Piercing the Haze: Part I

What is a "distracter?" A "distracter" is technology which is employed to make it appear that the provider is interested in your input or that the information you provide will be used for a constructive purpose.

The less cynical view is that the provider doesn't know any better and is using the technology because they feel they have to to look current. The more cynical view is that they do know what they are doing and are using the technology to promote a specific agenda while using the technology as a sort of "Trojan horse" to gain your trust.

Filters are those elements which prevent the public form getting accurate information.

So what we are attempting to do, in part, with the One Long Island series of ideas is to "pierce" the haze of filters and distracters toward a more unified "language." Yes there will still be disagreements on policy, but at least we'll all be "singing from the same hymnal" so to speak.

More in Part II.

More interesting reading ...

"No one starting from scratch would design a local government system like New York has
now, with its overlapping governments and rigid structure. This structure makes it
difficult – but not impossible – to define efficient service areas and to levy taxes or
assessments on those who are served. It creates some duplication of services and
functions. It creates opportunity for miscommunication and lack of coordination in
30
economic development and other policy areas.
Although it is not the system we would design today, it is the system we have.
Unfortunately, changing the system structurally is extraordinarily difficult: The political
hurdles in front of eliminating a village layer or merging a city and county are
extraordinarily high. City-county mergers in upstate New York would require merging
governments whose citizens are dramatically different in terms of race, poverty,
urbanicity, educational attainment, political inclination, and preferences for government
services. That doesn’t mean it cannot or should not be done, but clearly it will not easily
be done.
The quantifiable benefits of eliminating a layer or merging a city and county appear to be
low, often because of leveling up between collective bargaining agreements. Potential
cost savings, while certainly meaningful in dollar terms, can be small relative to
government budgets – on the order of 1 to 2 percent of spending, judging by available
dissolution and merger studies. While taxpayers certainly would welcome tax reductions
of this magnitude, historically they have rarely been willing to accept the intangible costs
of dissolution or consolidation for this level of tax reduction.
Each merger and dissolution situation must stand alone. New York’s local governments
vary enormously as do their service delivery and financing arrangements. Whether a
specific merger or dissolution will make sense from fiscal or other perspectives will
depend on its facts – there is no one size fits all solution. However, even if a merger or
dissolution appears sensible on its face, how it is implemented will matter. Careless
implementation can lead to inefficiency and waste.
Consolidations and dissolutions also involve a redistribution of service benefits and tax
costs. In a positive vein, one could say they involve equity issues, but another
characterization is that they produce winners and losers."

Bottom line. If you don't build trust based upon verifiable information and analysis and give citizens a sense of common purpose and inclusion, change is almost impossible.

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.

"One Long Island" Metachart 1.7.08

(Click on the image for a larger view)

Fluid versus Static Intelligence

"An individual's level of fluid intelligence can be determined based on the degree to which he or she is able to let go of previously held conceptions on encountering reliable information or experiences which show these conceptions to be mistaken or overly simplistic.

At the other end of the spectrum from fluid intelligence is static intelligence.

When those with a high degree of static intelligence encounter information which seriously questions the established paradigm, they attempt to discredit the new information using laws and principles previously agreed upon under the old paradigm. If they fail at this, the new information is then deemed not worthy of study and discarded. At worst, the new evidence is actively attacked as being irrational or unscientific, even though it may be easily verified."

"One Long Island" Metachart 10.24.07

(Click on the image for a larger view)

"One Long Island" : The Short Version

Someone asked me the other day to state what I was trying to accomplish with the "One Long Island" concept. You know, the old "give it to me five minutes or less" routine.

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.

There. That was less five minutes wasn't it?

Now back to our regularly scheduled program ....

"One Long Island" Metachart 10.5.07

(Click on image for larger view)

One Long Island Project: Part One

Another way to conceptualize the Long Island 3.0 series of proposals.

The hardest thing to do, I think, is to explain complex ideas in simple terms. It may be a skill I don't possess. I will continue to try however.

Some of you have asked me what the "agenda" is for all of this. Why are you writing this blog?

Well the reason I'm writing about Long Island is because I actually enjoy this sort of thing and also, being an individual whose relatives have only known Long Island as a home since they "arrived" here in the late 1880s through the early part of the last century, I have an affinity for and a desire to see Long Island stay the great place its been for my family and friends.

However, for Long Island to remain a great place it must change in a sustainable and dynamic manner. I think most Long Islanders see that. My hope is that I can contribute some piece of the puzzle that helps this come about.

Ah, but you are, or have been, political aren't you? You must be setting yourself up for another run!

