Participatory budgeting is actually about connecting folks with the skills and resources to navigate and shape government. And so, for me, that is the most optimistic and the most important outcome of any participatory budgeting process.
Shari Davis
A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.
Key Highlights Include
Shari Davis leads the Participatory Budget Project as its Executive Director. They have over 15 years working in local government beginning in high school. And not long ago they were honored as an Obama Fellow.
Key Links
Participatory Budgeting Project
"Why is Democracy Performing so Poorly" by Francis Fukuyama
Related Content
Hélène Landemore on Democracy without Elections
Carolyn Hendriks, Selen Ercan and John Boswell on Mending Democracy
More Information
Apes of the State created all Music
How Do We Fix It?
Email the show at democracyparadoxblog@gmail.com
Follow me on Twitter @DemParadox
100 Books on Democracy
Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/
Participatory budgeting is actually about connecting folks with the skills and resources to navigate and shape government. And so, for me, that is the most optimistic and the most important outcome of any participatory budgeting process.
Shari Davis
A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.
Key Highlights Include
Shari Davis leads the Participatory Budget Project as its Executive Director. They have over 15 years working in local government beginning in high school. And not long ago they were honored as an Obama Fellow.
Key Links
Participatory Budgeting Project
"Why is Democracy Performing so Poorly" by Francis Fukuyama
Related Content
Hélène Landemore on Democracy without Elections
Carolyn Hendriks, Selen Ercan and John Boswell on Mending Democracy
More Information
Apes of the State created all Music
How Do We Fix It?
Email the show at democracyparadoxblog@gmail.com
Follow me on Twitter @DemParadox
100 Books on Democracy
Learn more about the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at https://kellogg.nd.edu/
I come across a lot of ideas to reform or reimagine democracy. But I approach every new idea with a healthy dose of skepticism. I want to know how it works. Is it feasible? Is it scalable? And does it gives citizens real decision-making power?
I came across the Participatory Budget Project by accident but have been impressed with its experience in developing programs for municipalities, schools, and other organizations to involve communities in the budget process. And we’re not talking about token amounts. It’s not uncommon to find projects involving millions of dollars.
Shari Davis leads the Participatory Budget Project as its Executive Director. They have over 15 years working in local government beginning in high school. And not long ago they were honored as an Obama Fellow.
But what I find most compelling about Shari is their passion and charisma. Shari is one of the most dynamic communicators I have invited onto the podcast. They are intelligent and knowledgeable, but also very likable.
But before we begin I want to remind you the Democracy Paradox is a part of the Democracy Group network of podcasts. I want to highlight a podcast from our network, How Do We Fix It? Every week Richard Davies and Jim Meigs introduce a new guest to explore a diverse range of topics. Recent guests have spanned Republican Pollster Frank Luntz to astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson. So check out How Do We Fix It?
But now I am excited to introduce you to one of the most innovative democracy reforms I have come across: Participatory Budgeting. This is my conversation with Shari Davis…
jmk
Shari Davis, welcome to the Democracy Paradox.
Shari
Thank you so much, Justin, for having me. I'm excited to be here.
jmk
Well, President Joe Biden has said, “Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I'll tell you what you value.” I love that quote. Can you explain to me why a budget is really about values?
Shari
Well, I think it was Martin Luther King Jr. who said a long time ago that budgets are moral documents. A budget generally speaking is our guess over the next calendar year of expenses that a city is likely to incur. And it also reflects the values, the investments that we are prioritizing. And so I think that that statement around budgets being so deeply connected to values is incredibly valid. And while I appreciate the Biden administration's acknowledgement of this, I think that there has been longstanding acknowledgement of that correlation.
jmk
So, I want to get into what participatory budgeting is and I'm sure that every example is going to be different.
Shari
Yeah.
jmk
But rather than simply explain it, can you actually walk me through an example to illustrate what the process is like?
Shari
I can totally walk you through an example. And, if it's okay, maybe you can travel with me to the first time that I did participatory budgeting, because it was also the chance that I had to learn about what participatory budgeting is.
jmk
My bags are packed. Shari
Shari
Good. Good. Let’s go on this journey together. And I'm going to take you back to something like 2013. When I had worked in local government in the city of Boston for just about 10 years. I started as a teenager. They let me in and I was like, I have to be here. How else would you figure out things about young people and youth voice. And slowly but surely, I started overseeing some of the initiatives that I grew up being a part of. And one day, the mayor of Boston, who was mayor Menino at the time, invited me to his office and said, ‘Sherry, I want you to devise a youth participatory budgeting process that allows young people in our city to decide on a million dollars of our capital budget.’ I said, yes, sir. Absolutely. That sounds great.’
