others’activities and can discuss issues of mutual concern. Leadership meetings. Board members and committee chairs from DistrictCouncils citywide meet quarterly to keep each other in the loop and discussissues of mutual concern. Rubbing elbows. Board members from District Councils citywide scheduleoccasional happy hours or coffee hours, to provide a way for them to buildprofessional and personal relationships through informal gatherings thatare not agenda-driven. (The first of these kinds of events already are underway.) “Phone tree.” Board members from District Councils citywide voluntarilycreate a website, closed Facebook group, listserve, or similar platformthrough which board members can connect with and contact each other.

Relationships

27

Individual Councils already collaborate on an ad-hoc basis. Systemwide,Councils have demonstrated that there are issues around which they cancollaborate informally. In the future, deeper collaboration will meanintentional alliances around common focal points. These focal points shouldnot be limited geographically; they can be alliances built on topics or policiesthat have significant impact on several neighborhoods, whether or not theneighborhoods are physically adjacent.

Geographic. Councils can start with their borders, which often are countyor state roads that generate pedestrian, traffic and development issues.Similarly, Councils that share wards also should seek areas of commonwork and leverage. The four East Side District Councils, for example,already have begun meeting monthly to provide support and addressissues that impact them collectively. Topical. Identify where interests overlap, even if Councils are notcontiguous. Possible issues include housing, density and gentrification;displacement of businesses, artists, or other community members; andimmigration. Similar opportunities exist along major transportationcorridors or in dealing with major developments such as the soccerstadium. These alliances give Councils a reason to deliberately andcollectively develop a common strategy to create influence and become ajoint force. Healthy Transportation for All and the Stop for Me pedestriansafety campaign are recent examples of initiatives that demonstratecooperation among councils on a common issue that ignored geography. Structural. Just as Councils can support each other in individualinitiatives, they have opportunities to collaborate on broader structuralchange. The West Side Community Organization’s “developmentscorecard” is one example with potential. East Side councils are studyinghow to duplicate District 1’s example of a Youth Council. Board membershave floated the idea of changing the City Charter so District Councils canappoint one member each to the Planning Commission.  

Focal points

28

Councils as a whole lack an inspiring common narrative to share withresidents, media, elected officials, foundations, and other potential allies.Messaging that does exist can seem inconsistent, outdated, and bureaucratic.The need to better sell themselves also is not a new challenge for DistrictCouncils. A 1998 Center for Neighborhoods study said, “Neighborhoodorganizations need to better articulate their role in the community.” The 2004City Council Research report noted, “People don’t get involved because theydon’t understand what District Councils do.”

Some steps Councils can take system-wide to change this:

Define themselves. Create an “elevator speech” that speaks clearly towhat Councils are, what they do, what they’ve accomplished, and whatthey aspire to. The Phase One report of this project provides extensivecontext; the summary spelled out in the accompanying breakout boxprovides a starting point (see Page 30). Market themselves. Using their elevator speech as a foundation,Councils can use common language to promote themselves and theirsuccesses. At the very least, this language should be adapted for theirindividual websites and promotional materials, in joint grant and projectapplications, and to replace existing language on the City’s web pageabout District Councils. Tell their stories. Councils typically lack multimedia expertise. But thisexpertise is available in their communities, in schools, and throughorganizations such as Forecast Public Art and the Saint PaulNeighborhood Network. Councils should explore ways to engage incommunal story telling. One potential approach: Use the Story Corpsmodel to create video, audio clips and other media that give staff, boardmembers, and volunteers the opportunity tell the value of DistrictCouncil work in their own words. Another approach: A poster project thatenlists artists from all 17 neighborhoods to engage in communityconversations that help define neighborhood identities. The artists thencreate a poster series that connects the City’s past with its present andfuture, connects the people within individual communities, and connectscommunities with each other.

Identity and communication

Hold joint activities. Councils could raise their visibility as a system bysponsoring events that ignore neighborhood boundaries. Food forthought: Slow Roll bicycle rides across several districts, large-scale OpenStreets events, or community events (such as ice cream socials) scheduledto happen on the same day citywide.

29

District Councils are woven into the fabric of our neighborhoods and the city

at large. We are the spark behind community-building work. Our work can be

as fleeting as an open-mic night at a local library and the melting sugar cone

of a neighborhood ice cream social. It can be as permanent as Phalen

Boulevard, the Capitol Region Watershed District, or additional stations along

the Metro Transit Green Line.

District Councils are the backbone of block clubs, crime prevention programs,

and fundamental livability initiatives; a wide range of neighborhood

environmental and beautification projects; and neighborhood planning that is

incorporated into the city’s Comprehensive Plan.

