A golden opportunity ...

“The public’s in a bad mood...”

Yes of course the public is in a bad mood.

Why?

Many reasons, but primarily because the public, which is generally ahead of the curve in understanding the need for change, is frustrated at the inability of the current "system" to implement reasonable and ordered change for the public good.

In short, a dramatic overhaul is required in the way we "think" about government (and those organizations which interact with government in some manner) and the way we "collaborate" with one another to bring about substantive and sustainable change.

It's about process, not revolution. It's about the empowerment of the public to govern themselves. Its about dynamic, accurate information and analysis presented in an common sense and understandable way.

Public anger will not be enough to change the current reality unless those who are put in position to effect the change required empower and enable the public to be an equal partner in the process.

The "One Long Island" series of concepts is a method to channel this "anger" into a new way of creating a sustainable and dynamic Long Island (or any region for that matter).

The anger will dissipate over time. It always does. But if we have not left a better "system" in its place, we will have lost a golden opportunity to make Long Island a better place.

Solution to the problem?

"The way forward

So, how do we keep what we have and bring in more? One small bit of hope: The Long Island Regional Planning Council is calling a July 29 summit of key players. Good idea: Use the still-fresh pain of the OSI loss as a catalyst for action.

That's one baby step. What we need is the will and the sense of urgency to flex our regional muscle and grow a biotech cluster that will be a world-beater. We need to be like San Diego, where Helicon fled. That city has enough biotech companies so that a scientist can feel safe in signing on with one, because if it fails (and many do), there are other jobs in the area. To grow companies and attract scientists to the Island, we need that same synergy here.

If the great science emerging from our world-class research institutions is to create companies that start and stay here, it's a lead-pipe cinch that we must speak with one voice, more loudly and persuasively than the competing regions. That's the real lesson of OSI"

The "One Long Island" series of ideas are designed to do what the above commentator proposes.

No, it's not a "bolt of lightening" that will solve out problems overnight. But then again we didn't arrive at this position overnight either.

Long Island needs to be "reorganized." Methodically, deliberately and based in real data and collaborative analysis and action.

Isn't it lucky we have the talent here on Long Island already to do this work. Give them some minor initial funding and some cooperation and let them get the job done.

You'll be amazed how quickly it can come together.

Put aside the "old ways of thinking" about the issues and dissolve old alliances where necessary.

This is a new day and age. The tools are available if the mind and heart are willing.

There's really nothing left to talk about.

There's nothing left to do, but to do it.

Review: Part One

I thought it was time to start a review (and possibly expand) on some of the 300 or so previous posts.

“Simply stated, ‘One Long Island’ is a series of interrelated projects designed to foster productive collaboration on Long Island through the utilization of common technology, interdisciplinary education, public participation and a shared Long Island philosophy. In short it is a way to change the way we solve problems on Long Island in a sustainable manner.”

Cycle of Stagnation Redux

Part of the current problem, as I see it anyway, with the current fiscal "crisis" on both the national (international) scene and the local scene is that the "public" does not have the "tools" it needs to help prevent crisis situations and therefore feels powerless, confused, frustrated and angry when then presented with a take it or else solution.

It may even be said that those who we elect to govern us do not have the proper tools at their disposal either. Blaming others is easy. Fixing problems is hard work.

We will assume for the moment that "those in power" actually want the tools to see what reality looks like.

Now a cynic may say that this is all part of the grand design. After all what fun would there be legislating if the general public had access to the same information and analytical tools as those who were elected. What fun would there be in the media losing its place and power as the "fourth estate" if the public could inform itself.

To be even more cynical, there are those who would suggest that the public doesn't really want the ability to govern itself, because it is too much work and we like to have people to blame when things go wrong.

I don't subscribe to that way of thinking.

So the current "fiscal" crisis in just the latest manifestation of the "cycle of stagnation" we've spoken about earlier on this site.

Is there too much government or is the government we have just ineffective? Isn't having a lot of well run local government (home rule) accountable to the public and working in a collaborative manner better than less government, but larger more ineffectual government? Can you even have large effective government?

Here on Long Island, as elsewhere, we a experiencing the pain of "change" and here, like elsewhere, we have not, for the most part, prepared properly for what needs to be done.

The greatest tragedy of the current dilemma is not that we have to go through it and make, perhaps, bad decisions based on the lack of a clear understanding of the "meta-dimensional" aspects of our very existence.