I march right down to my desk, Justin, and I Googled what participatory budgeting was. That was my first introduction to PB and what I found out, like most people in government that are charged with deep engagement processes, was that it would take time. And I learned about the Participatory Budgeting Project. And as we embarked on this journey together on the country's first instance of youth focused PB, this is how it worked. We came together first and thought about, well, what does the design of this really need to look like? And that's where according to the United States kind of PB framework, we really thought about building a steering committee of young people, of teenagers, that would write the rules to govern this process.
And they absolutely did that. And so, we saw youth serving organizations come together, nominate young people to make sure that they were supported and they went through and really thought about what the goals of the process was, what equity meant in this instance, and what outcomes we were really desiring here. After we wrote the rules, then we moved into the next phase, which I think was really exciting. It was the idea collection phase. This is where young people across the city put forward so many ideas. Actually, thousands of ideas on how to spend that pot of funds. And it was phenomenal and the ideas were so smart. And they were so based on lived experience, they were kind of brilliant. And…
jmk
Well, let me pause for a second. So you set up the steering committee to figure out what the process is going to be like. How do you pick the people onto the steering committee n this example, and maybe, give us a framework for others too?
Shari
Yeah, such a good question. So, it's not me. It's not Shari that picks the steering committee. Instead, we said, ‘What are the kinds of folks that we really want to focus on? What is the goal of this process?’ And so, when the city of Boston agreed to launch this, they really started thinking about the overarching goals of making sure that historically and traditionally marginalized people were at the center of design. They really thought about the neighborhoods in Boston that were historically and traditionally marginalized. And there were five, according to city data, that was readily available to people. And then they also thought about also the conditions that folks were facing that may be barriers to participation.
And so considering those things, we made an application so that folks could apply. Based on that criteria. And then we really thought about city-wide neighborhood balance and again, those barriers to participation. So how do we ensure that folks from all different experiences are able to design this process? And that was the criteria then that was formed in reviewing the applications. And so legitimately in the Boston instance, and many instances across the country, where we see participatory budgeting, the folks that are most marginalized, those neighborhood ambassadors that are deeply connected to the issues and have already built trust end up serving on the steering committee. And these aren't the quote usual suspects. These are neighborhood leaders. Does that make sense?
jmk
No, that's great. Now you were also describing how you set the agenda then. What they're going to decide, because one of the flaws that direct democracy has is that if it's poorly designed, it becomes manipulated by powerful elites who determine what everybody's going to vote on. One of the challenges that people in favor of direct democracy or even deliberative democracy are trying to overcome then is how do we democratize the agenda setting process? And it sounds like you were doing that. So, explain to me how you were able to set the agenda, what people were actually deciding. What scope they had and what power they had to actually throw out their own ideas or evaluate others?
Shari
A lot of power. Like a lot of power. Probably more power than community members are accustomed to encountering. And it's actually a beautiful thing because that's how we make better decisions together. And so, when we think about their purview, the scope of steering committee members that are designing the process, a really important understanding is that this is about not designing for, but actually designing with. So, it's essential that the steering committee has the power to make some decisions, really to customize the process, for the most vulnerable in a community to really show up. That's what I mean by being centered.
And so, for example, some of the decisions in Boston that the steering committee makes, but many steering committees make is age eligibility. And the city of Boston, they really thought about, what kinds of materials are we producing? Who are they for and how do we design feasibly for a group? And in that instance, they said, look, I think we can really do this deeply for young people. And if we're going to focus on youth, let's design the materials for those that are between the ages of 12 and 25 years old.
In other instances, like the city of Oakland, when they thought about what does age eligibility look like, and this time in Oakland it was federal dollars that were passed down through community in a district-based process, they said, ‘Look. I really think that equity in Oakland looks like not having a minimum age.’ So, it was literally anyone of any age that could interact with the materials could participate in participatory budgeting. And those are the kinds of decisions that the steering committee makes around eligibility, focus of outreach, what the goals of the process were, really refining those goals and building consent around them. And that's an incredibly powerful element of design so that this process really, really works.
jmk
My nine-year-old would love that. He wants to write essays about why we need to drop the voting age.
Shari
Come on. We should totally do that. I mean, Justin, there's some instances of PB in elementary schools where young people like your child would be able to literally not only design the process. But then be able to submit ideas, develop them into concrete proposals, and vote. And so, I know I described a little bit of how PB gets set up. But just to fast forward some, so we talked a little bit about the design element, this steering committee piece, we write the rules, that governance process, and that's done by community members.
