Give People Money to Engage
Erin Garnaas-Holmes is the Ambassador to the Anacostia Watershed Urban Waters Partnership.
A friend of mine recently wondered aloud what would happen if, instead of spending hard-raised money on research, consultants, planning, strategies, advertisements and special events in an attempt to improve the value of parks in the Anacostia watershed to nearby residents, we instead just paid a certain number of people from under-resourced neighborhoods to simply bring their families to the park? Perhaps, my friend wondered, that might change more lives: it would guarantee attendance, expose families to the benefits of nature, put money on the pockets of families who need it most, and perhaps still cost less than all that other stuff.
While my friend was feeling frustrated and venting about their workload, rather than seriously proposing this idea, their comment raises an important challenge for park and environmental enthusiasts, planners and program providers like myself. Having participated in numerous community conversations about connecting Ward 7 and Ward 8 residents of DC to the Anacostia River, I have often heard that “the environment” is not in the top-ten list of concerns facing our community’s most stressed families. Instead, people are concerned about issues like employment, wages, affordable housing, gun violence, access to healthy and affordable food, and mental health. With limited free time for “civic engagement,” people will probably only attend community meetings that directly affect their family. Even if someone might be interested in getting involved in conversations about restoring the river or about improving the parks, they often aren’t able to attend official meetings due to work or family schedule conflicts, lack of transportation, or simply not knowing when or where such conversations are taking place.
As roomfuls of professionals discuss plans for the Anacostia River and postulate how restoration of the river and its parks might also help lift up struggling residents, we need to recognize that we are being paid to have those conversations. I am well aware that I would probably not attend so many Anacostia-River-related community meetings if it weren’t part of my job to do so. It isn’t fair to expect “civic duty” to compel other people to participate actively in planning conversations.
Event Staff during events in Anacostia Park in 2019.
What if, instead, we paid people to participate? I’m not the first urban planner type to suggest this, and many other industries already pay people to participate in feedback-gathering efforts (e.g. marketing focus groups). “Giving people money” in general has really become a national conversation as “universal basic income” models have entered American political discussions. Proposals to pay underemployed people to do the work to restore the environment show up in national politics, regional conversations and here on this blog.
Paying people to participate in decision-making (in addition to the restoration itself) is another step, one that two local efforts focused on the Anacostia River and its parks have started to consider. The National Park Foundation recently gave a grant to the Anacostia Park and Community Collaborative to help build relationships between program providers, neighbors and the Park as it prepares to launch a “Friends Group” (fundraising partner) for Anacostia Park. Part of this grant was spent alleviating the financial burden of participating in park events by paying for transportation and providing volunteer stipends. Fifteen east-of-the-river residents became “Event Staff” for programs, and champions of the park. Families without transportation options were able to ride shuttles into the park from neighborhood schools.
Meanwhile, the District Department of Energy and Environment and the DC Appleseed Center for Law and Justice recently piloted a “Community Ambassador” program as part of the Anacostia River Sediment Project. This grant to DC Appleseed has paid stipends to eight established community leaders to assist with outreach. Instead of simply leaning on their existing relationships to help the agency out of the goodness of their hearts, DOEE and DC Appleseed are respecting the time and reputation of these community leaders when asking for help collecting public input on their plan.
Community Ambassadors under the Anacostia River Sediment Project like Lora Nunn, pictured here, were recognized for their reputation as existing community leaders.
These programs are small, imperfect pilots with lessons to be learned (for example, there are tax implications for paying volunteers cash for their time versus volunteer-appreciation gifts and awards, or covering expenses rather than time). Nevertheless, they demonstrate the beginning of a more equitable approach to engaging residents that should be expanded throughout the watershed. As many of us continue to get paid to talk about how restoration of the Anacostia River corridor could be connected to equitable community development, let us also begin to shift resources to the people who a) need them most, and b) have the power to actually make it happen.