District Councils work to improve life where we live. We give residents a

constructive way to combine their voices, so decisions reflect on-the-ground,

lived wisdom. We organize to make sure decisions are made from the bottom

up, not the top down. We provide the conversation space and grassroots

energy for rolling out citywide initiatives, and push issues onto the table for

citywide action.

We provide a hub for partnerships and cooperative efforts among residents,

elected officials, agency staff, developers, institutions, and businesses. On a

day‐to‐day basis, we provide a focal point for constructive neighborhooddiscussions and recommendations on economic development, zoning,

housing, planning, transportation, safety, environmental, livability, and other

issues.  

We play key roles in such positive, annual events as local National Night Out

parties, neighborhood festivals, community gardens, Citywide Drop-Off days,

and the Neighborhood Honor Roll.

We routinely educate neighborhood residents about city initiatives, compile

and communicate city news and outreach opportunities to our networks of

neighborhood activists, and host community meetings. We increasingly focus

on expanding equity in our organizations and in our neighborhoods –

expanding not just who is involved in decision-making, but also which issues

become priorities.

30

Celebrating District Councils

Community engagement is a field in which relationships are fundamental.That puts a premium on longevity, continuity, and consistency. Yet high staffturnover has long plagued District Councils; it was cited as one of the majorchallenges as far back as a 1996 report by the League of Women Voters SaintPaul. That has not changed: At 12 of the 17 District Councils, executivedirectors or other lead staff have been on the job less than three years. Thatkind of turnover – 70 percent – demonstrates that retention at Councils is asystem-wide problem; improving that requires a system-wide approach. Inaddition to paying attention to the dynamics of board-staff relationships,board members need to make a concerted effort to improve pay and benefits.

Benefits. Health insurance,retirement plans, and similarmonetary benefits are virtuallynonexistent for staff. Councilsshould actively pursue ways to formor join pools to provide benefits;professional employeeorganizations or the MinnesotaCouncil of Nonprofits’ proposedAssociation Health Plan are twopotential options for group healthinsurance. Job descriptions. Board memberscould standardize job descriptionsof key staff positions across thesystem.

Staff retention

Pay. Directors in particular need a deep skill set to do their work well,including expertise in finance, administration, communication, volunteerand program management, grant-writing, conflict resolution, publicrelations, organizing, meeting facilitation, policy analysis, zoning,licensing, and engineering, to name a few. But compensation levels andjob responsibilities make it difficult to attract or retain skilled staff forlong. Salaries are low; overall compensation averages $44,700, based onin federal 990 filings. Hours are irregular, and challenges are many.

31

BUILDINGEFFECTIVENESSINTERNALLY

Throughout this project, Council staff members shared a desire to take onmany of the actions described below.  Some were hampered by a lack ofcapacity or resources, other by external issues.  However, it was clear that evenincremental progress made to expand capacity, strengthen identity, orbecome more visible and accessible would be beneficial.

Although part of a larger “system”,however loosely structured, DistrictCouncils are each independent501(c)3 organizations with their ownfiscal, governance and managementresponsibilities.  As such, there areactions that each can takeindividually to build greatereffectiveness within theorganization. 

Expand and diversify capacity

Though there are dozens of ways for the City to strengthen its commitment tothe District Council system, financially and otherwise (see Page 41), Councilscan take steps on their own to gain financial breathing room and deepen theirpools of expertise and volunteers. In general, Councils can do more to seekadditional funding, technical support, and personnel from their communities,from foundations, from local colleges and universities, and from otherinstitutions.

Funding. As Councils redefine themselves individually and as asystem, and engage a broader cross-section of their neighborhoods,the clarity of their mission and visibility of their work should presentmore opportunities to seek direct grassroots contributions, as mostnonprofits do. This should include deliberate and targeted appeals forfinancial donations.