Then we move into this idea collection phase. Hundreds, if not thousands of ideas come in around what community really believes are the issues that need to be solved and they put forward those solutions. And then we move into probably my favorite part of PB, which is proposal development. How on earth do you take hundreds or thousands of ideas and flesh them out into concrete proposals? Community members are able to do that alongside city and agency staff. They form a couple of committees. They prioritize the ideas based on need, feasibility, and impact on equity. And then they research those ideas that have the highest scores or they combine ideas that make a lot of sense together.
jmk
Now, how are you finding these ideas? Like, are you sending people out in the community or are you just waiting for somebody to drop something into a drop box and just the most active and engaged people are the only ones participating?
Shari
That's such a good time question. And going back to design again, the steering committee really thinks about what those outreach elements are. Where do we need to focus our outreach, who is often left out and how do we ensure that they are at the center and deeply engaged? And so that said those ideas come in through a multi-modal process based on the experience of the steering committee members that bring their brilliance forward in the design. And so that looks like, sometimes maybe at a transit spot. There's an opportunity for folks to submit ideas.
When I was doing this in Boston, we had a booth set up at different public transit locations across the city on different days where folks were or students really were going to school or were when they were on their way home or to extracurricular activities. We asked them this question, how would you spend a million dollars? To improve your life and the life of other young people in the city of Boston. And then we also offered other prompts, like where do you feel most safe in the city? And how could we grow that? Where do you feel like you can connect with other young people? And how do we grow that? Where do you feel like you can find resources that you can use and how do we grow that?
And so, as a result, we were able to collect a lot of not only ideas, but really brilliant solutions that were based on, in some instances, non-traditional leadership, but really experience from folks being able to marry context expertise, and content expertise in the idea collection phase. That's how we get not only a breadth of ideas, but really good ideas that rely on experience of community members.
jmk
So, you've got a bunch of different ideas. You’ve got to be able to choose between them. How do you make the final decision? Do you send this out to a vote within the community? And even if you do send it to a vote, how do you narrow it down to a ballot, or however you do it, to make it so that people aren't overwhelmed by the choices?
Shari
Such a good point. So, now that we've collected these hundred, if not thousands of ideas, we move into this proposal development phase. This is where community members form thematic groups. And so there might be a group that's centered around environment. There might be a group that's centered around public safety. There might be a group that's centered around connection. And these particular groups will score ideas. So they review every single idea that came in and they're able to prioritize based on need, feasibility, and impact on equity, which ideas they should really focus on developing for the final ballot. And we use something called the idea ranking tool to really be able to do that in our participatory budgeting practice.
As a result, community members and agency staff sit on the same side of the table to do some light research to really marry this with the overall five-year plan for a particular city or an institution, so that nothing makes it onto the final ballot unless it's fully vetted, is a hundred percent feasible and is going to have a high impact on equity. We provide folks with digestible data so that people aren't just making up what those impacts are, but instead are using real data and their experience to finalize those alongside those city or agency resources. And then we're able to have a finalized ballot that folks can vote on. And I think, again, the most important thing about this is nothing makes it onto the ballot, unless it can really be implemented, if it gets the votes.
jmk
So the people making these decisions, in your case in Boston, or even others, is it the steering committee alongside the city officials that are then working together? Or do you expand the number of people involved in the process at any point?
Shari
That's such a good question. And when we talk about the Sherry Arnstein ladder of civic participation or citizen engagement. I really like to call it civic participation because I think it is designed to be broad, beyond folks that have citizenship status. But the most important thing here is when we think about this ladder, so often community members come in at the bottom rung, which is actually no decision-making power at all. Sometimes they receive information and that's great, but it doesn't allow them to make decisions. As we march up this ladder, though we get into examples of full participation. Participatory budgeting is an example of full and broad participation where community at large can not only submit ideas, they can sign on to develop them into concrete proposals.
And then everyone usually has an opportunity to vote based on the eligibility that the steering committee sets. So, this is a broad opportunity to really be shaped by community and throughout the process to really see community members ensure that the integrity of the ideas shows up on the ballot.
jmk
Very impressed with the organization that you've just laid out. So amazing that you were doing this at such an early stage of your career.
Shari
Oh, thank you so much.
jmk
Talk to me about the voting process, because you're talking so much about trying to get people engaged who are marginalized. It's difficult to get them to realize that there is an election. It's difficult to get them to know the process to be able to go about this because they've got a lot of priorities. Sometimes people are working multiple jobs, they've got multiple children. The people that we're most concerned about trying to get engaged, in fact, people with multiple responsibilities, are the people we most want the feedback from, that need the help oftentimes. So how do you get them engaged?
