Two basic questions to ask when reviewing projects like this one:
1. What level of impact will public input have?
2. Will the process and the outcomes meet participants' expectations?
The level of impact is not clear. Sure, all ideas will be "reviewed" and some
may even get personal responses from prominent local figures. But are decision
makers on board with this? Are all the right stakeholders being involved? Has
anyone committed to actually doing anything about these ideas? In order to have
any impact that's usually what's involved *before* the public gets tapped for
input.
Has a process been defined? Will the outcomes be in line with expectations?
Obviously, that remains to be seen. But intentionally or not, the website
raises high expectations. Describing the project as "a new kind of public
dialogue" with "change-making community leaders" to help "[make] your city [a]
better place" doesn't exactly promise anything. However, to the average
participant it has high impact written all over it. And once hopes and
expectations have been raised it's usually impossible to trim them back.
So will this "reinvent public participation for the 21st century” (as quoted in
the NYT article)? At this point, I'd feel more reassured if I knew they had at
least done their 20th century homework.