CHAPTER 2

32

Skills. Councils are almost always spread too thin. They should identifyspecific technical needs, then seek expertise among local residents orinstitutions that can offer their time or services pro bono, as parts ofclass projects, or under similar arrangements.Volunteers. Councils should make opportunities available forvolunteers beyond serving on the board. Follow up with unsuccessfulcandidates for the board and ask if there is another way they are willingto be involved. Short-term projects or special events often provide anentry into the organization for talented and committed communitymembers, give them a way to make an impact in an area they careabout, or allow the Council to accomplish a task it otherwise could nottake on. At the same time, providing meaningful volunteer experiencesreduces the burden on staff and current board members, which reducesthe opportunity for burnout, which makes them more effective in coreareas. Other options: Don’t focus exclusively on internal needs – lookfor opportunities to place community volunteers on the city’s 30boards and commissions. Or, when appropriate, Councils can expandthe expertise of one of their committees by holding a joint committeemeeting with another Council.Assets outside the neighborhood. Councils increasingly deal withissues and problems that are not parochial, but regional. Boardmembers seem eager to identify common issues and commit to long-term efforts across geographic barriers. Councils that team up onsolutions should be able to parlay that collaboration to engageinstitutions (beyond City government) that can provide financial andtechnical assistance to support this joint work.Leadership development. Turnover and loss of institutionalknowledge are significant challenges for District Councils. Especially asCouncils more successfully engage under-represented residents, it iscrucial to provide leadership paths and groom new activists whodemonstrate commitment and potential. In addition to making surethese new volunteers receive citywide District Council training,individual Councils should be sure to utilize formal staff and volunteerdevelopment opportunities through such sources as Wilder’sNeighborhood Leadership Program or the University of Minnesota’sCenter for Urban and Regional Affairs. As mentioned above, DistrictCouncils could and should play a central role in the Serve Saint Paulinitiative.

33

Just as Councils systemwide can improve the perception that residents hold ofthem, individual Councils can do the same. The fact is, even the Councils thatare best at communication don’t reach the majority of residents in theirneighborhood. Partly as a result of that, District Councils are unknown ormisunderstood by too many people. The fact that many residents don’t knowCouncils even exist is a key point raised by residents who were part of thisproject’s focus group and one-on-one conversations. Among those who doknow about District Councils, some think Councils are too powerful, somethink they are worthless, some think they are part of City government, andothers question to whom Councils owe allegiance.

Reputations may be based on ancient history, on the results of one issue, or onwhether a Council agreed or disagreed with an individual. Councils often aretargets of (and tools of) people who are inherently negative. One commonperception is that Councils are primarily white institutions, or homeownerinstitutions. Another paints them as dens of bickering complainers.

These are daunting descriptions to overcome, especially for organizations thatdon’t have PR firms on retainer. But if it is true that most residents genuinelydon’t know what District Councils are, it also means Councils have plenty ofopportunities to make a good first impression.  A good first start:

Promote accomplishments. Councils cannot always control theirreputation. But they do have impact and influence. When Councilsachieve something, they need to take credit – especially when they dogood work, and important work. City staff and officials need to do thesame thing. Promote a vision. In an era of fractured national discourse, andincreasingly fractured discourse at the state level, what happens at theneighborhood level can be a welcome alternative. The nature of the workoften means District Councils react to issues, rather than define them.Too often, Councils deal with the issue of the moment, rather than beingfree to pursue long-term goals. That reality can affect how residentsperceive and engage with Councils. But Councils have a better chance ofdefining their own identity when they act, not react.  Rather than sittingback and becoming a forum for opposition, Councils should identify avision for themselves and their communities. Councils should alwaysremember to tell their own story, to define what they do in their ownwords, to define their goals and values – in other words, to definethemselves, so other definitions of them have little validity.

Strengthen identity

34

Living out their mission of engagement is every Councils’ everyday challenge.Engagement takes so many different forms, it is nearly impossible to do it allwell all the time. Councils are expected to provide information, take positions(often on tight schedules), organize and unify neighbors, coordinate socialevents, mediate disagreements, promote community health and healing, holddecision-makers accountable, be present, and more. Finally, remember tohave fun, because not everything has to be business.

The most successful Councils will make the goal of the equity Innovation Fundproject a reality: They will be organizations that more accurately reflect theircommunities as a whole – not only in who is at the table, but in what isdiscussed at the table. Do community members see themselves – and theirpriorities – reflected? This is not a new challenge, though it is more acutebecause of the changing population of Saint Paul. Several studies of DistrictCouncils over the decades have cited the challenge of more equitablerepresentation. Some ways to make that more likely:

Be more visible

Make outreach routine. Don’t stick to the office or the monthlymeeting; be present in the neighborhood. Dedicate staff or volunteersto outreach: door-to-door, at locations or activities where residentsalready hang out, at community events sponsored by otherorganizations. Have board members make the rounds during NationalNight Out. Often, reaching residents who are immigrants or live inrental communities takes persistence. Give it time. Don’t have atransactional expectation; focus on just being there and being human.Look for alternatives: sometimes, as District 1 has demonstrated,youth can be the bridge – connecting the Council to more of thecommunity today, and developing community leaders for the future.This project’s focus groups, in particular, pointed out the need andchallenges of reaching newcomers and renters. Renters, who are nowa majority of households in Saint Paul, present particular challengesof access. District Councils will not be able to do consistent, successfuloutreach to renters on their own; it will require partnerships with avariety of individuals, organizations, and businesses, plus coordinatedefforts with City leadership to fully integrate renters into the socialfabric of our community.   Explore partnerships. Look for opportunities to work with existingcommunity activators and culturally based organizations. Createboard ambassadors to key organizations or businesses.