Shari
That's such a good question. And, I think, again, this comes back to design principles. We're talking about designing with and not for. So, it's not me. It's not Shari that answers these questions. It's actually community members themselves. What do you need in order to participate in the steering committee phase, the design phase, the idea collection phase, the proposal development phase? All of the phases community members legitimately have designed so that community members can show up. And when I talk about centering equity, when we're talking about oppressed people, folks that have been historically and traditionally marginalized, we're designing so that they are able to fully participate. And so, like you mentioned, there might be single parents. There might be folks that have multiple responsibilities.
And so, we're able to pose the question to them. What do you need? And they're able to respond with, I need some childcare. I might need a stipend. We might need a meal in order to engage in this deep participation effort. And all of those things are things that should a hundred percent happen in deep engagement practice. And that's how we're able to do it. And so when it comes to the vote, unlike a traditional local or national election, a participatory budgeting vote lasts generally for a week, maybe two weeks.
And it meets people where they are. The steering committee helps to design where polling locations need to be. They help think through what credentialing voters needs to look like so that we're able to reduce barriers so that someone could sign an affidavit to say that I live, work or play in this space based on the eligibility criteria to vote so that they're able to vote in the process with reduced barriers.
What we find is that folks that are living in poverty are overrepresented in participatory budgeting process when we compare that to traditional local and national elections. We find that members of the BIPOC community are overrepresented in participatory budgeting processes compared to local and national elections. And so, what we find is that when we do these design principles, we design with and not for, folks are legitimately able to show up and have their needs met for deep participation.
jmk
The way you're describing it, it requires. a firm emphasis on the design.
Shari
Yes, that's absolutely right. It's a firm emphasis on designing with, and that means that at every stage. So, one of the questions that I get from folks that are trying to build PB process is when do I invite community in. And if you're asking that question, I'm happy that you asked, but the reality is you probably waited a little bit too long and that's okay because the answer is yesterday, but we can get them involved today and really be able to build a process that centers folks.
jmk
Well, Shari, in the prep that I did to have this conversation I was amazed how often I found participatory budgeting in the literature that I read on a regular basis. I went over some past articles that I've read, some past books that I've read, and I came across not just the concept, they literally called out participatory budgeting within the literature. I've got a piece here from Francis Fukuyama. He wrote an article called “Why is Democracy Performing so Poorly?” in the Journal of Democracy about five years ago. He writes, “At the moment, there is something of a consensus within the international donor community on how to pursue good governance. A consensus that is embodied in programs like participatory budgeting, the open government partnership, and the initiatives of the numerous organizations promoting government transparency around the world.”
I bring it up because this is not a concept that is far out there. This is something that's embedded within big names that are studying democracy and trying to make this happen throughout the world. So, can you talk a little bit about the history, about how participatory budgeting evolved, how it came about?
Shari
Yeah, absolutely. And I think it's important to acknowledge that PB as a practice is still about 10 years new in the United States. But it's not 10 years new across the globe. Participatory budgeting started in the global South. The first instance that we see often in the literature is in Brazil. And one of the biggest things that's exciting about this is that in the launch of participatory budgeting and the very first instance it was actually really centered around folks in poverty and being able to improve their outcomes. One of the resulting outcomes of that PB process in Brazil was actually a decrease in the infant mortality rate because folks were able to make allocations of public dollars that met their needs and ensure that folks were healthier, could thrive better in their communities. And from that instance of participatory budgeting, it spread across the globe.
And so now we see entire countries practicing PB. Look at the example of participatory budgeting in Paris where the mayor puts up 5% of her budget, ends up being over a hundred million euros where community members are able to decide how those funds are spent, not just in one process, but actually in three: in a district-based process, in a citywide based process and in a school-based process. So, a young person in Paris would actually have the opportunity to vote three times on three different processes to determine how funds would be spent to meet their needs. Now, how special is that? How radical is that compared to some other instances?
So, it can be as big as what we see in Paris or some of the opportunities to advocate for deeper civic engagement in the United States. Look at New York City. They started with two or three districts that were doing participatory budgeting. It's spread to over 30. Then they changed their city charter that allowed the creation of a city charter commission that would be maybe the largest instance of participatory budgeting in the United States that would allow folks to deeply engage in PB.
jmk
I had on a scholar of African politics a few months back, Winston Mano. And he said something remarkable to me. He said he doesn't like to talk about democracy. He likes to talk about democratization.
