Governance, Participation and Community Dev. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 13
About This Presentation
Title:

Governance, Participation and Community Dev.

Description:

Governance, Participation and Community Dev. From the EOA (1964) to the Present. Stuart Langton: 2 Types of Citizen Participation ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:15
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 14
Provided by: johnr75
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Governance, Participation and Community Dev.


1
Governance, Participation and Community Dev.
  • From the EOA (1964) to the Present

2
Stuart Langton 2 Types of Citizen Participation
  • Citizen Action Activities initiated and
    controlled by citizens primarily designed to
    influence governing decisions
  • Citizen Involvement Activities initiated and
    controlled by government for adm. purposes (e.g.,
    improve decision-making, develop consensus,
    enhance legitimacy)

3
Robert Pecorella 2 Types of Citizen Participation
  • Community Control Citizens would have some
    actual decision-making power over resource
    allocations.
  • Community Integration Citizens would have
    advisory power over resource allocations
  • How do these relate to Langtons types?

4
What type do activists want?
  • Surveyed community board members in New York City
    and asked whether they favored advisory or
    decision-making power over 12 urban policy
    matters.
  • Responses were used to create a community
    empowerment scale.
  • Those who favored advisory power were moderates
    as opposed to reformers who wanted actual
    decision-making power

5
(No Transcript)
6
What factors explain these differences?
  • Example of how research is conducted in the
    social sciences.
  • Variables race, ideology, trust in government,
    type of appointment to community board.
  • Hypotheses? What do you think?

7
(No Transcript)
8
Community Action Programs? What type?
  • Key point Although CAAs could have been set up
    to operate within city hall, about 75 chose to
    remain outside as independently run,
    not-for-profit agencies.
  • Yet, maximum feasible participation by the poor
    was mandated.

9
Pressure for Reform
  • Big City Mayors pressed Congress for changes
  • 1966 Model Cities Program Key aspects
  • widespread participation
  • Programs were placed directly in city hall
  • Citizens Advisory Board was required to provide
    input to proposed projects.
  • Final approval for projects resided with city
    government

10
Further Federal Efforts to Reduce Citizen Action
  • 1967 Green Amendment to the EOA (Edith Green of
    Oregon)
  • Deleted the MFP clause
  • Prohibited CAA personnel from clashing with city
    hall via protests and demonstrations
  • Guaranteed city government could have at least
    1/3 of the membership on CAA boards

11
Reduction Efforts (contd.)
  • Hatch Act extensions
  • 1975 OEO, became Community Services Adm., and
    then when Reagan came to power it was eliminated
    altogether
  • Model Cities program saw reduced funding, and in
    1973 Nixon impounded its funding

12
Nixons New Federalism
  • Prior to Nixon, federal programs had become
    heavily centralized and categorical in nature.
  • Nixon proposed a New Federalism
  • Decentralization
  • More flexibility and choice for cities
  • Block Grants instead of Categorical Grants
  • Revenue Sharing

13
The Housing and CD Act of 1974
  • Consolidated 7 cats into 1 block grant
  • Called for maximum feasible priority for
    low-mod income benefit
  • Gave cities lots of leeway in how to spend
    federal CD money
  • 2 classes of cities 1) entitlement, 2) small
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com