|
Dispute Settlement Center |
of orange county
August 13, 2008
Ms. Rae Buckley
Housing and Neighborhood Services Planner
Town of Chapel Hill Planning Department
405 Martin Luther King Jr Blvd
Chapel Hill, NC 27514-5705
Dear Ms. Buckley
Thank you for asking how the Dispute Settlement Center (DSC) would facilitate a constructive dialogue between Grubb Properties and the Glen Lennox neighborhood if it were selected by the Town to serve in that capacity. You asked for a very general approach and cost estimate.
DSC’s first step as facilitator would be to determine through conversations with selected individuals and groups whether and to what extent Grubb Properties and the neighborhood would be interested in the proposed dialogue. The Town Council has directed the Planning Department and Planning Board to structure a constructive dialogue for the neighborhood and Grubb Properties. While the Town staff is obligated to comply with the Council’s directive and the Planning Board will give it serious consideration, the neighborhood and Grubb Properties are under no formal obligation to take advantage of this opportunity. The key to a truly constructive dialogue will be an effective process design (explained below) that the neighborhood, Grubb Properties, and the Town each believe will improve the situation, from its own perspective.
In order to determine how a dialogue could be organized to meet each of the stakeholders’ needs, I would ask the Town Planning staff in consultation with the Planning Board to provide me with (a) the names and contact information of individuals that DSC should interview in order to get a balanced view of the stakeholders’ concerns, and (b) background information that DSC should study in order to be well informed about the situation.
I would then review the background information and conduct interviews, as time and resources allow and according to my professional judgment. In each interview I would ask for additional people who should be contacted for interviews and for additional background materials.
Based on what I learn from the interviews and background materials, I will propose a design for the dialogue that best meets the needs of the neighborhood, Grubb Properties and the Town. For example, the design elements may include some or all of the following:
· The purpose(s) for the overall dialogue
· If there are to be multiple meetings then the purpose(s) for each session.
· How dialogue participants will be selected
· Topics to be addressed through the dialogue
· Formats and activities for addressing the topics
· Assignments and roles, such as for note taking, facilities set up/take down, time keeping, discussion facilitation, making presentations, creating handouts, decision making, observing, communicating with meeting invitees in advance and as follow-up.
· Time allocations for activities in single meetings
· The overall timeframe for completing a series of multiple meetings, if needed
· Protocols/ground rules to ensure that all significant expectations are shared among the participants (e.g., inclusion, civility, engagement, information sharing, decision-making, conflict management, publicity, transparency, confidentiality/openness, etc.)
· Needs for facilities, equipment and materials.
In some situations it is helpful for DSC to convene a small cross section of the affected parties to advise us during the design and facilitation phases. This group could review and comment upon different iterations of the process design, for example, and take responsibility for clarifying process matters with their respective business partners, colleagues, neighbors, or constituents. DSC will decide upon an efficient and effective method for refining its draft process plan after it has conducted the interviews.
Once a design for the dialogue process is complete, DSC will serve as facilitator for the one or more sessions. If there are multiple sessions, then DSC will work with leaders from the neighborhood, Grubb Properties and the Town to ensure continuity between meetings. Here again is where a small cross sectional group may be helpful.
In a nutshell, the facilitator’s role at each meeting will be to ensure that (1) participants concentrate on one subject at a time, (2) participants follow a clear and agreed upon process, (3) conversation is open to all participants and balanced among them, (4) roles of the people who are present are clearly defined and agreed upon, and (5) participants’ feelings and ideas are taken into consideration. The facilitator will not contribute ideas, facts, or perceptions of the issues being discussed, nor will s/he evaluate the ideas of the meeting participants.
The DSC facilitator(s) will:
· Remain impartial with respect to the content of the group's discussions
· Manage the overall process and individual meetings consistent with a process design agreed upon by the participants,
· Suggest ways to approach process challenges (communication, conflict, etc.) that arise during meetings or are anticipated
· Enforce groundrules and procedural agreements to the extent allowed by the participants, and
· Solicit and accept feedback from group members from meeting to meeting so that the participants and the facilitator may reinforce behaviors that are helpful to the process and identify areas for improvement in future meetings.