Shari
Hmm.
jmk
And it's interesting how participatory budgeting can help facilitate the process of democratization or bring those initial pieces of democracy to places where democracy does not exist today. Jim Fishkin out of Stanford, he wrote a remarkable book years ago called When the People Speak. He writes about a case in China, in Wenling city. He says, “It is worth noting how the process,” because he designed a process for a city in China to use this.
“It is worth noting how the process, far from yielding a predetermined conclusion, surprised local officials with its results. In addition, they found it advantageous to implement the results and to repeat and expand the purview of the process in subsequent years by increasing public responsiveness to the point where it affected decision-making about the entire budget of the town. It brought transparency to the town's entire budget and it created probably for the first time, scientifically representative participatory budgeting by the mass public.” So this is something that is really at the forefront of democratization efforts in places that we don't even think that democracy could thrive. But these are the seeds that are being planted in places where we don't expect democracy to pop up and it's so fascinating. So, I'm happy to have you here to learn about it within the United States.
Shari
Definitely. And, and, you know, as you're sharing that example, I'm giggling a little bit to myself, because one of the things that we're faced with now in the United States is making the case for deep civic engagement. And by deep, I mean, people-centered civic engagement that takes time, that allows folks to show up full and whole that allows them to participate in decisions and actual decision-making. That's not trivial, but instead is significant and is accessible. And I think that is what real decision-making is about.
And it's interesting as you talk about data and learnings about participatory budgeting. It makes me think about a study that Public Agenda did. One of them that I think is incredibly compelling, and there's actually a couple that they did in the study in 2020, which was really recent, is that they found that four in 10 Americans think significant changes are needed to the design and structure of our government. And so often we've heard a conversation about apathy in the United States, maybe folks are just too busy, or maybe they're just flat out uninterested, or maybe they don't care. But we find, actually with legitimate data, not only through PB, but more broadly that they do care and that they want to be engaged.
And I think furthermore, one of the things that Public Agenda was able to bring forward was that about half of Americans want their local government to give people more direct power through systems such as participatory democracy, citizen juries, and ballot initiatives. And so, to me as you kind of reflect on some of those learnings in government, not only does it make sense, but we've seen that not only in the United States, but across the globe, about how important it is for us to make better decisions together. And that brings me to this point. I think it's actually the role of government to facilitate community led decision-making. That's real leadership to be able to hold the space of deep community engagement and decision-making and build the muscle to facilitate that process. That's how we make good decisions.
jmk
That's exactly what Jim Fishkin describes in his explanation of what happened in China. It's an authoritarian leader. He's selected by the communist party. So, this is not a democracy, but he found that his legitimacy was strengthened because he engaged people. So, we can imagine how our democratically elected leaders can strengthen their own legitimacy through engaging the public in processes like these.
Shari
I think it's the charge of democratic leaders to do exactly that. If any leader should be doing that, it's those that are leading in democratic institutions. And I think that when we talk about government, government is a business, it's an organization. So, the question that we have to ask is how do we marshal and lead this organization in a way where it is effective. And not only do we have data and research to prove that, it just makes sense.
jmk
Hundred percent. So, Sherry, what is the most surprising decision that you have seen from PB, from the process?
Shari
You know, Justin, I've seen a lot of surprising decisions. And I don't want to say surprising in the sense that community voted on a room made of bacon, right? Like that necessarily probably wouldn't be feasible. So, it wouldn't make it to a PB ballot, but instead I've seen some really powerful and innovative examples of participatory budgeting. The one that's coming to mind though, that I want to talk about, that I think is really radical and surprised me is when I thought I broke PB. I thought I violated all of what the PB framework was. And this was actually in the first time that I ran PB. And as a reminder to folks out there, I used to work in government.
So, I was a government staff person that had limited exposure to what PB was. Charged with running this process. Not only did I have to learn about it, I had to teach several other people about it. And then we had to run it effectively. It worked, but there was one moment where I thought I messed it all up and it was in the first year that we did PB in Boston. This is what happened. So young people decided that they were going to renovate a park. A park that was in a marginalized neighborhood in Dorchester, in Massachusetts. And we're really excited about this. It won on the ballot. Yay! And right as we were about to break ground, and as a reminder, we had already done all the studies on whether or not it was feasible, whether or not it was needed.
And right as we were about to break ground, the city archeologist called me and said, ‘We cannot move forward with this project.’ And I thought I broke PB. I thought I ruined everything. And I was like, ‘Why can't we move forward?’ And they were like, ‘Actually, this park is on top of an archeological site. And we have to protect the site first.’ And I said, ‘All right. Well, what are we going to do here? I think we can actually invite community in to this process.’ And the archeologist said, ‘Actually, I need help from community.’ And the result was way better than anything that we would have thought of had we not done PB.
