Interesting proposal ...

Here is a another proposal for the consolidation of governmental entities in New York State.

It will be interesting to see the details. On first blush the referendum reform seems well thought out. Yes there should be uniform, more simple rules for public referendum (as we've advocated in our Referendum Cycles, Virtual Constitution, Best Practices Wiki sections among many others). Allowing counties to "forcibly" consolidate districts however seems counter to the idea of a streamlined referendum process, although I may be misreading the intent of the proposal.

Less clear on the press release is the methodology for determining the validity and the efficiency of districts, towns, villages etc although I'm sure that will be forthcoming.

Just because there are a lot of districts doesn't necessarily mean they are a bad thing or not well managed. Well coordinated small units can be as effective or more effective than larger units and "corruption" and "inefficiency" is part of the human condition against which we must always be vigilant, it is not the sole domain of one form of government (or any organization for that matter) over another. Increased collaboration and coordination among all branches of government should always be our goal.

Lastly, it would be interesting to see this current proposal integrated into all of the other ideas for comprehensive change in New York, from all quarters and to take the best parts of each so that we may move forward in unison and with a common purpose.

I'm afraid however, that until we have the access to information and fair and complete analysis of the type we've been proposing (for the last 15 years or so and more vigorously for the past couple of years) large scale sustainable change may be rather difficult since there will always be a trust issue to overcome.

Is what we are being told true and are we getting all the information we need to make a rational judgment?

An emerging Long Island Philosophy: Part One

Meta-Leadership: Part IV

If we define Meta-Leadership, in part, as the ability to facilitate a change from a "static" environment to a "dynamic" environment, then this partial chart helps illustrate this point (click on the chart for a larger view).

Long Island "Green" Business Accelerator

I've been reading with great interest all the new focus on "green" energy and its possible positive impact on the Long Island economy.

"The Green Guide" and "Long Island's Next Big Thing" among others are great additions to the cause and are doing splendid work in highlighting the issues and attempting to take a comprehensive approach to energy production on Long Island.

I would suggest all involved consider a Long Island "Green" Business Accelerator model along the lines of the Port of Technology in Philadelphia and other business "accelerator" models we've discussed in previous posts over the past year. Here is another example of an "alternative energy accelerator" in Michigan.

I've had some very preliminary talks with some folks out at Stony Brook (a natural location given their new alternative energy center) and other folks in the industry who feel the idea has merit and some potential.

Of course there may be multiple "accelerators" so long as they work collaboratively (this is the meta acceleration we spoke about previously) and for a common purpose. There should also be "cross pollination" of ideas and business among and between accelerators engaged in green energy and accelerators and incubators engaged in different but potentially mutually helpful work.

Depending on governmental resources to launch this initiative into high gear is, perhaps, dooming it to at best mediocrity. Again, it must be a "dynamic" process, not the stagnant "static" process which has formed so much of our current policy.

We need all the resources at our disposal to create a "green" Long Island.

Avoiding the Suppression of Progress: Part One

"I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." James Madison

Who are the gatekeepers of information and opinion? Media? Government? Large organizations of varying stripes?

Who prevents us or assists us in ensuring that diverse opinions, ideas and information are integrated into the "common dialogue" so that all realistic avenues of progress are debated, analyzed and enacted?

What I find fascinating about the current presidential contests is the continued focus of our fellow citizens on "looking for a leader" who will somehow have the answer to all our questions. No one individual, no matter how bright, can solve all our issues.

At best they can only find people smarter than they are with a broader and more diverse scope of knowledge, give them the tools to work collaboratively with the citizenry to solve problems. One's judgment and ability to formulate collaborative solutions which integrate a wide cross section of the citizenry is, to me, more important than some vague reference to leadership.

In short, what are your ideas and how specifically are going to implement them? We don't expect perfection. We will allow you to change your positions without demagoging the issue. The vast majority of people just want a sincere effort, an honest answer and an opportunity to be heard.

Of course tell us the truth. But, more importantly tell us how you arrived at what you believe the truth to be. It may not always be the best politics. It may not even be winning politics. But it is good for the overall health of the public discourse.

Most people are reasonable, hard working citizens. Most people are tolerant of opposing views. Most people will participate if given the opportunity and believe that their voice, even if it doesn't carry the day, will be heard.

Bottom up generally works better than top down. Smaller more diverse groups working collaboratively are generally better than a monolithic entity dictating policy.