No, the greatest tragedy would be repeat this "cycle of stagnation" and not take comprehensive steps to change the way we govern ourselves and thus condemn future generations to this "old and outdated thinking."

One Long Island is an attempt at this "re-ordering."

"The universe is transformation; our life is what our thoughts make it."

Getting some of the basics done ...

More well deserved good press on the new Long Island Index mapping project.

I tried to get this done about 15 years ago with my Oyster Bay 2000 concept with varying degrees of success.

Now we need to take this basic concept and expand it to include all the advanced features of our One Long Island project, most specifically the concept of "normalized" meta-data, meta-land use planning map, advanced analytic features (example - Stony Brook Lydia), and the ability to "think" and communicate in more complete, collaborative ways among other proposals.

Hopefully it won't take another 15 years for it to happen.

Climate Change initiatives ...

I read with interest the ongoing "Climate Communities" project of which Nassau County is a part and on Monday had the pleasure of hearing the Governor of New York address a gathering of the Long Island association.

Once again I was struck at how many good things people are doing and saying in all of the various disciplines, and also sadly, how truly disorganized we are.

The Governor spoke of the need to "reorganize" New York State for greater efficiency. This is certainly a good approach. He also spoke of the difficulty of getting everyone on the "same page" so to speak and the urgency of doing so. Also good.

SO above we have an partial example of a symbiotic relationship between one of the things the Governor wishes to do, that is allow SUNY and other universites the freedom to become a larger part of the economic engine of New York and to help drive innovation and job creation and the worthwhile Climate Communities project.

Free SUNY and make it easier for them to engage in business arrangements with local government. Streamline the ability of SUNY and local government to do joint projects and make application to the Federal Government for real world projects. Integrate what they are doing with the new Long Island Master Plan. Establish Green Accelerators across the state. Innovate with programs like "Better Place."

Where is the money you may ask? There is more than ample money in the system if it is organized properly and allocated effectively to at least get the ball rolling. More important is the need to free SUNY and others to be entrepreneurial and to cut the red tape.

We can not be so afraid of potential "corruption" that we paralyze our ability to be successful.

Apparently New York State is close to 15 Billion in the hole according to the Governor. Now is the time for bold new thinking and yes, some risk taking.

Playing it safe has only lead to stagnation in New York.

If "change" and reform is on the menu, we should leave no stone unturned in making comprehensive sustainable progress in addressing New York's and Long Island's future.

It is time for collaborative meta-leadership.

Change is here ...

The results of the current New York State elections have brought into clearer focus the need for a different approach to problem solving and organization on Long Island.

The old adage "to the victor belong the spoils" is one Long Islanders must be more acutely aware of more than ever. In a time of diminishing resources and a political power shift towards New York City and its boroughs, Long Island stands to lose whatever power it currently holds.

Elected officials generally will take the course of least resistance, and for New York elected officials, its easier to help their own constituents than to worry about the "big picture" and Long Island in particular.

Shouldn't then Long Island elected officials (in this particular case the NYS Senate) be looking to form a coalition (political and/or otherwise) on Long Island and with upstate officials so that the balance of power between urban, suburban and rural interests in maintained? Is the model of the NYS Assembly and the accumulation of power in the boroughs of New York City a harbinger of the future?

Maybe, maybe not. But why risk the future of Long Island's interests until we are certain of a fair and balanced approach to governance in New York State? It is simply illogical to give away power and influence when you don't have to and before you have a verifiable scheme in place to replace the one you have, as imperfect as it may be. That would be simply like "re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic."

Take a comprehensive approach to solving the problems and the inequities in the current system, don't just shift power so that some problems get solved and others become more pronounced, perhaps to devastating effect on large numbers of Long Island, suburban and rural residents. Yes NYC is vitally important to the economic well being of our state. But we should not put all our efforts into NYC to the exclusion of other existing and potential economic engines across the state.

Because of Long Island's fragmented nature, it is somewhat easy to pit one constituency against another whether using political means or other devices. Long Island is ripe for a divide and conquer strategy.

By withholding (intentionally or unintentionally) information from the public or otherwise making it difficulty for the public to get a "clear picture" of the reality of our circumstances and leads to extreme partisanship and demagoguery, neither of which is healthy for Long Island's long term health and well being.