Rather than not renovating the park, rather than pushing off this opportunity to protect the historical site, they invited everybody in the community in to do an archeological dig, to actually excavate, to protect the site. They found artifacts. They extended Boston's history, and then they were able to move forward with the renovation that centered accessibility. And so, for me this was an example of how innovative this can be. Of what I call the PB spillover effects. We weren't planning on doing this when we started the PB process, but as a result of the infrastructure we had built, as a result of the deep engagement that we had created, we were able to do things that we didn't imagine when we started this process.
jmk
Well, my seven-year-old doesn't need an excuse to dig. He would love that. So, tell me this though. Like, has there ever been a case where you were disappointed with the outcome of PB? It chose to do a project that you thought was wrong or that you thought was a wrong direction to go?
Shari
I can't think of a time where I've seen a project that was just flat out, maybe wrong. I can think of times where I thought, hmm, maybe the prompts should have been a little bit different. Maybe the data that folks had access to that was digestible should have been a bit more comprehensive. I think when we talk about participatory budgeting, and running this process well, we need to recognize how important it is to make sure that people have the right information in a format that they can understand. And I liken it to this. If you go to vote in a local or national election and you’re standing in a long line. You may be looking at everybody in that line and wondering about what they know. You may notice that people in the line are receiving information that might change their vote in that moment.
The thing about participatory budgeting that's a little bit different is that community is so deeply engaged in every phase of the process that the opportunity for capacity building, knowledge transfer and sharing is actually owned in large part by community and in partnership with the institution that's running the process. And so that changes things drastically. And so, when it comes to whether or not I've been disappointed by the projects. No. These projects were vetted. They were owned. They were supported and they addressed a deeply identified community need. I think that there are times where we as a society can do a better job of building muscle to have some deliberative conversations about the root cause issues.
And I think that now in our trajectory of participatory budgeting, from where we started to where we are today at the participatory budgeting project, we really focus on ensuring that folks have an opportunity to sit in, understand and build responses to the root cause issues that are causing some of the barriers that folks face or the challenges that folks face in community. And I think that makes the projects far, far better. And that makes people's understanding of the process far better. I think the last thing that I'll say about this is for me, participatory budgeting is actually about connecting folks with the skills and resources to navigate and shape government. And so, for me, that is the most optimistic and the most important outcome of any participatory budgeting process.
jmk
How should communities deal with dissent? If PB produces outcomes where a vocal minority finds the outcome objectionable, how do you deal with that? Because it might only be five people, and the rest of the community is ecstatic.
Sheri.
So, when we talk about participatory budgeting, there's like this little equation that goes off in my brain that is like absolutely needed on the community side and on the side of government. And my hope is that we're actually able to break down what community versus government is, because in theory, in my theory, I think that government is the people that show up. And it's actually our job to make sure that any and everyone could show up in government, to change that us versus them narrative, so that it is us. Right? And I think participatory budgeting creates an opportunity for that.
And this little equation in my mind looks like one: vulnerability. We need to have vulnerability first. We need to have some vulnerability in government. A non-prescriptive opportunity to have some conversation. We need to have some healing and also vulnerability in community. And that looks like an opportunity for them to voice what their experience has been. The second part of that equation for me is actually acknowledgement. And that means that folks in government needs to not only listen, but acknowledge that they heard what community members have said. And vice versa as a person that worked in government, I know how important it is to be able to not only acknowledge what folks are saying. But to be able to create an environment where we can acknowledge some of the intersecting challenges or complexities that folks in government are faced with in solving complex challenges.
This is what information sharing looks like, but this is what visibility looks like. I think the last part of this equation for me is action. It's not enough to be vulnerable. It's not enough to acknowledge things. We have to be vulnerable, acknowledge things, and move in to concrete action. And I think that is an opportunity for us, not only to build trust, but to be able to address concerns that people have in multiple directions as a result of the PB vote or winning a PB process. People can be suspicious.
The first time that I ran PB in the city of Boston. I remember calling up all my friends, all the young people that I work with, say, ‘Hey, come down to this community center today. We're going to make sure that you have an opportunity to spend a million dollars in the city.’ The first reaction that I got Justin was, ‘I don't believe you. Is that really true? I have a lot of trauma interacting with government and you're asking me to show up.’ And I'm like, ‘No, no, no. I'm not asking you to show up. I'm asking you to shape this. Because if you don't come, other people will shape it.’
