Process
effort within a decade, so that principle became instead a mere given.
RELEAF CEDAR RAPIDS
oll participants P were asked to rate the thirteen initial principles on a scale of 5 (most important) to 1 (least important), and also to rank them in order of preference. This second exercise turned out to be useful, as most people liked most principles, and the ranking forced some tough choices. The ratings and rankings were then combined to create overall scores, shown here. It is clear that there were essentially three tiers of scores, with two principles under-performing the others: Homeowner Choice and Edible Landscape. These had been described in the poll as follows: Homeowner Choice: Homeowners in Cedar Rapids have traditionally been allowed to choose the species of street A plan is only as good itsplants principles. tree theas City in front of their house, and someIf this plan is to have the right outcomes times to stop the City from for Cedar Rapids, its actions planting at all.must be Edible Landscape: Street, yard, driven by a set of beliefs that the people and park trees can feed people of Cedar Rapids share. this Planting reason, as well For as animals. fruit and nut trees can shrink the plan’s public outreach focused on urban food deserts. identifying what those beliefs are. Given its low performance, Edible Landscape was eliminated from the principles list. for It was not suggestions cut from We cast a wide net, asking public the plan, however, since it and coming up with a list of thirteen possible can be provided in certain guiding principles. These were then submitted locations like parks without to polling across a range of venues, including at conflicting with other public workshops (via Zoom due to the global principles. Homeowner Choice, pandemic), through theinonline ReLeaf and contrast, was portal, eliminated through clipboard interviews neighborhood entirely,atbecause it directly events, with the goal of also hearing from those who might not engage online.
Guiding Principles and Public Process
8
conflicts with as many as six principles that were rated higher, such as Native Landscape, Species Diversity, and Beauty & Character. It just isn’t possible to deliver fully on these goals without the City being able to select the species of the trees it plants. Finally, the resulting list of eleven principles was reduced to nine based on two realizations: • It turned out that the concept of Expediency simply
• Research demonstrated that the two principles of Habitat Preservation and Native Landscape were essentially the same, since only native plants provide adequate habitat for native creatures. They were combined into Native Habitat. While each of the remaining nine principles received different average scores, the range of those scores ended up fairly small, only 0.75 points on a 5 point scale. We can comfortably
none of them conflict with any of the others; there is no reason that they can’t all drive the plan. These nine principles can conveniently be grouped into three different categories: • Planet: Rebuilding the canopy to keep the earth supportive of life. • People: Rebuilding the canopy for the best social outcomes. • Plants: Rebuilding the canopy with trees that last and maximize their impact.
Photograph from www.pollinatorsnativeplants.com/softlandings.html
Guiding Principles Rankings 4.66
Habitat Preservation 4.52
Resilience
4.51
Native Landscape Climate Action
4.49
Equity
4.46 4.42
Species Diversity 4.24
Expediency Volunteer Participation
4.05
Beauty and Character
4.05 4.02
Public Education
3.91
Human Capital 3.63
Homeowner Choice
3.61
Edible Landscape 3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
ReLeaf Principles: Categories
Over seven months, more than 2,800 people weighed in. Poll responses showed strong support for most of the suggested principles, but not all. Of the top eleven principles shown in the Guiding Principles Rankings Chart, Expediency was the only principle removed. The mandate was to complete the effort within a decade, so the principle became a mere given. Research demonstrated that the two principles of Habitat Preservation and Native Landscape were essentially the same, and they were combined into Native Habitat. The remaining nine principles can be grouped into three different categories shown at right.
PLANET
Rebuilding the canopy to keep the earth supportive of life.
PEOPLE
Rebuilding the canopy for the best social outcomes.
PLANTS
Rebuilding the canopy with trees that last and maximize their impact.
OUR CR
|
MARCH 2022
5.5
