A Problem Of Participation
Last week, the Woodhaven Residents’ Block Association (WRBA) helped the neighborhood get involved in participatory budgeting.
As I wrote last week, participatory budgeting is a process that lets residents vote on how they want public funds to be spent. Council Member Eric Ulrich, who represents a majority of Woodhaven’s population, opted to let his constituents in the neighborhood (along with those in Richmond Hill and the northern portion of Ozone Park) vote on how to spend $1 million for brick-and-mortar projects.
Anyone who lives in Ulrich’s district and is 16 years or older was eligible to vote in participatory budgeting. Based on very conservative estimates, that comes to nearly 17,000 Woodhaven residents.
Spread out over six days last week, we had volunteers staffing the office and keeping its doors open for a total of 28 hours so that people would have ample opportunity to vote. Of those approximately 17,000 eligible Woodhaven voters, how many stopped by the WRBA office to vote? About 100-and that includes several people from outside Ulrich’s portion of the neighborhood.
So, about one-half of one percent of all eligible Woodhaven residents took the time to vote.
This is extremely disappointing.
What does it take to get residents involved? Offering them a say in how $1 million will be spent appears was obviously not enough.
I know what some people will reply to justify their failure to vote. During the hours I spent at the WRBA office staffing the polling place, I heard the objections from those who actually did cast ballots. Some believe the projects they could choose from were not the greatest options. Others say they did not know about participatory budgeting until someone told them about it directly. Still others claimed their vote would have little impact.
These are poor excuses, in my opinion. Even if someone didn’t like all the items on the ballot, surely there was at least one that he or she could deem worthwhile. Those who didn’t know about participatory budgeting must have missed the robocalls, failed to read the newspapers, and never bothered to attend a WRBA town hall. And because relatively few ballots were cast, those who did vote had far more influence over the outcome than they’ve probably had in any election they’ve ever participated in.
The sad fact of the matter, though, is that this low turnout was not unique to participatory budgeting. The WRBA sees it every month at our town halls.
A truly spectacular town hall turnout will be 120 residents. That’s about one-third of one percent of the neighborhood’s population. Quite poor attendance, despite the fact that our town halls are regularly attended by all our elected officials, representatives from the 102nd Precinct and other city agencies, candidates for elected office, those speaking on behalf of neighborhood organizations, and other concerned residents.
The WRBA has been nearly a constant presence in our newspapers, on our news stations, and on the streets of our neighborhood. Anyone who’s unaware of our existence simply hasn’t been looking. I know that many residents have many obligations in their lives-long work hours, raising children, etc. But so do the people who attend the town halls, and so do the members of the WRBA’s Board of Directors.
My point is that not enough residents are involved. Woodhaven has not even scratched the surface when it comes to civic engagement. Our residents need to step up and play their part to make the neighborhood a better place. But it’s tough to see that happening when not even a million dollars is incentive enough.
Do you have a solution to this problem? Drop us a line at info@woodhaven-nyc.org. Or better yet, come to our next town hall and tell us.
Editor’s note: The next Woodhaven Residents’ Block Association meeting is on Thursday, April 24, 7 p.m. at the American Legion Hall (89-02 91st Street). Blenkinsopp is member of Community Board 9 and director of communications for the WRBA. For additional information on the WRBA, visit www.woodhaven-nyc.org.
