ICMA Conference 2013 - Center for Priority Based Budgeting Presentation (2/2)

Jon Johnson, Chris Fabian & Kathie NovakICMA Conference Presenters

Leading Your Organization (and Elected Officials) to “FISCAL HEALTH and WELLNESS through

PRIORITY BASED BUDGETING - Part II

CPBB Publications on Fiscal Health & Wellness

Across the Board Cuts Address $14.5 Billion Shortfall

California Governor’s Office: “Across-the-board approach spreads reductions as evenly as possible so no single program gets singled out.”

Reaction: “the governor’s approach would be like a family deciding to cuts its monthly mortgage payment, dining-out tab and Netflix subscription each by 10%, rather than eliminating the restaurant and DVD spending in order to keep up the house payments.”

From 2007

According to Moody’s:Across-the-Board versus Targeted Budget Cuts

“Across-the-board cuts can be a way to avoid tough decisions”

“Targeted cuts require a serious discussion of community values, relative benefits of different services, and long-term implications”

Moody's wants to see how local governments plan for and respond to financial challenges over the long term“Making targeted cuts can demonstrate a more strategic

approach to managing the fiscal crisis”

“Across the board cuts spreads the pain evenly and also evenly spreads the mediocrity”

- Budget Director for the State of Louisiana

Fiscal Wellness

Achieve Fiscal Health

Value Programs Based on Evidence

of their Influence on Results

Support Resource Allocation Decision

Making with Prioritization of Programs

Identify, Define and Value the Results

of Government

Identify Programs and Services

ACHIEVING LONG-TERM FISCAL WELLNESS

STEPS to SUCCESS – Priority Based Budgeting1. Determine Results

Accurate prioritization of programs, reflecting the organization’s stated objectives, depends on the comprehensive identification of the Results it is in business to achieve

2. Clarify Result DefinitionsPrecision in prioritization depends on the articulation of the cause and

effect relationship between a program and a ResultUsing clearly defined “Result Maps”, detailing the factors that influence the

way Results are achieved, the organization can minimize subjectivity in the process of linking programs with its Results

3. Identify Programs and ServicesComparing individual programs and services as opposed to comparing

departments that provide those services allows for better prioritization4. Value Programs Based on Results

With the right Results that are clearly defined, the organization can more accurately “value” a program relative to its influence on achieving Results

5. Allocate Resources Based on PrioritiesUsing “Resource Alignment Diagnostic Tool”

Strategic Questions

1. What are we in “business” to do?

What are “Results”High-level and over-arching reasons the organization exists

in the eyes of the community

Remain consistent and unchanged over time

Comprehensive

Distinguished from (i.e. “Results” are not…)Vision or Mission StatementsOrganizational Values

How we want to achieve our results“Marketing” statements

Look and feel of the communitySpecific short-term, projects, goals or initiatives

Step 1: Determine ResultsCity of Grand Island, Nebraska

Quality of Life

Stewardship of the Environment

Safe Community

Strategic, Sustainable and Maintained Development

City of Grand Island Results

Effective, Efficient and Sustainable

Organization

Accessible and Transparent Organization

Stewardship of Resources

Community Results• Used to Differentiate Programs Offered to the Community• Not All Programs Achieve these Results• Programs that Achieve Many Results, with a High Degree of Influence, Achieve Highly in Prioritization (demonstrate high degree of relevance)

Quality Service Results• Every Program Should Achieve these Results (though potentially, not every program does)• Not Used to Differentiate the Relevance of Programs in Prioritization

Governance Results• Used to Differentiate Programs Designed to Support Governance

Validating Results

Step 2: Clarify Result Definitions (Result Maps)

