Presentation at the July 23-24 Civic Studies, Civic Practices conference at Tufts University.

1. Politics, Policy and Citizen Participation in City Governance Civic Studies, Civic Practices Conference at Tufts July 23-24, 2010 Rebecca Lisi, Candidate for PhD in Political Science, UMass Amherst Rebecca Moryl, Candidate for PhD in Public Policy, UMass Boston Felicia Sullivan, Candidate for PhD in Public Policy, UMass Boston

2. Plan for this session Introduction to our background and research interests (30 minutes) Background on gateway cities Brief introduction to our areas of research, how they overlap and the conversation we’ve begun to have around Politics, Policy and Citizen Participation in City Governance Participatory discussion (60 minutes)

3. Gateway Cities in Massachusetts Defined as traditional mill cities with populations of greater than 35,000 and significant levels of poverty. The cities include: BrocktonLowell Fall River New Bedford FitchburgPittsfield Haverhill Springfield HolyokeWorcester Lawrence *Research interests presented here are in the cities in bold plus the city of Leominster.

4. Locating our research Lowell 98,766 Leominster 42,047 Pittsfield 45,058 Holyoke 38,320 Worcester 163,637 Population data from the ACS 2006-2008

5. Gateway Cities overview According to a 2007 report by MassINC, Gateway Cities: lost more than 11,000 jobs or 3 percent of their job base since 1970; are home to 30 percent of all Massachusetts residents living below the poverty line, even though they account for only 15 percent of the state’s population; and have low educational attainment levels with just 16.5 percent of residents possessing a four-year college degree.

6. Gateway Cities basic demographics Race / Ethnicity (percentage of population) Immigration / Language(percentage of population)

7. Gateway Cities Stats Poverty / Employment (percentage of population) Educational Attainment (percentage of population)

8. Initial questions:Within the city framework….. How do we define community? Is there such a thing as a collective voice? or of desired community outcomes? Any discussion from day one sessions that can shed light on this? Given the particulars of the city context, what obstacles and opportunities exist for citizen participation in community?

9. Initial questions:Within the city framework….. At the city level, how do we define / observe engagement? Any discussions in prior sessions that can shed light on this?

10. Delving Deeper:Our experiences and understandings Specific examples of ways in which government agencies and / or nonprofit or community organizations have sought to facilitate citizen engagement and participation Specific successes, structures, and ingredients for success? Specific challenges or obstacles Broadly, what do you see are the ingredients for successfully facilitating citizen engagement? If you consider yourself engaged in your community, what made you take that step? If not, what would it take for you to get engaged in your community?

11. Delving Deeper: Are there ways in which some elements of facilitating participation work better for/with government agencies compared to community groups ? Are there ways in which either are more flexible or constrained? Are there strengths that could come from joint efforts or partnerships? What is the role of information in building community? Who generates it? Who controls the flow? Does the type of information matter? Where does responsibility lie for providing? For using? Regarding research in this area: How do we measure community engagement / participation? How do we measure community preferences? How do we account for differences in preferences and engagement practices?

12. Wrapping Up Can / How can community organizations act as incubators and innovators of citizen participation and bridge links to government agencies?