It is also clear that until there is a "unified"approach to solving state-wide issues (and national issues for that matter) Long Island will need to fortify itself against the coming storm. We must create an environment that will inoculate ourselves from extreme changes to our environment and give us the flexibility to adjust quickly and naturally based upon logic and reason within a dynamic environment.

The "One Long Island" series of ideas, while appearing to be only an abstraction are, in fact, based in reality and on concepts we can accomplish immediately.

As we've stated before trust is the key and there can not be trust without verifiable information and objective analysis within a collaborative, dynamic environment.

It will take time, but the the results will promote real change based upon a "bottom up" collaborative approach to problem solving.

No one leader can "save us." No "one idea" can solve all our issues. No "one group" can or should determine our future.

We must change the dynamic on Long Island and subscribe to a shared Long Island Philosophy which is based in a pragmatic approach wit in a flexible, dynamic environment if do not wish to fall prey to other regions in the state or the nation.

A strong Long Island can be a model for the nation on how to create a new regional dynamic that can work with other regions yet allow independent, creative dynamism within our own region to continually reshape and reorganize how we operate and how we address any new challenge we may encounter.

“What seems different and noteworthy about the I.B.M. approach is its sweeping comprehensiveness and message,” said Rosabeth Moss Kanter, a professor at the Harvard Business School. “Putting the pieces together under one inclusive and rather bold label can stimulate discussion and innovation.”

Meta-Leadership: Part III

(Select image for a larger view)

Another plan ...

More static planning?

Not that this a bad idea, in fact it may turn out to be very productive.

But the idea of, once again, one group trying to plan an entire region's future strikes me as more of the same. A new report, no matter how professional, divorced from or marginally connected to all the other projects, ideas, organizations etc, won't get the job done.

As one example in hundreds, how will the creators of this report interact with the study being conducted at Dowling regarding a possible 51st state? Aren't both looking at many related issues?

Another example. How will the creators of this report interact with the many planned and operating business incubators/accelerators to determine potential business growth and the type of business growth for the next 50 years or so?

The point is that almost everything on Long Island has some bearing on everything else occurring on Long Island. Changing one thing potentially creates a domino effect.

We must know with reasonable certainty what these outcomes are likely to be or making change will be almost impossible to sell to elected officials, general public and Long Island organizations.

We need dynamic, real time planning. It must be inclusive and collaborative. It can not be mandated, it must contain many options and it must contain productive public input (not complaints or NIMBYism) from a diverse assortment of individuals and groups.

Before you plan, you must know what and who you're planning for. What type of future are you planning for Long Island?

Traditional planning models and techniques may be helpful, but they are not enough to change the course of Long Island history in a meaningful, sustainable manner.

Create a Long Island philosophy. Rethink how everything is done.

Editorial: LI needs new planning blueprint

April 9, 2008

Long Island can't go on like this: choking traffic, little mass transit, lack of affordable housing, threats to open space, unbearable property tax burdens and a sputtering economy - to name a few of our problems. We need a smart plan to recommend specific actions, and we need the commitment of our public officials to carry it out.

The Long Island Regional Planning Board took a first step yesterday toward that kind of plan. It looked westward to New York City, whose PlaNYC is a model of both crunching the numbers and laying out doable recommendations.

The consulting firm that had a lot to do with creating that plan is McKinsey & Co. And Long Island's planning board served notice yesterday that it intends to hire McKinsey to create a blueprint for sustainability here - unless another firm offers a better proposal. Local not-for-profits have offered $500,000 toward the eventual $1.5 million to $2 million cost of the study if McKinsey does it.

To be a success, any plan must have strong action recommendations, plus staunch political backing. A word of warning: One of the 127 initiatives in PlaNYC was congestion pricing, which timid Albany lawmakers have just killed. The lesson is not that we don't need a plan, but that even the best blueprints need courageous politicians. Whatever McKinsey recommends, if the top leaders of the two counties don't fight for the tough changes this study is likely to urge, we'll be stuck in the same sad rut.

Long Island: The 51st State - Part Two

Some have found it amusing that this subject has reappeared. In fact, some have dismissed it out of hand.

But we should look at it as an opportunity to do some real analysis in a dynamic manner.

The folks at Dowling will, I have no doubt, do a thorough and professional job on the analysis, just as Mr. Koppelman and others have done previously.

But what will happen with the results?

Will they sit on a shelf somewhere never to be seen again?

As we have stated previously, there are many good ideas and intelligent folks on Long Island. What is missing is a coordinated approach to the issues.

