LWV on Portland’s Neighborhood Associations

The League of Women Voters of Portland, Oregon (LWV) has just posted their new position on Portland’s Neighborhood Associations (NAs). I’ll copy and paste it after the break.

I was a member of the study group, chaired by Patricia Osborn, that examined the NA system in a work project lasting almost two years. The study was proposed and voted to be done at a General Meeting of the League, early in 2005. The committee of LWV volunteers did a survey (pdf) in addition to interviewing dozens of participants and non-participants, and reviewing national and local literature. League members visited NA meetings, unannounced, for the survey – making this study different from others which have relied on anecdotal examples and reported statistics. A key finding in the study is that more NAs had 25 or more participants than had 10 or fewer in attendance, at the random meetings documented.

The first phase of the study is detailed in the history (pdf) summary. Then there is a comprehensive report on How Portland’s Neighborhood Program Works Today (big pdf file – smaller pieces available here and a very helpful diagram of the structure here).

After participating in this intensive study, I’m even more impressed with Portland’s Neighborhood Associations and the work volunteers do within their structure, and also with the League of Women Voters’ process. And I support the new League of Women Voters position, which is:

Neighborhood Associations (1975, 1973, 2007)

1. The LWV of Portland believes that Portland’s Neighborhood Associations have the potential to serve the public good by providing important opportunities for civic participation and improving neighborhood livability. To meet this potential, Neighborhood Associations must be integrated into city networks of communication and decision-making, and they must be adequately supported by city funding and services. Neighborhood Associations, in turn, need to consistently invite and include all residents in their operations.

2. Portland’s neighborhood system structure:

Neighborhood Associations should continue to be autonomous entities separate from city government.

Because Portland’s neighborhood system is grassroots in nature, diversity of NA character should be honored. A decentralized system of service delivery is appropriate.

District coalitions, in their varied organizational formats, should remain in place as long as they are effective, with funding from the city.
Uniformity and equity should be pursued where possible but should not come at the expense of effectiveness.

3. The city’s role in supporting Neighborhood Associations should consist of:
At the Council and Bureau level:

Informing Neighborhood Associations of city projects and activities affecting them
A willingness to solicit and receive neighborhood input
Consideration of neighborhood needs within city budgeting process
Funding that is adequate to maintain this system
Through the Office of Neighborhood Involvement:
Ensuring a neighborhood voice in city operations
Encouraging better communication between city bureaus and neighborhoods
The setting forth of healthy governance practices in guidelines for neighborhoods
Support for neighborhoods and district coalitions including assistance and adequate funding for communication, outreach, leadership training and technical assistance

4. Successful Neighborhood Associations should:
Be independent with the authority to set their own agenda
Have the ability to interact with all government and non-governmental entities
Work to engage the various populations in the neighborhood
Respond to neighborhood needs
Represent neighborhood interests effectively to the city
Utilize effective means to communicate with neighborhood residents at least twice a year

5. Neighborhood Associations should not be the only avenue for civic engagement with Portland’s government. If resources are adequate, city assistance could be offered to groups other than Neighborhood Associations to increase organizational capacity. When Neighborhood Associations are functioning effectively, with both the resources to do their work, and city’s acknowledgement of their role, encouragement should be given to other community groups to channel work on civic issues through the neighborhood system.