35

Most of the time, most Councils are seen as rigidly structured organizations.They revolve around meetings, committees, process, and parliamentaryprocedure. Some of this is necessary, at least some of the time. But much of itis too formal, too confusing, too intimidating, too uncomfortable, and flat-outunwelcoming for too many segments of the community. Much of thisstructure is not conducive to constructive conversation, not for newcomers,and probably not for many old-timers, either. Similarly, many people are putoff by the conflict for which Councils naturally provide a forum. But Councilscan use controversy to their advantage: It can be positive if they can channelpeople and their energy toward solutions, not stalemate.

Traditional ways of doing “Council work” do not always provide communitymembers an easy way to get involved. In too many ways, Councils are not setup to be inclusive of Saint Paul’s diversifying population and demographics.Given that the mission is bigger than individuals, and the cause is bigger thanthe people in the room, councils can do a self-examination on these practices:

Make accessibility a reality

Don’t rely solely on meetings. Supplement standard meetings withless-structured community forums or “coffee hours” at whichcommunity members can generate ideas or provide honest feedback ina more social setting. Set up “office hours” outside the office – in apark, in a business, in the lobby of a public housing community.Listen. Don’t go in with a set agenda or prescribed solution. Have openeyes, open ears, and an open mind. Opportunities will come.

Meetings. The timing of meetings – typically on a weeknight – canexclude huge numbers of community members who face work, family, orother commitments. Similarly, the location of meetings can be anobstacle. Does the location geographically favor one part of thecommunity? Is there enough parking? Can residents in a wheelchair getthere? Is public transportation nearby? Are there adequate signs to getcommunity members to the room they need to be? The antidotes arerelatively obvious: At least quarterly, schedule meetings on a differentday, at a different time, in a different location – and spread the word.Offer child care, so families with youngsters don’t feel excluded.Committees should exercise the most flexibility: Hold a meeting at ornear the site of a major issue – or at least closer to the people mostaffected. Or, livestream meetings, so people who cannot attend can keeptabs from home or watch at a later time.

36

Formality v. flexibility. Yes, conducting business or facilitating aproductive discussion requires a certain level of order and protocol. Butnot all the time. Councils should take a deep, objective look at theirmeetings – especially board meetings. (Visit other Council boardmeetings for comparison.) The goal: Be as informal, welcoming, andneighborly as possible, as often as possible. Areas to assess: 

Language. It’s a given that meetings are likely to be conducted inEnglish. But Councils should examine if they are doing everythingreasonably possible to reach and involve those who are not in themajority culture. Can other avenues be used, such as having interpretersavailable at meetings, or translating key documents into languages thatare commonly spoken in the community? On a different tack: Languageat meetings can be a barrier even for educated English-speakers. Doesthe chair adhere to the letter of Robert’s Rules and to jargon that peoplein authority prefer? Or, whenever possible, does the chair instead take amore informal approach – call it Bob’s Rules – and state in plainlanguage what’s going on?

How is the room set up? Are residents greeted when they arrive? Can residents see and hear the board? Can they see and hear each other? Does the board introduce itself? Does the chair explain how the proceedings will go?Is there an agenda, so residents can follow proceedings? Is the agenda published in advance? When and how can community members raise issues? Is the agenda flexible enough so a big issue can be discussed andacted upon early in the meeting?

37

BUILDING EFFECTIVENESSIN PARTNERSHIP WITHTHE CITY

As the City of Saint Paul recommits to and re-imagines communityengagement, it should not overlook or underestimate the accomplishmentsand potential of the city’s unique District Council system. District Councils arethe natural hub for a comprehensive, citywide network of residentengagement that is based in and driven by the neighborhoods. Councils couldand should provide the centerpiece for genuine partnerships with Citydepartments, plus other geographically based organizations andconstituency-based organizations.

It is possible that City departments and City staff will transform themselvesto become dedicated practitioners of community engagement. It is possiblethat administrative policy will genetically incorporate public participationinto City initiatives large and small. Nonetheless, the advantage of DistrictCouncils is straight-forward. The project-driven, drop-in nature ofengagement coming out of City Hall cannot match the ongoing presence,long-term commitment, and local wisdom and context that result from thecore work that District Councils do. Drop-in engagement cannot produce therelationships and leadership development that District Councils do.Therefore, this project recommends that Saint Paul utilize District Councils –not outside consultants or independent efforts by City department staff – asthe nucleus for a partnership on actual engagement activities as much aspossible.

