"Glenna Rose" wrote in message
news:fc.003d094101c0eb513b9aca009cbb789b.1c0ec79@p mug.org...
writes:

Applause, applause. I have been working with (doing a web site for) a
local neighborhood association. The membership is heavily weighted
with participation by Los Ricos with waterfront property, and they
*do* get their agenda acted upon. However,...a quarterly newsletter is
distributed to 1,600 households just in advance of general meetings.
At the last meeting, the attendance was 32 people, and about 150
families are voting members ($10/yr membership fee). The rest sit home
and complain about changes the association has promoted or brought
about. The quarterly general meetings and monthly board meetings are
open to participation by anyone. Los Ricos definitely have their own
interests in mind, but they *are* the ones who come to the meetings,
volunteer to be on the board, do the paperwork for grants and
activities, and hide the eggs and dress up in the bunny costume for
the Easter Egg Hunt in the park. I did my share of complaining
before I got involved. But Darwin is right. It does absolutely no good
to take a 'victim' position when there are opportunities to change
things through participation.

This has shown to be true here as well. In fact, we had so little
participation (and with *no* dues) that one meeting in which we proposed
changing the bylaws to include a quorum to be 3 elected board members and
5 general members (meaning non-elected) where it had been 3 and 15; we had
great attendance *and* had the required attendance at that one meeting
only (in over four years!). There was a quorum and it was decided to go
to 3 and 10 because a total of eight was "too few" making decisions. That
was in June. Well, until this past month, we didn't have a quorum and
couldn't vote on anything, including making some donations to charity!
The entire idea of the 8 was because 6-8 was a good attendance at most
meetings, even as few as a total of 4! While we had a quorum, we voted on
the many issues that had been set aside for up to 8 months, and *then*
changed the bylaws to reflect the 8 for a quorum as had originally been
suggested. You see, literally *none* of those who voted for 13 attended
another meeting in that eight months!

Our city recently passed a minimum property maintenance standard ordinance
which grouped all related laws and ordinances in one area for easier
understanding and enforcement. Of course, there were several that were
strengthened and some were added. Because I was at the initial meeting, I
was able to influence some of the new ones which were good for what they
were intended but what was in black and white was overly restrictive.
Example: no vegetation over 18" in height which excluded such things as
raspberries, tomato plants, etc. Solution: insertion of the word
"non-cultivated." Example: no wood stored on property without a current
building permit. Problem: many projects do not require building permits;
many folks have gardens using lumber as borders on raised beds, etc.
Solution: insert exception of agricultural and seasonal as long as
properly stored when not in use. Example: no holes on property.
Solution: define "hole" including size. The list goes on and on as you
can imagine. Clarification of terms, etc., made the finished product
livable and realistic for the average home owner. This entire process of
refining/defining and presenting it before various groups for input took
over 18 months. Our association had two (yes, two!) meetings specifically
about the ordinance, one dedicated to *only* that, asking for input and
then prepared a formal memo to the City incorporating all comments and
suggestions with even the memo read at the next meeting before
presentation to the City. Ordinance passed last fall and effective
December 31st. Yup, you can guess what has now happened at our last
meeting . . . a couple that had not been heard from before (and has lived
here for many years) was at the meeting complaining about not being able
to just throw gravel on a corner of their yard and park their trailer
there. Interestingly enough, they hadn't been able to do that since 1965
anyway, but didn't bother to find out what they needed to do. They would
have known, however, if they had read the newsletter or attended any of
the meetings. This is doubly frustrating to me as I faithfully attended
all meetings related to this as a neighborhood representative, made myself
initially unpopular by challenging the vagueness of some things and the
unreasonableness of others to City officials, regularly reported back to
our meetings as well as including key points in our newsletters (I was
editor for four years, now taking a break), and made myself available by
telephone for all input as well as in person.

This ordinance was highly publicized in the local newspaper, was addressed
on several news programs, was presented at many public meetings, was
available via web and in-person presentation by the department involved,
etc., for that entire year and a half. Yet, many people weren't
interested until it affected them. I must admit my attitude for those in
our own neighborhood who all received at least six newsletters asking for
them comments, aren't getting a lot of sympathy from me as my first
thought is, "Where were you during the year and a half of preparing the
ordinance?" This wasn't something done behind closed doors or "sneaked
past" the citizens; it was remarkably public as well as those involved
being receptive to suggestions. No, we didn't all get what we wanted,
either way, but we do have something we can feel we helped to make more
reasonable and livable. And, yes, I may get "nailed" on it with some of
my non-commercial tomato cages, tomato and potato tubs/planters, and bean
tee-pees if someone wants to be highly literal though I have been assured
it will not happen since that's "not who we are going after." (LOL, famous
last words!)

Yup. The "don't care" attitude seems to be widespread *until* it affects
you (generic "you" not specifically "you"). My attitude is: Don't vote,
don't bitch. Only if you vote have you've given yourself the right to
complain. Of course, for our neighborhood, that is even more true since
everyone over 18 who either lives here or owns property here, is a member
and has a vote with a limitation of one vote per business. So, you can
see, there is no reason why everyone didn't have their voice heard.

Have you bothered to ask people why they don't participate? I bet you
could learn a lot by their answers.