And as a result of that, we were able to see people bought in at multiple levels of the process so they could understand and step into other people's shoes as they brought forward different issues. I'll give you this last example. One of the first instances I had in PB, not in Boston, but actually in observing the New York City process. I happened to sit in on a meeting where parents showed up and said, ‘I'm here to make sure that my neighborhood has a cat park, a park for cats.’
Now I didn't say anything because people in that conversation were like, ‘I hear that. And that's really interesting, but where I'm coming from people are dying. And we have very different needs. And to give you an example, there's no bathroom stall in my kids' school that has a functional door. And so, my kid has to go through school all day without a safe place to use the restroom. And I actually think that that should be a focus.’ Now I'll be honest. The person that came with the cat park idea said, ‘You know what? I'm willing to hold that for a later time, because I think that what you're describing is actually far more important.’
And again, this is about visibility. It's about conversation. It's about moving through vulnerability, acknowledgement and action, so that we can really focus on deep understanding and getting to the issues that are going to have the most impact and need for most people in the community. And what I find is that folks get it when we allow them an opportunity to talk to each other and we can't be afraid of that.
jmk
Many of the projects that I see that PB has made possible involve art. Can you talk a little bit about how art can shape democracy, how it influences democracy? What does art mean in a democracy?
Shari
Well, first of all, art is liberatory. And I think that when we're able to infuse opportunities of art it's necessary that in the same way that no two communities are the same, no two human beings communicate the same. And we have to really think about opportunities of expression for people in really meeting them where they are. So, we can't privilege verbal communication or written communication. We have to really consider a multimodal approach. And that's where art in particular really comes in. And again, it's not me Shari coming up with all of the ways that art can be infused. In most instances that I've seen really awesome PB it's young people leading the charge there around art integration. And as a reminder, young people are not future leaders. They're leaders right now.
And art integration is one way that young people can continue to exemplify their leadership right now. But I think when we talk about art and culture, it's symbiotic. It's an opportunity for us to really infuse that and program design. And I think it's also most importantly, an opportunity to envision and to invite folks into envisioning what is possible when we engage with art. We're able to see some poetic elements of what's possible, but we're actually also able to see some mock-ups of people's vision of the outcome of a particular project or particular initiative. And that's where I think it's really powerful.
jmk
I spoke with an art historian a few months back. And she described art as not just being a way of communicating, but also just being a way of actually being. And it changes your experience. It changes the way that you think about things. And that's important, not just for democracy, but obviously our community and how we experience life with others, and how we experience life in society.
Shari
Definitely. I think one of the things that I mentioned around visioning in art is it's a way for us to see ourselves in the future, but actually see ourselves in the present and to tell that story of what needs to happen. And again, it's important not to privilege one kind of communication, but to actually open it up. Go back to the ladder of participation. What does full participation look like here and how can we open up the modalities for folks to really be able to offer their vision, their ideas, their brilliance around what should happen?
jmk
Now, I went through the map on where your projects are occurring and you've got projects all across the country, red States and blue States. So I don't want to take anything away from that, but a lot of the projects seem to be in very urban areas. I think some projects are moving into rural communities as well, but I'd like to know, is there a difference in strategy and approach between working with a more rural community versus an urban community?
Shari
Well, I think the first thing to acknowledge, one more time, is that no two communities are the same. So PB is not a one size fits all solution. It's a customizable solution. And so far in the United States, yes, participatory budgeting very much showed up coastally at first and now it's permeating across the country. And so, we have seen now more instances of rural PB, more instances of PB in the southern states in the United States.
And one of the biggest things that I'm noticing in that rollout is that folks in rural communities, I think everyone knows this, are incredibly smart, but they have unique challenges to your point. One is actually in terms of demographic area. People may be further away physically from each other than in a hyper urban community. And so, how do we bridge that gap so that folks are able to participate? Now, this comes back again to the steering committee and it makes me think about an instance of rural PB in Merced, California where this was a little bit of a hybrid of very much farming community that sprawled over a large geographic area as well as a little bit of an urban community.
And so, the design question for these folks became how do we ensure that people are making decisions together, are able to build out this process together and so on? And they were able to really think about, well, what does SMS engagement look like? How do we make low tech solutions for folks to come together, to meet them where they are? And so, unlike a hyper urban environment that may have public transit stations every couple of blocks, in a rural community where that's not present. And we really need to think about where are people congregating? Where does Friday night lights happen? Do Friday night lights happen? Where are folks going - like the supermarket? And how can we incorporate that, since they're going to be there, into the PB process?
