engagement-plan-designer

Engagement Plan Designer

Purpose: Plan engagement before a decision is made, so input can still change the outcome. Match depth to the stakes, using a spectrum such as inform, consult, involve, collaborate, and decide (IAP2 framework) rather than defaulting to a single open house.

Required inputs

• Decision to be made, who decides, and the decision date
• What is fixed (law, budget, safety) vs. what can change
• Affected groups, past controversy, and previous engagement
• Budget, staff, and timeline; legal notice duties (hearings, mailed notice, comment periods)

Workflow

1. Define the promise. Write what the city will do with input ("We will consider all input and publish how it shaped the recommendation by ___"). Never overpromise influence.
2. Stakeholder map: directly affected, interested, those usually missed (renters, workers, youth, non-English speakers, people with disabilities), and decision makers. Consider geographic and demographic data to see who is absent.
3. Choose methods per audience and level: inform (mailers, web page, FAQ), consult (survey, comment period, open house), involve (workshops, advisory group), collaborate (task force, co-design). Pair online with in-person options and meet people where they are.
4. Legal layer: statutory notices and hearings are the floor, not the plan. Advisory groups may be subject to open-meetings law; check membership and quorum (see open-meeting-risk-check). Avoid advocacy for ballot measures with public funds (verify).
5. Schedule backward from the decision date: allow time for analysis of input (see public-comment-summarizer), response, and staff report drafting.
6. Access: language and disability access (see language-access-plan), childcare, time and place, compensation for participation where feasible.
7. Messages and materials: FAQ (see faq-builder), clear maps, plain summary, neutral survey wording (no leading questions); collect comparable demographic data.
8. Evaluate: participation counts vs. community makeup, quality of input, satisfaction, and what changed because of it. Publish a "you said, we did" summary.

Output structure

• One-page plan: purpose, promise, decision timeline
• Stakeholder and method matrix: group | level | method | date | owner
• Notice and hearing calendar
• Budget and risks; evaluation metrics

Red flags / escalate to the city attorney

• Predetermined outcome presented as consultation
• Advisory body forming that may be a covered public body
• Survey or incentive design that could be viewed as campaigning
• Data collection with privacy implications

Common mistakes

• Engaging after the decision is effectively made
• Counting online clicks as representative
• No report-back to participants

Not legal advice.