City of Boulder, CO Results

Accessible & Connected Community

Economically Vital Community

Healthy Environment & Community

Inclusive & Socially Thriving Community

Safe Community

Economically Vital Community

Fosters regional and public/private collaborative with

key institutions and organizations that

contribute to economic sustainability

Provides for a quality of life that attracts, sustains

and retains diverse businesses and creative

entrepreneurs

Helps sustain a qualified and diversified workforce

that meets employers’ needs and supports

broad-based economic diversity

Invests in primary economic generators and

businesses

Encourages sustainable development supported by

reliable and affordable city services

Healthy Environment and Community

Supports and sustains resource

conservation

Promotes and sustains a safe, clean and attractive place to

live, work and play

Promotes environmental stewardship in a manner that advances community

sustainability goals

Provides for inclusive and diverse recreational and

arts programs

Provides for multi-generational community

enrichment and community engagement

Defining ResultsResult Mapping Exercise

Creating Result MapsCITY OF BILLINGS, MONTANA

Result: COMPREHENSIVE, ORDERLY GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT

If the CITY OF BILLINGS _____________________________, then it will have successfully achieved the result of providing COMPREHENSIVE, ORDERLY GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT

Provides, maintains and invests in a well-planned

public infrastructure network that

accommodates the long-range growth needs of the

community

Develops, preserves and revitalizes residential

neighborhoods that are safe, attractive and

provide diverse, affordable housing options

Appropriately plans for the creation, maintenance and accessibility of open space,

parks, recreational activities and educational

opportunities

Optimizes the City's resources and enhances the growth needs of the

community through well-planned infill and

annexation

Develops and prepares integrated, comprehensive

long-range zoning and land use plans that are consistently followed and managed

Partners to plan, prepare and collaboratively invest in properly regulated, quality and future-focused

development and redevelopment that stimulates the local economy and is consistent with community

standards

Fix existing infrastructure before building new

Support affordable housing development city-wide, not just in

low income areas Park/trails/open space creation &

maintenance Incentivize infill development Structured/consistent land use regulations Funds the planning department Following existing phase policies Invests in downtown &

neighborhoods

Administers and prioritizes its CIP Promote neighborhood revitalization Develop resources to support park

development Continue annexation policy that

identifies areas for growth already served by City programs

Updates & reviews as zoning/land use regulations Planning related to growth Developer buy-in Blighted/run-down area

redevelopment

Fund CIP on regular basis so

infrastructure is built, repaired & replaced

Invests in downtown & neighborhoods Water Park 15 minutes from every

home Annexation plan Zoning regulations (2) Planning for development Reviews & approves fees for

service that cover at least 75% of that true cost of development

reviewInvest in downtown

Reviews & approves the CIP Blighted/run-down area redevelopment Public indoor recreation centers Well-defined annexation

plan/map/policy Mixed use structures and neighborhoods Master plan Figure "real cost" of developments

before approving Dangerous building abatement

Long-term arterial road plan Provides broad housing choices Parks where needed Identify whether infill areas are sufficient to meet future growth

needs Good zoning Prepare/implement neighborhood

plans Development review boardsDe-localize businesses (so that I

don't have to travel across town to get what I want)

Infrastructure paid for by development Ensure affordable housing New recreation programs for youth Infill policy Zoning control Future planning Developers follow the rules Support & encourage small

business

Anticipate, plan & provide for increased infrastructure SUBDIVISION ZONING - INCLUDES

LOW INCOME HOUSING A park within walking distance from every home Stops annexing areas not up to

City standards Green zone Provide for long-range planning & annexation Partnering with development

community Save small businesses

Comprehensive, Orderly Growth and

Development

Develops, preserves and revitalizes residential neighborhoods that are

safe, attractive and provide diverse, affordable housing options

Develops and prepares integrated, comprehensive long-range zoning and

land use plans that are consistently followed and managed

Partners to plan, prepare and collaboratively invest in properly

regulated, quality and future-focused development and

redevelopment that stimulates the local economy and is

consistent with community standards

Optimizes the City's resources and enhances the growth needs of the

community through well-planned infill and annexation

Appropriately plans for the creation, maintenance and accessibility of open

space, parks, recreational activities and educational opportunities

Provides, maintains and invests in a well-planned public infrastructure

network that accommodates the long-range growth needs of the community

Identify and Define Results


Encourages energy conservation and efficiency through

education, incentives and the provision of alternative

solutions

Provides for the renewal of the

environment through recycling and reuse

Manages and mitigates factors that impact environmental quality and sustainability