Dowling should reach out to other universities (Stony Brook comes to mind on the technology end) and create a dynamic, sustainable dialogue about how government operates and how best to provide services among many issues to be addressed.

For example, what would the "perfect" government structure be? Form follows function as they say. What functions do we require on Long Island for the next 100 to 200 years? Can we achieve what is necessary with existing organizations and laws?

Is there something that can take the place of government in providing these services? How do we make the public (who own the government after all) more involved in the governing of Long Island?

The results can not go on a shelf (or even a static web site) or they will become useless.

The process of being or becoming excellent never really takes a break. Our new organization(s) and governing structures must be dynamic, collaborative and perpetual as we've described in many previous posts.

More in part three.

Making the Transition: Part One

The universe is change; our life is what our thoughts make it.

Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, Meditations
Roman Emperor, A.D. 161-180 (121 AD - 180 AD)

We harp quite a bit on structure the Long Island Idea Factory in the form of the One Long Island series of projects.

Why?

Because without the proper flexible, dynamic structure sustainable positive change is difficult to achieve.

I have my own ideas about what change is important, but so what?

No one person or organization has all the answers. We have to believe that with the correct structure and methodology the correct change will occur, in whatever form that change manifests itself.

So how to go about change? How do we transition from where we are to where we wish to be?

How do we go from mere rhetoric to substance?

How do we create a Long Island "meta-transition?"

More in Part II.

More on the way ...

I'm in the process of setting up a number of meetings to begin the implementation of some of the "One Long Island" concepts. I'm also supplementing and refining a good portion of the material.

Additionally I'm reviewing my notebook(s) of ideas to see where the next "suite" of concepts fits into the overall "One Long Island" game plan.

Thanks to all of you who have offered advice and support.

I look forward to a productive remainder of 2007 and an even more productive 2008.

Something different ... update

OK, so I'm going through boxes of my old music and I think I found all the parts to my orchestral study "Locust Valley by Moonlight - Part One" and "Locust Valley by Moonlight - Part Two" ... give a listen when you have 30 minutes or so to spare.

Back to the work at hand ...

Now for something a little different ...

I was cleaning out the house a few months ago when I came across boxes and boxes of old tapes and sheet music I had, quite frankly, forgotten about.

This was the byproduct of a portion of my youth when I was determined to write the next great American Symphony, or Jazz Standard or Rock Classic or ... well suffice it to say there is tons of stuff all recorded or written the old fashioned way. A real chore.

I started to look around at what was available to the new composers and musicians out there and was pretty impressed. So I purchased some software (Acoustica) and am in the process of going through hours of old stuff and practicing a little to get my "chops" back so I can record or re-record half finished or never recorded projects.

Here is a "study" for a symphony that real life has prevented me from completing.

There's a Podcast Player in sidebar of the Long Island Idea Factory with some other demos (some complete, some not) of stuff I was working on 25 to 30 years ago or more. They just happened to be the first things my hands touched through the dust ... I'll post more as time permits. There's so much it could be a full time job.

Maybe when I retire ...

Long Island Idea Bank: Part Two

Just as we proposed in the early 90s with a "Land Bank" for the Town of Oyster Bay (Oyster Bay 2000) as a means of protecting and preserving open space and redeveloping underutilized or improperly utilized parcels for the public good thus protecting and developing one of the Town's important "assets" we now look to the Long Island Idea Bank as a way of protecting and "developing" another important Long Island asset: our immense capacity for innovation and potential for productive collaboration. In short, our brainpower and ideas.

There is no doubt that Long Island possesses and has access to some of the finest minds on the planet. We have not, to date to any great extent, been able to marshall this ability for the collective good of all the residents on Long Island. An "idea bank" while not a new idea in itself. is a necessary component in the overall structure of the "One Long Island" project we are proposing in that there needs to be a central clearinghouse of ideas (in all stages of completion) for us to draw from and contribute to. We might also call it the Long Island Idea Library.

The Long Island Idea Bank concept, as all "One Long Island" projects must be viewed in concert with all the other components of our proposal. The idea is to collaborate and coordinate, not to continue to maintain separate disjointed static organizations or to create a new "super" or "meta" bureaucracy.

More in Part Three.

... or the Meta Chart Version of 9.24.07

(Click for larger image)

Long Island School of Meta Interdisciplinary Studies

A way to teach collaboration and dynamism. Any ideas out there for inclusion in a curriculum?