A. Situation Assessment Phase
Assumptions: 30 hours of interviews and 10 hours of background material review. 40 hours @ $95/hour = $3,800
B. Process Design Phase
Assumptions: Draft a process plan, get feedback from small cross-section of stakeholders, redraft plan based on feedback, 3 days @ $760/day = $2,280
C. Facilitation Phase
Assumptions: Preparation, facilitation and follow-up for three four-hour meetings. 42 hours @ $95/hour = $3,990
D. Total Estimate
Out of pocket costs (materials, mileage): $400
Contingency: small group facilitators @ $40/hour
It is my hope that DSC will be able to help the Town, by organizing and facilitating a meaningful dialogue between Grubb Properties and the Glen Lennox neighborhood. I have attached some information about DSC’s experience in comparable situations and my professional biography for whatever uses you might make of it. Please let me know if you have any further questions.
I hope this is helpful to you.
Sincerely,
Andrew M. Sachs
Coordinator, Public Disputes Program
Public Disputes Program
Dispute Settlement Center, Carrboro NC
Representative Projects
Mediation for sponsors of a proposed group home for people living with AIDS and residents of four surrounding neighborhoods in opposition to the proposal in Carrboro, NC. Representatives from the two sides jointly organized a facilitated public forum at which the proposal and neighborhood concerns were discussed. Opposition to the group home dissipated after information was shared, relationships were established, and lines of communication opened across the two groups.
Design and facilitation of a year long community consensus building process on the Town of Carrboro's Northern Transition Area Small Area Plan. In 2000, the “Facilitated Small Area Plan for Carrboro’s Northern Study Area” was selected by the NC Chapter of the American Planning Association as the recipient of the Brian Benson Award for Small Community Comprehensive Planning.
Facilitation of a series of meetings through which representatives of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and neighborhoods surrounding the campus power plant reached understandings and agreements for minimizing the impacts of a proposed coal silo demolition/reconstruction project.
Design and facilitation of the Shaping Orange County’s Future Task Force process: 27 residents of Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough and the unincorporated areas of Orange County, NC appointed by their respective jurisdictions – reached consensus after years of study and deliberation on a set of values and goals for guiding the community’s future, and on a set of recommendations for achieving those ideals.
Facilitation of a series of work sessions through which residents living near the Orange County, NC Regional Landfill and representatives of local governments negotiated conditions by which the governments would acquire soil from adjoining tracts for use in landfill operations while minimizing adverse impacts on residents and the environment.
Design and facilitation of an innovative year-long community problem solving process sponsored by the Winston-Salem, NC/Forsyth County Coalition on Drug and Alcohol Problems through which over 60 organizations in the public, private and civic sectors reached consensus on improvements to local substance abuse treatment services.
Facilitation of the County/Schools “Collaboration Work Group,” composed of the Chairs, Vice Chairs, and Executive staff persons from the Orange County Board of Commissioners and the Boards of Education for Orange County and Chapel Hill/Carrboro. Since January 2004, the Work Group has identified, clarified, planned, and/or evaluated cross-jurisdiction issues such as revisions to local school construction standards, community use of school recreation facilities, and “new paradigm” funding for school-based human services.
Professional Biography
Andrew M. Sachs
Andy Sachs is the Coordinator for the Public Disputes Program at the Dispute Settlement Center, a community-based not-for-profit organization, located in Carrboro, North Carolina. The Public Disputes Program helps groups in the public, private and non-profit sectors to resolve conflicts and solve difficult problems by providing meeting facilitation, multiparty mediation, collaborative process design, and training and education in multiparty conflict resolution.
He initiated the Public Disputes Program in 1987 with a one-year grant from the Mary Reynolds Babcock Foundation of Winston-Salem, NC and has maintained the Program to date through additional grants, fees, contributions and honoraria.
He holds a Masters in City Planning from M.I.T. (1986) and a B.A. in Environmental Studies from the State University of New York at Binghamton (1979).
In 1994, Sachs began a seven year appointment as Lecturer in the Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, during which he co-developed and co-taught an upper-level undergraduate course, Non-Violent Conflict Resolution as part of UNC’s Curriculum in Peace, War and Defense.
He is a member of the National Association for Community Mediation (since 1994), the Association for Conflict Resolution (since 1993, active in ACR’s Sector on Environment and Public Policy, and its NC Chapter), and the National Roster of Environmental Dispute Resolution and Consensus Building Professionals (since 2000). He served on the Board of Directors of the Mediation Network of North Carolina from 1990-2004.
His most recent publications on conflict resolution include "Understanding Public Disputes Resolution in Community Mediation" (Mediation Quarterly, v.17, no. 4, Summer 2000) and contributions to Alternative Dispute Resolution in North Carolina: A New Civil Procedure, Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Bar Foundation and the North Carolina Dispute Resolution Commission (2003).