Promotes and regulates a clean, orderly and

ecologically balanced community

Controls and abates threats to the

environment caused by nature

Safe Community

Offers protection, enforces the law and is well-prepared to

promptly and effectively respond to emergencies and

calls for service

Provides for the protection and sustainability of the

environment through regulatory compliance, planning and

effective stormwater management

Offers and supports a variety of safe activities and facilities that provide for the physical health

and social well-being of the community

Provides for a safe transportation network that is well-maintained, accessible,

enhances traffic flow and offers safe mobility to motorists,

cyclists and pedestrians alikeCreates a secure, well-

regulated, well-maintained community that is healthy, clean, well-lit and visually

attractive

Fosters a feeling of personal safety throughout the

community by establishing a visible, accessible presence that

proactively provides for prevention, intervention, safety

education, and community involvement

GOOD GOVERNANCE (Sound Financial Entity)

ENABLES and ENHANCES TRANSPARENCY,

ACCOUNTABILITY, INTEGRITY, EFFICIENCY and INNOVATION

IN ALL OPERATIONS

ATTRACTS, MOTIVATES and DEVELOPS A HIGH-QUALITY

WORKFORCE, DEDICATED TO PUBLIC SERVICE

PROVIDES ASSURANCE OF REGULATORY and POLICY

COMPLIANCE TO MINIMIZE and MITIGATE RISK

SUPPORTS DECISION-MAKING WITH TIMELY and

ACCURATE SHORT-TERM and LONG-RANGE ANALYSIS

RESPONSIVE, ACCESSIBLE and COURTEOUS TO ITS

CUSTOMERS

PROTECTS and PRUDENTLY MANAGES ITS FINANCIAL,

HUMAN, PHYSICAL and TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES

Role of the Council/BoardDevelop and/or endorse the ResultsPartner with Staff to develop and/or endorse the Results

DefinitionsDecide on the level of public engagement

Role of the CitizensPartner with the Council/Board to develop and/or

endorse the ResultsPartner with Council/Board and Staff to develop or

endorse the Results Definitions

Strategic Questions 1. What are we in “business” to do?2. What exactly do we do?

Departments develop their own “program” inventories – only ongoing; exclude capital & one-time

Comprehensive list of “what we do”

Comparing relative value of programs, not relative value of departments

Goldilocks & the Three Bears: Not too big, not too small, just right! TOO BIG = Departments/Divisions TOO SMALL = Tasks JUST RIGHT = Measure relative

size based on costs/people associated with program to more discretely demonstrate how resources are used

Step 3: Identify “Programs” CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADODepartment Program Inventory

Fund No.

Department Providing Program Program Name

010 Community Planning & Sustainability General Business Assistance010 Community Planning & Sustainability Business Retention and Expansion010 Community Planning & Sustainability Business Incentive Programs

010 Community Planning & SustainabilityBusiness Partnerships and Sponsorships

140 Community Planning & Sustainability Energy Decarbonization140 Community Planning & Sustainability Green Job Creation140 Community Planning & Sustainability Climate Adaptation Planning

112 Community Planning & Sustainability Comprehensive Planning112 Community Planning & Sustainability Intergovernmental Relations112 Community Planning & Sustainability Historic Preservation112 Community Planning & Sustainability Ecological Planning

Directions: For all of the programs and services in your department, identify the program name. When completed, please e-mail the Program Inventory back to Jim Reasor

Monday, July 26, 2010

City of Boulder, Colorado

OBJECTIVES forDeveloping Program Inventories Create a comprehensive listing of all services offered by

each operating division ( to both “external” and “internal” users

Provide a better understanding of “what we do” to staff, administration, elected officials and citizens

Provide a framework to better understand how resources are used to support “what we do”

Provide a valuable tool for staff, management and elected officials to use when faced with budgetary “choices” about how funds are distributed.