CHAPTER 3

38

This project’s research found consistent themes and opportunities toimprove District Council relationships with the City. Some rely primarily onactions the City must take; others rely on actions the Councils must take. Anyprogress will depend on true partnership: a commitment to cooperation andan attitude of collaboration. We don’t always have to agree; in the real world,a resilient system becomes stronger when challenged. But in ways large andsmall, in policy and in execution, the City must demonstrate a genuinecommitment to the District Council system it created. And on a day-to-daybasis, staff and volunteers all must value and nourish the organizational andpersonal relationships that make this unique system work – and can make itwork better.

It is telling that in the initial public draft of the City’s 2040 ComprehensivePlan, District Councils not only do not figure prominently, they are rarelymentioned at all. This Plan is a foundational component of City planning andpolicy. This Plan guides future decision-making and funding. The City iscrafting a vision for reducing inequities, jump-starting neighborhoodeconomic vitality, expanding housing affordability and access, and making thestreetscape safer and more vibrant, among other goals. But it does not buildinto the equation the very network of citizens that is the most durable, reliableand knowledgeable demonstration of ground-level participation the City has.

Up to this point, City staff have informed District Councils about the Planprocess, but they have not directly sought input from Councils. Pop-upmeetings, which broaden the opportunity for “everyday” residents to have asay, are a worthwhile innovation. Indeed, they are an innovation that DistrictCouncils could build into their own practices. Developing a ComprehensivePlan while overlooking the more than 500 volunteers who are the heart of theDistrict Council system is not a way to build on the City’s assets.

Other examples also demonstrate an institutional ambivalence toward DistrictCouncils:

Make a commitment

The steering committee for the City’s evolving pedestrian plan has 29members, but not one position is designated for District Councils. Thisstructure is in spite of the fact that District Councils played a founding andongoing role in Saint Paul Walks, which led to the City’s most visible andwell-known pedestrian safety campaign: Stop for Me.

39

The City’s direct funding for District Councils is stagnant and, in some ways,eroding. (See box below.)The position of Community Engagement Coordinator lacks focus and adefined mission. (See  Page 47).Many City departments have various levels of commitment and approachesto community engagement, but most do not seem to coordinate with eachother or with District Councils as part of their mission. Many Councils cangive examples of collaborative work that should be celebrated. But morecommon are examples where reliance on, involvement with, or promotionof District Councils by City staff and officials is selective, inconsistent, anddepends largely on the individual involved or the issue at hand. ManyCouncil staff perceive, from the City side, the absence of a sense of sharedmission. In some cases, Councils describe a disregard for the expertise andinsights that they can offer at the outset into neighborhood dynamics or aparticular situation.

It doesn’t have to be this way – and it shouldn’t. Not in principle. Not given theCity’s basic fiscal challenges. And not given Saint Paul’s potential. This projectenvisions a robust, more inclusive engagement system that revolves aroundDistrict Councils, a process that uses both neighborhood and professionalcredentials to deliver innovative, people-centered community engagement. Inthe pages that follow are some suggestions on how to make that happen.

The Community Engagement grant is the main source of City funding for

District Councils. In 2018, Councils receive a total of $1,088,371. Most of this --

$743,371 – is General Fund money; an additional $345,000 comes from

federal Community Development Block Grants for the 10 District Councils

that qualify for such funding. Six councils receive the minimum amount of

funding: $51,873. The other councils receive funding up to $109,475, based

on metrics such as population, poverty levels, jobs, and non-English

speakers in the district. Community Engagement grants account for about

0.19 percent of the City’s annual budget.

40

City financial support for District Councils

Funding from the Community Organization Partnership Program, which

is distributed on a ward level

All In recycling grants, which range from a minimum of $800 to as

much as $4,300 for Councils that agree to carry out additional waste

reduction activities, including organizing a Citywide Drop-off Event

Neighborhood and Cultural STAR grants, for specific capital or arts

projects

A few Councils also have offices in City buildings at favorable lease rates.

The Innovation Fund has been a competitive grant program enabling

District Councils to carry out projects that have a citywide impact and

would be beyond the scope of a Council’s typical day-to-day work. The fund

provides about $100,000 a year. This Engagement Project and the Equity

pilot project described on Page 21 are the most recent examples of how

District Councils have collaborated to use this Fund. For 2018, 2019 and

2020, Councils have agreed t