These again, aren't Shari Davis ideas. These are the ideas that came up from instances of rural PB like Merced, California, and also instances in West Virginia where we're seeing a very large participatory budgeting movement.
jmk
So, I like how your example had a blend of both farming community and a more urban community together because it makes me think about how you would be able to expand PB to larger regions that are going to have those blended demographics. Because when we start moving it out to the size of something that's statewide or even the entire country, the United States, you're going to have a lot of different experiences, lots of different viewpoints, lots of different problems , and a lot of disagreements. So how do you envision being able to expand PB to larger regions? What are some of the challenges and how do you overcome them?
Shari
Well, I think, to your point some of the challenges are no two communities are exactly the same. And so, it has to be customized on that level for what that community needs. And so, when I think about a vision for how this could work on a larger scale, I think about our work that looks like Democracy Beyond Elections. And if folks haven't checked that out yet, they can go to democracybeyondelections.org, where we're thinking about a national campaign and coalition partners that are able to build a menu of participatory democratic options that would allow community led decision making to be customized by folks on the ground, by teams of folks. Democracy teams, if you will, that are able to receive the capacity building so that they can shape what the intervention needs to look like in their space.
I think one of the biggest things that I'm learning or that I think about in this vision is that we need to kind of overcome this need for narrative shift. I think that right now folks are so accustomed to the quote “status quo” or how budgets work. And just to be clear, the way that budgets work right now is a person or a small group of people makes a bunch of guesses and they submit those guesses to another person, or a small group of people, that can also be city council. Community tends to stand on the side and yell about what needs to happen. Sometimes people hear them. Sometimes they don't and then the budget is passed and that is the budget for the next calendar year.
So, the question becomes, ‘How do we begin to introduce people to a different way of doing things that works, that's data proven, so that they learn how to have the capacity to maybe imagine a different one, a different approach, and then to be able to onboard people to that approach. I think that's the biggest challenge of doing things different and remembering that this is going to involve vulnerability, acknowledgement and action.
jmk
Do you envision the possibility of expanding the scope of PB within a community where instead of dealing with a million dollars within a city, PB actually determines the entire budget?
Shari
Yeah. I would love to see a world where we're able to deeply engage community members in the budget. Overall, I think where we're at with PB right now is by identifying spaces where we can make decisions together. However, I do think that that's a small slice of the pie in terms of making really good decisions, understanding community, spending priorities, and government spending priorities. I think there's a major opportunity for us to build more muscle and to learn from folks, like I mentioned in Paris, that are doing 5% of their budget. And I would argue that maybe that's not enough. Maybe there's an opportunity for us to have bigger, deeper impacts by having larger opportunities for folks to do some shared decision-making.
And this isn't one or two people making decisions. We're talking about a broad opportunity to center equity in the decisions that folks are experiencing and shaping. And I think that we, as a country can certainly do more. And I think that as we think about federal earmarks that are coming down. As we consider what folks are doing on a hyper-local level, there is more and more of an opportunity to ask ourselves where we can make better decisions together.
jmk
Sherry, your organization takes pride as a national black led organization. Why is this important for an organization, like yours, that strives to elevate disadvantaged voices?
Shari
Justin, thank you for that question. When we talk about black leadership, I think it's important to acknowledge that we're not talking about tokenized leadership. We're talking about real power. We're talking about real support and we're talking about real supportive intersectional leaders that have maybe some non-traditional leadership experience, but absolutely lived experience that should be incorporated and needs to be incorporated in how we move forward. I think one of the things that I'm most excited about in being a black led organization is that opportunity for folks to be invited into intersectional leadership, but most importantly, intersectional solutions to complex problems. I think there's also something important about how non-tokenized and real shifts in how we think about leadership lead us to better decisions together. This is about shared leadership.
And so, what better way to exemplify that and to double down on leadership that may look non-traditional, but most importantly has been historically and traditionally marginalized. And I think who better among us to help solve problems and consider what effective solutions would be, but those that are closest to those issues. And so, I think that PBP as an organization recognizes how important that is. And more broadly we recognize how important it is to support folks that are black trans femmes, how important it is to support indigenous leaders, how important it is to support maybe silenced voices that have incredible impact in thinking about problems in a very complex way.
jmk
Shari, thank you so much for joining me. I think you helped me understand how this idea that I see pop up occasionally actually functions in the real world and how you're able to make an idea become a reality. Thank you so much.
Shari
Justin, thank you. And here's a challenge for you. Maybe you can consider how you invite people in to some participatory budgeting with the work that you do. And if folks out there are wondering, man, how do I do this at my organization? How do I do this in my government space? How do I do this period? We're here to help you. Visit participatorybudgeting.org or sign on to support the democracy beyond elections initiative at democracybeyondelections.org. Justin, this was awesome. Thanks for having me. Bring me back, man.