Allow for the preparation and discussion of a “program budget” rather than a “line-item budget”

Defining ProgramsTo determine “just right”, look for “differences” that might

help determine if an activity can be defined as a “stand-alone” program

“Who” are you doing the activity for? Does it benefit a specific demographic group or population?

“Where” are you offering the service? Does it impact a specific area, location or environment

“What” are you doing the service to? Does it affect a specific property or asset (infrastructure, facility, etc.)

“How” is it funded? – Is there someone paying for it? Are there revenue sources associated directly with the program

(“Program Revenues”)

Defining Programs“What” percentage of your resources are used to

provide it? - Do you need “specialized resources? Is the estimated annual cost of the program a significant

percentage of your total section’s budget? Are the number of FTE’s associated with the program a significant

portion of your total section’s staff?

Has someone told us we “have to do it? Are there statutes, ordinances, resolutions, or other legislative

documents that require us to provide the service?What “type” of service are you providing?

Preventative, Replacement; Repair/Maintenance; Instruction; Protection; Informative; etc.

Defining ProgramsIs there an “End Product” as a result of doing it?

Does the external or internal user get something tangible when the service is delivered?

“Is there someone outside the organization that “does the same thing”?Does a private business offer a similar service (“Yellow Pages

test”)

Do we “advertise” that we do it? Is there a separate phone directory or website reference to

the service?

How to Identify Program Costs

1) Associate Salary & Benefit Costs with your Personnel

2) Assign Personnel to the Programs they Provide

3) Associate Non-Personnel Costs with Programs

4) Line item Budget is now expressed as a Program Budget!

1) Associate Salary & Benefit Costs with your Personnel

2) Assign Personnel to the Programs they Provide

• Estimate for a given year (this is not a time study!)• Accuracy, not precision, is the goal • Can’t allocate an FTE over 100% (no matter how overworked they think

they are)

3) Associate Non-Personnel Costs with Programs

• Choose a reasonable allocation methodology:• Divide costs by FTE (i.e. supplies line item)• Assign costs directly to program (i.e. annual audit)

Role of the Council/BoardHave transparent access to listing of all programs offered

along with associated costs and FTEEducate themselves on the variety and diversity of

programs offered

Role of the CitizensHave transparent access to listing of all programs offered

along with associated costs and FTEBe informed about the nature of the programs offered to

residents businesses and visitors

Strategic Questions 1. What are we in “business” to do?2. What exactly do we do?

3. How do we figure out what is “core” OR What is of the highest importance?

City of Boulder’s Results Basic Program AttributesAccessible & Connected

CommunityEconomically Vital

CommunityHealthy Environment &

CommunityInclusive & Socially Thriving

CommunitySafe Community

Mandated to Provide the Program

Reliance on the City to Provide the Program

Cost Recovery of the Program Change in Demand for the

ProgramPortion of Community Served

by the ProgramAnd/or any other criteria that

is relevant to your community

Step 4: Score Programs against Results & Attributes

Simple Scoring Scale – “Degree” of Relevance to a Result

4 = Program has an essential or critical role in achieving Result

3 = Program has a strong influence on achieving Result

2 = Program has some degree of influence on achieving Result

1 = Program has minimal (but some) influence on achieving Result

0 = Program has no influence on achieving Result

No Clear Connection

“Lower Degree” of Relevance (still a clear connection)

“High Degree” of Relevance

Basic Program Attributes:Mandated to Provide Program

• Programs that are mandated by another level of government (i.e. federal, state or county) will receive a higher score for this attribute compared to programs that are mandated solely by the City or have no mandate whatsoever.

