Ann H., Bill Hu. Lisa, Recia, Dianne. Anne M., Renee, Mary

1
HISTORY OF PUBLIC DELIBERATION IN OKLAHOMA
Big Moments Formation of Oklahoma Partnership for
Public Deliberation (OPPD) May 2000
GOALS/ RESULTS
In the Beginning... Public Deliberation (PD)
came to Oklahoma
Goal To Foster Public Deliberation
Big Moments Capacity Study
Prior to 1994, National Issues Forums and
Study Circles used in Oklahoma
OU Public Policy Institutes 1995, 1996, 1998
OPPD Public Policy Institutes 2001-present
Seminar on Public Deliberation October 2000
KEY EVENTS
Delegation from Nigeria
Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service
programming
50 Forums 2001-present
Social Studies classrooms
PRODUCTS/ SERVICES/ SITES

• Conflict is
• a reality, positive
• and a toolif managed
• well.
• Conflict is the reason
• for PD.

Global View Visiting Faculty Grasp concept of
Public deliberation
Statewide Access
LESSONS LEARNED
Difficult to sustain
PD works for anyone
2
Oklahoma Partnership for Public
DeliberationCONTEXT MAP
INTERNAL TRENDS
OUTSIDE TRENDS
POLITICAL CLIMATE
Continually seeking committed partners who have
a mission alignment with OPPD.
Increasing recognition of need for inclusive
Public Deliberation in decision making.

• We need to be information providers, not
  advocates.
• Public Deliberation is implementation of
  participatory democracy.
• The most valuable information for public
  decision-makers is from balanced sources.
• Because of polarization there is a need for
  the public voice.

ECONOMIC CLIMATE

• Economic Downturn
• Disparity between urban and rural resources.
• OPPD is in an economically sheltered
  environment through December 2003.
• Disparity of access to public deliberation.
• Limited access to information regarding resources.

Varying degrees of polarization depending on
community and issue.
Commitment to building a collaboration network.
Expand training opportunities for OPPD.
Impact of demographic changes on issues and
resources.
Increased curriculum demands competes with
deliberation process.
Acknowledging and valuing youth and adult voice
participation, inclusive of ethnic backgrounds
and diverse disciplines.
CUSTOMER NEEDS
Need access to practice of Public Deliberation
(PD) skills and to deliver PD. Increasing
application of PD, so it becomes part of Oklahoma
culture. Whats in it for them? How do they
get it? What does it cost? Citizens of all
ages, ethnicity and disciplines need access to
public knowledge. People need to be and feel
heard.

• Utilize existing communication infrastructure for
  PD.

OPPDs Financial Future unclear.
UNCERTAINTIES
Potential for deliberative forums on OETA.
Appropriate matching of skill levels of
moderators and recorders to the issue.

• Appropriate technology needed for different
  audiences.

Controversial issues have the potential for
negative impact

• Need for easy access to an OPPD website and
  e-mail address.

Appropriate application and performance of
Public Deliberation (PD).
TECHNOLOGY FACTORS
Potential of compromising the integrity of OPPD
and PD.
3
Oklahoma Partnership for Public Deliberation
VISION
Oklahoma embraces a culture of Public Deliberation
CULTURAL DIVERSITY
COLLABORATION OF PARTNERS
Public Voice Civic Engagement
M I S S I O N

• Interdependent world
• Common Ground

To foster participation in reasoned and informed
decision making for the public good.
MANY APPLICATIONS
DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY
CHALLENGES
3. Frame local and state
issues.
SUPPORTS
Recruiting and retaining key personnel
PD can be applied with many issues and
situations
2. Develop the deliberative habit
throughout Oklahoma.
Personal/Professional crises
Timely, worthwhile mission
Competing demands for time.
Established state-wide network of resources
1. Create an organizational and
programmatic structure.
Lack of follow-through
Potential for turf wars
Establish state-wide venue for youth an adult
programming
Maintaining partners interest in PD
B O L D S T E P S
Use of research-based field-proven resources
Uncertain funding
VALUES
Maintaining focus on mission
Justice for all
Credibility of Forums
Inclusiveness Freedom of democracy
In-appropriate, unethical application of PD
Equality Education
Non-partisan Respect/Responsibility
4
TARGET
Oklahoma Partnership for Public
DeliberationGAMEPLAN 2002-2005
TEAM
Education
MISSION
DEVELOPMENTAL STAGES
State agencies
To foster participation in reasoned and informed
decision making for the public good.
Volunteer/ Civic organizations

• Establish organizational structure

Professional organizations

• Establish program

Government

• Foster Deliberative Habit

• Frame State and Local Issues

RESOURCES

• Foundations
• Social Capital

• PD integrated
• into educational
• institutions

SUCCESS INDICATORS
Public decision makers use PD for citizen input
Self-sustaining Funding

• PD in valued conflict resolution

Forums Statewide
See detailed Gamelan page
5
Detailed Gameplan
Actions
Timeline
Responsible Person(s)

• Identify leadership team
• Choose structural model
• Create a short-term work plan
• Solidify partnership agreements
• Identify secure funding sources
• Public information plan

• Travis, Sue T., Bill Hu., Anne, Sue W., Renee,
  Tony, Mike Ridgeway
• Sue W.
• Renee
• Bill Hu., Sue W.
• Lisa, Recia, Dianne

• January 2002
• 2nd quarter 2002
• Draft 2/14/02 meeting
• 2/14/02 meeting, 5/1/02 more permanent
• 4th quarter 2002
• 2/14/02

Objective 1 Establish Organizational Structure

• Train more moderators and recorders
• Develop more PPI faculty
• Project events calendar
• Evaluation assessment process
• Publish annual report

• Sue T., Recia, Travis Pam
• Ann H., Bill Hu.
• Lisa, Recia, Dianne
• Anne M., Renee, Mary, Phyllis
• Anne M., Renee, Mary, Phyllis

• 2nd quarter 2002
• PPW double by July 2003
• 2nd quarter 2003, December 2003
• 2nd quarter 2002
• 2nd quarter 2002

Objective 2 Establish Programmatic Structure

• 2002
  
• 2nd quarter 2002
• 1st quarter 2002
• Basic by 2nd quarter 2002
• In place now
• Begin 4th quarter 2001
• 2nd quarter 2002

• 50 forums across Oklahoma annually
• Identify convenors for 2002 - Expectations
• Qualifications for moderators Code of Conduct
• Reporting/Set up database for events, staff, and
  participants
• Establish a clearinghouse for OPPD
• Develop steps for integrating deliberative
  concept into Higher Ed.
• Correlate deliberative concept to P.A.S.S. and
  state standards

• Lisa, Bill/Ann, Pat W., Tony
  
  
• Lisa, Bill/Ann, Pat W., Tony
• Pam, Sue T., Renee
• Sue W./Renee, Lisas group
• Steve H., Gina W., Ann H., John F.
• Mary O., Eugene

Objective 3 Foster Deliberative Habits (G Plan)
Sue W., Renee, Pam, Ann H., Bill Hu.

Objective 4 Framing State and Local Issues