None of this works however without the active participation of you and me.

So who can suppress progress here on Long Island and elsewhere?

With the free flow of information and the tools to empower the public, no one.

Who has the ultimate responsibility to solve problems? We do.

I don't see how there can be a "silent majority" or a silent anything in the future. Maybe even the very near future.

Enough sermonizing.

More in Part Two.

Good article on "Meta-leadership"

"Meta-leadership" refers to guidance, direction and momentum across organizational lines that develops into a shared course of actions and commonality of purpose among people and agencies that are doing what appears to be very different work."

More here.

We made another blogroll ...

American Solutions for Winning the Future has added the Long Island Idea Factory to its "BlogRolls (see right hand column of the graphic)."

"We recently launched American Solutions for Winning the Future, a unique non-partisan organization designed to rise above traditional gridlocked partisanship, to provide real, significant solutions to the most important issues facing our country.
The breakthrough impact of this organization is driven by its powerful approach:
Broad scale engagement of elected officials and candidates of both parties at all levels of government, interested citizens, private sectors leaders, reporters, scholars and students.
Development of big, real, breakthrough solutions to the most important issues facing this country - education, energy, more effective homeland and national security, a new model of retirement savings, a renewed sense of American civilization and citizenship, creating efficient, information age government and more.
A process to educate, ignite collaboration and implement these solutions across all levels of government with widespread ..."

"One Long Island" Metachart 10.17.07

(Click on the image for a larger view. Go here for a brief summary.)

Long Island "Idea TV": Part One

OK, so you have this great idea (you think) burning a hole in your brain and you want, no, you need to collaborate with the "One Long Island" network of "change agents" right away. What do you do?

The answer in Part Two.

Good reading ...

"A range of organisations - with direct experience of working with diverse groups in society - has produced guidance or can offer advice on how to effectively involve different groups in decision making." (click for entire article)

Possible applications of a Virtual Long Island Constitution

So how do we solve our housing issues?

If we agree with the premise (subject to the dynamic meta-analyses we've been preaching for the past 100 or so posts) that there is a need for more housing to keep our young workers and families here on Long Island (and to attract more professionals of all types), then let us take a simple, common sense approach to the issue.

Let's also agree that we be able to, with reasonable certainty, analyze and come to a defensible position on the who, what, where, how much, time frame (solves issue for 10 years, 20 years, 50 or more years?) and all the various environmental and quality of life concerns of the issue (I know it sounds like a lot, but it is reasonably simple to do accurate projections with the right modeling software).

Let's also agree that this issue is a shared issue amongst all Long Islanders.

Then we can agree that a Long Island Constitution (virtual or otherwise) could, as one of its outcomes, design a plan where all political subdivisions agree to construct (or allow to be constructed) X number of housing units at Y cost (sort of Long Island Meta-Leadership concept). We should also include all New York State owned land, school district property, and all other possible locations for housing.

In short, let's take a comprehensive, inclusive, well analyzed approach to the matter and enter into a "contract" of sorts (LI Constitution) to get the job done for the future health of Long Island.

Why is this important? Shouldn't our leaders (political and otherwise) just know how to get this done?

Well, yes and no.

It is not only the responsibility of our "leaders" to get this (and all other issues important for Long Island's future) done, it is really our responsibility. We must give our leaders the courage and the backing to make positive change for Long Island. We must reward innovation if we wish to remain competitive as a region.

Our "leaders" don't want to be the first to go "too far out on a limb" and be perceived as causing their "constituents" to bear an unfair share of the burden for, in this case, new housing development. This is a perfectly reasonable and rational view.

I believe most Long Islanders will support any effort to improve Long Island if they believe the process is fair and equitable. Additionally, I don't think it is productive for media (and others) to slam elected officials and other leaders in isolation (or at all for that matter, critique yes, personal attacks, no). If there are issues to be solved on Long Island, they are issues for all of us to solve. The media should foster cooperation while obviously fulfilling it's traditional obligation as a "public watchdog." But a good watchdog should see things that are actually there, not bark at every sound that it hears.

In the end, again, the public is its own best watchdog (see the Citizen Media Network and Citizen Alert Network concepts on this site).


A Long Island Constitution (virtual or otherwise), based upon fair and accurate information, properly analyzed is a necessary step in solving any of the long term issues for Long Island.