• The grading criterion established to score programs, on a 0 to 4 scale is as follows:– 4 = Program is required in writing by Federal, State or County government

legislation– 3 = Program is required by Charter or other incorporation documents OR is

required in order to comply with regulatory agency standards– 2 = Program is required by code, ordinance, resolution or policy OR is

required to fulfill an executed franchise or contractual agreement– 1 = Program is recommended by a national professional organization to

meet published standards or as a best practice– 0 = No requirement or mandate exists

Basic Program Attributes:Reliance on City to Provide Program

• Programs for which residents, businesses and visitors can only look to the City to obtain the service will receive a higher score for this attribute compared to programs that may be similarly obtained from another intergovernmental agency or a private business

• The grading criterion established to score programs, on a 0 to 4 scale is as follows:– 4 = City is the sole provider of the service and there are no other public or

private entities that provide this type of service– 3 = City is currently the sole provider of the service but there are other public

or private entities that could be contracted to provide the service – 2 = Program is only offered by another governmental, non-profit or civic agency– 1 = Program is offered by other private businesses but none are located within

the City limits – 0 = Program is offered by other private businesses within the City limits

Basic Program Attributes:Change in Demand for Program

• Programs demonstrating an increase in demand or utilization will receive a higher score for this attribute compared to programs that show no growth in demand for the program. Programs demonstrating a decrease in demand or utilization will actually receive a negative score for this attribute.

• The grading criterion established to score programs, on a -4 to 4 scale is as follows:– 4 = Program experiencing a SUBSTANTIAL increase in demand of 25% or more– 3 = Program experiencing a SIGNIFICANT increase in demand of 15% to 24%– 2 = Program experiencing a MODEST increase in demand of 5% to 14% – 1 = Program experiencing a MINIMAL increase in demand of 1% to 4%– 0 = Program experiencing NO change in demand – -1 = Program experiencing a MINIMAL decrease in demand of 1% to 4%– -2 =Program experiencing a MODEST decrease in demand of 5% to 14% – -3 =Program experiencing a SIGNIFICANT decrease in demand of 15% to 24%– -4 =Program experiencing a SUBSTANTIAL decrease in demand of 25% or more

Basic Program Attributes:Cost Recovery of Program

Programs that demonstrate the ability to “pay for themselves” through user fees, intergovernmental grants or other user-based charges for services will receive a higher score for this attribute compared to programs that generate limited or no funding to cover their cost.

The grading criterion established to score programs, on a 0 to 4 scale is as follows:4 = Fees generated cover 75% to 100% of the cost to provide the program3 = Fees generated cover 50% to 74% of the cost to provide the program2 = Fees generated cover 25% to 49% of the cost to provide the program1 = Fees generated cover 1% to 24% of the cost to provide the program0 = No fees are generated that cover the cost to provide the program

Basic Program Attributes: Portion of Community Served by Program• Programs that benefit or serve a larger segment of the City’s residents, businesses

and/or visitors will receive a higher score for this attribute compared to programs that benefit or serve only a small segment of these populations.

• The grading criterion established to score programs, on a 0 to 4 scale is as follows:– 4 = Program benefits/serves the ENTIRE community (100%)– 3 = Program benefits/serves a SUBSTANTIAL portion of the community (at

least 75%)– 2 = Program benefits/serves a SIGNIFICANT portion of the community (at

least 50%)– 1 = Program benefits/serves SOME portion of the community (at least 10%)– 0 = Program benefits/serves only a SMALL portion of the community (less

than 10%)

Identify “Value” of Program Based on their Influence on Results

Individual Department Program Scorecard

Mandated to Provide Program

Cost Recovery of Program

Change in Demand for

Service

Reliance on City to Provide

ServiceSafe City

Prosperous Economy

Green, Sustainable

City

Attractive, Vibrant

Community

Reliable, Well-

Maintained Infrastructur

e

0-4 Scale (4=State/Federal

Mandate; 2=Charter; 1=Ordinance/Resolution; 0=No Mandate)

0-4 Scale based on Percentage

(4=75-100%; 3=50-74%; 2=25-49%; 1=1-

24%)

-4 to 4 Scale ('-4=demand

significantly decreasing; 4=demand

significantly increasing)'

0 to 4 Scale (4=Only City can provide service; 2=Only public

entities can provide service; '0=other

entities can provide service)'

Department Program Enter Score Below Enter Score Below Enter Score Below Enter Score Below Enter Score Below Enter Score Below Enter Score Below Enter Score Below Enter Score BelowOffi ce of Economic

