1. City of Greater Geraldton’s Participatory Budget Journey
Ken Diehm
CEO

2. My Journey into Participatory Budgeting

3. Background Started in local government in1986
Financial Management/Accounting
CEO of Water Board in 2001
Back into LG in 2009
Completed a MBA & finishing a second Masters

4. Background “Never ask a question you don’t know the answer to”
Nature of my work
Highly political environment
Dominance Political party policy
Very strong Mayors
“Never ask a question you don’t know the answer to”

5. I was comfortable on the bottom rungs of the consultation ladder

6. Life Changing Moment Our kids left home My first long holiday
Burning desire to achieve more in my life
Legacy impact from my career
Wanted to be a captain/coach

7. City of Greater Geraldton
42,000 people
> 12,000km2
2 Amalgamations
Strong growth
Diverse economy
Progressive Council
Financial challenges
Opportunity to make a difference

8. Deliberative Democracy project
2010 – 2013
> 3,500 hours + volunteers + Curtin Uni
> 3,000 community members involved
Community forums, world cafés, surveys, conversation cafes, online tools
2011 Reinhard Mohn finalist
2012 United Nations Liveable Cities Award for Community Engagement

13. The Challenge Prioritised Capital Works List; and
Review of range and level of services.
Within …..
six months!!!

14. My staffs’ reaction

16. My reaction

17. Why Participatory Budgeting
Commitment to Deliberative Democracy
Community expectation
Genuine belief that true wisdom comes from the combined knowledge of community and technical experts

18. Participatory Budgeting
Key elements
Allocation of resources
Criteria established by participants
Inclusion; and
Deliberative Democracy

19. Governance The role of Council
Governing Committee (Independent Review Committee)
Project Leadership Team

20. Our Council’s Commitment
Seriously consider all recommendations made by the Community Panel;
Implement recommendations wherever possible;
Where a recommendation or recommendations cannot be implemented, they will clearly communicate the reasons to the Community Panel; and
Where a recommendation or recommendations cannot be implemented, Council will seek to understand the intent of the recommendation/s and work with the Community Panel to find other ways to fulfil the intent.

21. Governance Committee
Independent Review Committee (IRC) – included respected leaders in the community who were independent from the City – their role was;
Ensuring that Community Panels are appropriately established, particularly with respect to eligibility, stratification, age, ethnicity, education etc.
Ensuring that the participatory budgeting process is accountable and transparent and free from bias.

22. Governance Committee
Reviewing material provided to the Community Panel’s for accuracy and relevance.
Championing the participatory budgeting process within the community.
Certifying the extent to which the recommendations of the Community Panel have been developed in a transparent and accountable manner and the impact of undue bias.

23. Governance Committee
Importantly, the Governing Committee was not involved in the deliberations of the Community Panel, nor did they have any responsibility for amending the work of the Community Panel.

24. Putting the Puzzle Together
Selection of Panels
Internal data gathering
Establishing the IRC
Technology
Keeping the broader community informed

25. Capital Works Panel Four weeks in November.
Reviewed 116 capital works projects.
Developed values based assessment criteria for evaluating and prioritising projects.
Delivered a report with prioritised list of projects based on their criteria
Made four recommendations about future community panel processes
Executive Management Team and Council fully endorsed all recommendations of the panel

26. Range and Level of Services Panel
Eight weeks in February and March
Presentations and Q&A with every Manager in the City
Developed a methodology and criteria for assessing services
Engaged with the broader community and incorporate community input
Determine preferential ordering of service level recommendations
Develop a list of other suggestions (to incorporate the “how” suggestions)
Executive Management Team and Council fully endorsed all recommendations of the panel

28. Challenges and lessons learned
Community want and are prepared to be involved
Managing staff anxiety
Rogue panellists
Passion and tears – managing panellists disagreements
Keeping the panel focussed on “what” not “how”
Time intensive

29. Challenges and lessons learned
The community are smarter than we think
Breakdown of internal silos
Professional development opportunity for staff
Politically Defendable outcomes
65 champions for the City

30. Australian Project of the Year
Australian Research Award
Australasian Planning Project Award

32. 30yr Renewal Profile Modelling
Slide 1/13

33. Renewal Demand & Renewal Budget
Slide 8/13
Slide 1/13

34. Participatory Budgeting?

35. My reaction

36. Community Summit Mandatory Vs Non-Mandatory activities
Detailed budget breakdown and description of activities
>100 participants (including previous panellists)
Original information session
Participants given a restricted budget to fund activities
Full day session for review of outcomes
Debate and soap box sessions
Assisted by easy to use software

37. Our Software

38. Our Software

40. Our Software

41. Outcomes Prioritised list of non-mandatory activities
Clear direction on what services to cut
More community champions for the City
Better informed Community
Better informed Council

42. My personal learnings
Don’t be afraid to ask questions you don’t know the answer to
The community’s collective wisdom is a lot greater than you think
Deliberative democracy is a great way to get community champions for the Council
Clearly demonstrates that you are genuine about consulting with the community