COMMENTARY
City's vision process is a boon, not a boondoggle
By Eric G. Crispin
In response to the article "New signs of costly times" by James Gonser (June 15), I would like to offer a different point of view regarding the community signs created by the various community vision groups.
For the past three years, I have been deeply involved in the experiment in grass-roots democracy known as the Community Vision Program. It's a grass-roots, community-based planning process that empowers our citizens to have voice in the priorities and appearance of their communities.
I believe I bring a unique and valuable perspective to this innovative program, as a former deputy of the city Department of Design and Construction, and as present director of planning and permitting. In coming to some preliminary conclusions as to whether the vision program has lived up to its intended purpose, it is important to distinguish between the process and the projects that are its most tangible outcome.
The vision process was established in 1998 to strengthen the relationship between citizens and their government, and make it easier for O'ahu's people to express their views on the details of neighborhood planning. To my knowledge, it is the first program in modern-day Hawai'i to make possible citizens' direct involvement in discussions pertaining to physical changes and improvements in their neighborhoods, regardless of whether they live or work or play in that particular area.
The process builds upon existing channels of civic engagement such as the neighborhood boards, complementing established avenues of democratic participation. Everyone is eligible to take part, and thousands of residents who have done so have learned how satisfying it is to get involved in the selection, prioritization and design of public projects. I have tremendous respect for these people. They've gone to the meetings, articulated a vision for their communities, and worked closely with design professionals in deciding how they want their city to evolve.
Few Americans are opposed to furthering the cause of participatory government. In an age when voter participation on a national level is at an historic low, many observers believe that communities should do everything possible to enhance citizen involvement in civic processes. This is what the Community Vision Program has sought to do and has done.
As a result, Honolulu and its vision process have been recognized with national awards from such prestigious organizations and agencies as the U.S. Conference of Mayors and the American Planning Association, among others.
While the vision process has been successful in advancing democratic engagement, its detractors have seized upon specific projects — most recently, community identification signs — to dismiss the program as frivolous and wasteful.
People have a right to express disapproval about anything they want, but as a practical matter, constructive criticism has a greater value when it is voiced in meetings where vision teams decide which projects to take on. That's what the process is for. Taking potshots from the safety of the sidelines isn't in the best interests of active community engagement. To those who have stepped forward to express outrage about projects in their neighborhoods, I say "Shame on you. Why didn't you attend your vision group meetings and make your objections known?"
But there is a bigger issue to address in assessing the overall impact of the vision program over the past five years. Before passing judgment on the program as a whole, consider the many projects that have raised the quality of life on O'ahu in ways that seldom receive media attention. Once you do, I think you'll find that the people of this island have been perceptive in targeting real problems and workable finding solutions.
Notable examples:
• The Ko'olau Loa community vision group has been actively involved in eliminating the flooding that has crippled business development, the building of schools, the development of recreation areas, and even prevented access to medical facilities after heavy rains. Vision money has been used for planning, design and construction of drainage facilities. The team has also leveraged its money to get additional money from the state and federal governments.
• The Kailua vision group has implemented landscaping and beautification along the Kailua Road median, making it a safer and more efficient roadway. Pedestrians now have a safe place to pause while waiting to cross the street.
• Hawai'i Kai has the Myron Pinky Thompson Canoe Halau, a place not only to store outrigger racing canoes, but a venue for educating the young about the history, value and culture of this wonderful Hawaiian sport as well.
• Kaimuki is experiencing its own small revitalization as a result of the Top of the Hill traffic calming, beautification and sidewalk widening project, returning the street to pedestrians and supporting businesses along Wai'alae Avenue.
I submit these examples as evidence of a process that works. And there are many more projects that underlie the value of the Community Vision Program. When a government believes in its people, and empowers them to make decisions about their neighborhoods, they rise to the occasion in impressive and meaningful ways. I remain steadfast in believing that the results are far preferable to what top-down government would have done acting alone.
Eric G. Crispin is director of the Honolulu Department of Planning and Permitting.