DevelopmentBusiness Attraction/ Expansion Assistance

4 2 4 4 2 4 3 2 0

Offi ce of Economic Development

International Business Relations/Sister City

0 1 2 2 0 2 1 1 0


Economic Strategy, Policy and Analysis

1 2 4 2 0 3 3 2 0


Downtown Management 1 2 4 4 3 2 0 3 4


Arts / Festival Grants and Assistance

1 1 3 0 1 3 1 4 1


K-12 Arts Education 0 0 2 0 1 2 0 4 0


Cultural Planning, Policy and Initiatives / Arts

Commission

1 0 2 4 1 3 1 4 1


Public Art Project Management

1 1 2 0 1 2 2 4 3


Public Art Master Plan Implementation and

Interagency Coordination

1 1 3 0 1 2 1 4 2

On a scale of 0 to 4 points, 0 = program has no influence on achieving the Result; 1 = program has some influence, though minimal; 2 = program

influences the Result; 3 = program has a strong influence on the Result; 4 = program is essential to achieving the Results

Directions: For all the programs in your department, please rate how these programs score in the four Basic Attributes and they influence the City’s ability to achieve its Priority Results. When completed, please email the Program Scorecard back to [email protected]

Thursday, January 28, 2010 Evaluation CriteriaBasic Program Attributes Priority Results

Strategic Questions

1. What are we in “business” to do?2. What exactly do we do?3. How do we figure out what is “core” OR What is of the

highest importance?

4. How do we know we are successful?

Peer Review (Quality Control) Process

Role of the Council/BoardOffer input and/or endorse the Basic Program Attributes.If desired, individually participate in Peer Review process as

member of one Result Team Understand and evaluate the “key indicators” being used to

validate achievement of desired Results

Role of the CitizensSelectively participate in Peer Review process as member of

one Result Team – City of San Jose, CAUnderstand and evaluate the “key indicators” being used to

validate achievement of desired Results

Strategic Questions

1. What are we in “business” to do?2. What exactly do we do?3. How do we figure out what is “core” OR What

is of the highest importance?4. How do we know we are successful?

5. How do we ask “better” questions that lead to “better” decisions about “what we do” and “why we do it”?

Defining Quartile Groupings0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0

147

101316192225283134374043464952555861646770737679828588919497

100103

Total Score for Community Oriented Programs

Tota

l N

um

be

r o

f P

rogr

ams

Quartile 1

Quartile 2

Quartile 3

Quartile 4

Key:Programs are grouped into Quartiles (not ranked, one

versus the other)


Step 5: Allocate Resources Based on Prioritization

$85,915,772

$51,726,155

$21,505,297

$7,498,842

$- $10,000,000 $20,000,000 $30,000,000 $40,000,000 $50,000,000 $60,000,000 $70,000,000 $80,000,000 $90,000,000 $100,000,000

1

2

3

4

Quarti

le Rank

ing(Qu

artile 1

: High

est Ra

ted Pro

grams

;Qua

rtile 4:

Lowest

Rated

Progra

ms)

Prioritization Array: Combined City-wide Programs


“Resource Alignment Diagnostic Tool”City of Boulder, CO

Quartile Ranking Programs in ArrayQrt 1 88

Qrt 2 116

Qrt 3 1102-10%Qrt 4 54

TOTALS 368

October 30, 2012

Community-Oriented Programs

All Departments

Funding Source: (Est. Budget, Gen Gov Revenue,

Program Revenues)

Total Estimated BudgetCity-wide

Prioritization Perspective: (City-wide, Fund, Funds)

Choose Department: (All Departments, Specific)

Program Type: (All Programs, Governance,

Community-oriented)

