Attachment 4

Public Working Session Summary

The Public-Private Partnership Task Force held a public working session on Saturday, May 8^th, 1999, in order to obtain citizen comments on our work to date. The four-hour session, held at the Rainier Community Center in south Seattle, was widely publicized and attended by representatives from neighborhoods, nonprofits, and civic groups as well as representatives of City departments. City Council President Sue Donaldson also attended.

The meeting opened with "The Kiss Exercise", in which each person was given three chocolate kisses and instructions to place them in one or more bowls, each representing a different strategy for expanding citizen participation in public-private partnership proposals. Citizens ranked the six categories in order of their highest priority as follows:

Preparation and distribution of an independent evaluation of anticipated public benefits

Numerous, well-publicized public workshops and hearings

Review of proposed partnerships in future neighborhood planning efforts

Development of a website outlining and seeking comment on proposed partnerships

Creation of a partnership review board

Incorporation of partnership issues into annual City budget hearings

Following the opening exercise and introductions of Task Force members and attendees, the group began an in-depth discussion of issues and concerns related to the City’s engagement in public-private partnerships. Citizen comments emphasized the inclusion of neighborhood projects within the purview of proposed standards, a fear of too much process, the need for the City’s ethics code to be part of the proposed standards, and the need for guaranteed citizen participation as partnerships are proposed.

Following are highlights of participant comments.

• Don’t concentrate the public’s participation and oversight entirely on the front end of process - ensure ongoing monitoring of projects.
• Beware of overprocessing - too much process could deter small projects, especially those in neighborhoods.
• Balance process and structure with results.
• Leverage existing structures (i.e. neighborhood councils).

• Use neighborhood plans as an agenda setting criteria.
• Give neighborhood organizations a role in the process.
• Many projects on the neighborhood level don’t require intense involvement.
• Propose standards that encourage the private sector to work with the public on a neighborhood scale.
• Ensure flexibility so neighborhood projects are given a fair chance.

• Assure substantial public involvement.
• Encouraging citizen participation requires predictability in process.
• Involve citizens in different, creative ways.

• Incorporate appropriate parts of the ethics code within standards.

• Provide a clear calculation of direct financial benefit to the City.
• Include other values besides financial value.
• Understand that public-private partnerships are about incentives to create public benefits.
• Create incentives in the process and review for developers to "get outside the box" and be creative.

• The City needs to expand their advocacy/facilitative role, educate neighborhood groups, and help them meet PPP standards.

• The Task Force does a good job of asking questions, but lacks a statement of principle.
• The Task Force needs to define which types of public-private partnerships will require standards.

• An outside/independent evaluator of public-private partnerships should be identified.
• Find out ways to determine whether an evaluator is independent.

• Determine ways to value and allocate the sharing of risk.

• Include locally-owned and independent businesses in criteria.

• Creating a review board provides a neutral place to vet an idea.
• Other groups such as the County Council, Port, and School District could also make use of a partnership review board.
• A review board set up by the City Council could be viewed by the public as "more of the same".