$00.00%

0.00%

$0

$0

$85,915,772

$21,505,297

$51,726,155

0.00%

$0

$0

$0 $85,915,772

$51,726,155 0.00%

$0 $166,646,067 0.00% $0 $166,646,067

2012-13 Proposed Budget Increase (Reduce) % Impact 2012-13 Target Budget

$0

$0

2011 Budget

$7,498,842

$21,505,297

$7,498,842

$85,915,772

$51,726,155

$21,505,297

$7,498,842

$- $10,000,000 $20,000,000 $30,000,000 $40,000,000 $50,000,000 $60,000,000 $70,000,000 $80,000,000 $90,000,000 $100,000,000

1

2

3

4

Quar

tile R

anki

ng(Q

uarti

le 1:

Hig

hest

Rat

ed Pr

ogra

ms;

Quar

tile 4

: Low

est R

ated

Prog

ram

s)

Priority Based Budgeting: Spending Array Perspectives

Live Demonstration of

“Resource Alignment Diagnostic Tool”

Role of the Council/BoardEngage in the discussions by looking through this “new lens.”Be guided to ask the “right” questions – focused on POLICY rather

than OPERATIONS.Allocated resources based on priorities of the communityMake better decisions that you can easily communicate to your

citizens.

Role of the CitizensSee through the “new lens” how decision-makers are more

objectively allocating resources to achieve the community’s prioritiesBetter understand the budget “choices” that need to be made and

the impacts of those choices on the community

Strategic Questions 1. What are we in “business” to do?2. What exactly do we do?3. How do we figure out what is “core” OR What is of the

highest importance?4. How do we know we are successful? 5. How do we ask “better” questions that lead to “better”

decisions about “what we do” and “why we do it”?

6. What do you want to “keep” (not “What do you want to cut”) – THE ROLE OF CITIZENS

Keys to Public Engagement1.) Determine objective for engaging the Public

Is it a “Means to an End” or an “End in and of Itself”?

2.) Design the role of the Public so it will have a meaningful influence

3.) Ensure higher participation – GO TO THEMUse the WebMail enclosures with Newsletters or Utility BillsAttend Community Meetings (i.e. Chamber of Commerce;

Civic Groups; School Board; HOA Meetings)Set up kiosks at Library, Rec Center, Senior Center, etc.

Many Challenges Inherent to Engaging Public

Level of discussion too “Big Picture”

Conversation is framed contentiously (and possibly with “fear”)

Unclear about “how” citizens will be able to participate

Engaging Public in New Discussion About “What They Want to Keep”

Invest $100 in Results, according to their relative importanceValuing the Results of Government

Valuing the Results of GovernmentGiving Emphasis to the Priorities of Government

Directions: The results that our Government strives to achieve are identified in the table below. As a citizen, your job is to help the City understand clearlythe results that you value most. For this exercise, you are to imagine having $100 to invest in achieving the City's results. Where would you invest yourmoney? You can distribute the funds evenly to all results, you can invest all of your money in one single result, or you can invest your money toward the achievement of various results emphasizing those which are most important to you. Spend the $100 until it's gone by typing the amount you intend to invest in a result into the empty box to the "right" of the Result Statement.

Money You Started With $100

Money You Have Invested $100

Money You Have Left $0 (When this box reads "$0" you have completed Step 1.)

Strong Neighborhoods and a Sense of Community

Economic Vitality

Culture, Recreation and Learning Opportunities


Effective Transportation and Mobility Options

Results of Government

5$

20$

20$

15$

10$

Thursday, February 04, 2010

Amount of Money Citizen Intends to Invest in Result

30$ A Safe Community

Thank You !

www.pbbcenter.org

Jon Johnson, Co-Founder Chris Fabian, Co-Founder303-909-9052 (cell) 303-520-1356 (cell)[email protected] [email protected]

Kathie Novak, Senior Advisor 720-339-5845 (cell) [email protected]

Copyright ©2009 by Chris Fabian and Jon Johnson d/b/a the Center for Priority Based Budgeting,

Denver, Colorado.

Questions/Comments?

ICMA Conference 2013 - Center for Priority Based Budgeting Presentation (2/2)

Technology

Transcript of ICMA Conference 2013 - Center for Priority Based Budgeting Presentation (2/2)