Sorry. Been there, done that and did the best I knew how at the time (Oyster Bay 2000 [circa 1993]). I have great respect for everyone who puts themselves in the public eye and subjects themselves (and their family) to the "democratic process." Whether its a school board or President of the United States, it takes the "fire in the belly." I'm happy to help good people get elected ... it just isn't for me anymore.

I don't believe that what I wish to help accomplish on Long Island is best served through elective office. Elective officials are sometimes constrained and limited in what they can accomplish by the "parameters" of their office. If possible, I want to spend my time forging productive "links" and coalitions between disparate (and sometimes seemingly incompatible) organizations for the common good. I think Long Island 3.0 (or the"One Long Island Project") will be helpful in this regard. Sometimes those who seem to have all the power are themselves limited by authority and must be assisted as well in doing the public good ("Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown"). It has been my experience that most elected officials want to do the right thing and are elected officials primarily to do the public good and not for personal aggrandizement.

I am a firm believer in the process and believe everyone should be involved in getting good people elected. If you don't participate currently, you should in some manner. Going door to door is one of the best educational experiences a person can have. I know it was for me.

Among other things, it teaches you humility, teaches you what you don't know, forces you to see other points of view, shows you the value of compromise and cooperation, makes you work for your votes (we always appreciate something more when you work for it) and requires you to engage in a real and direct way, all the different types of folks you wish to represent. Most importantly it teaches you that elected office is a privilege, not a right.

I don't care what level of office you are seeking, if you are not going directly to the people (obviously as your physical abilities allow) and asking them for their vote, you are not being honest with yourself or the people you seek to represent. Citizens coming to see you is not the same as you going to see them. Obviously the larger the office the more difficult this becomes, but no matter what the office is it should be done at some point if for no other reason than to keep the flame of humility alive in all elected officials.

Even as I advocate for "virtual this" and "meta that" I remember the value of looking folks in the eye and asking for their vote. Hopefully what I propose is not taken as a replacement for this direct interaction but rather as a way to assist all Long Islanders in among other things, the process of dynamic self governance through informed decision-making.

OK. Time to get off the soapbox.

I hope I've answered some of your questions. As always keep 'em coming.

Long Island Meta-Accelerator Project: Part One

We've posted previously about how the Long Island 3.0 concepts have the potential to turn Long Island into one unified "accelerator" project.

Sort of like this only not just limited to business issues. Ours would be more all encompassing; a "meta-accelerator. "

Why can't we use our collective abilities to "make a profit" for Long Island. Use it to lower taxes. Attract business. Initiate and implement new ideas. More in part two.

As a side note, perhaps the reason there are so many different and diverse organizations (of all types) on Long Island is precisely because we have never had any method for "bringing it all together" before ... a self fulfilling prophesy of sorts. Different and diverse organizations are a good thing, so long as they are working towards a common, dynamic and organized mission. Hopefully Long Island 3.0 can, over time, help solve this riddle and promote diversity and innovation directed toward a common purpose.

Implementing Long Island 3.0

The above diagram illustrates one way to look at how to implement (or begin to implement) the Long Island 3.0 concept.

A key is to identify those in all relevant disciplines who have the "core competency" required in a particular field (it may be multiple individuals and/or organizations) then to determine who those individuals and organizations have the ability to influence. When we say influence, we are using it in the "collaborative" context, not the "command" context.

Obviously, some will have multiple core competencies and multiple spheres of influence. Together, the scope of their collective abilities should create the "Joint Sphere (s) of Influence" that covers not only all of Long Island, but reaches out nationally and internationally.


I short we may look at Long Island 3.0 as using a "social networking" theory of sorts to its fullest application.

Why is a "dynamic" Long Island important?

Why is a "dynamic" Long Island important?

As we've stated in previous posts a "dynamic" Long Island is, in effect, a Long Island in perpetual motion. There is no "down time" for stagnation and negativism to creep in and stop progress (whatever form this progress eventually becomes is a by-product of the collaboration Long Island 3.0 encourages).

We use the term Long Island 3.0 to encompass all the different ideas we promote on this site including the Long Island Congress, the Virtual Long Island Constitution , Citizen Media Network etc. Long Island 3.0 is not only a series of proposals, but hopefully a way to point to a "Long Island Philosophy" of sorts. A new and pragmatic way to think about Long Island and its future and to hopefully encourage the positive change we require.

Additionally, and as we've stated previously, there are many good people and good organizations striving to make Long Island a better place. The issue more often than not seems to boil down to the loss of momentum. Many good ideas and programs "die on the vine" for a lack of momentum.

Long Island 3.0 counteracts this loss of momentum by establishing flexible standards (technical and otherwise) which create the "dynamism" Long Island requires to forge a new identity for this century and beyond.

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.

The role of Long Island colleges and universities

Here is a good overview and perhaps some part of a model for Long Island colleges, universities and high schools and the role they might play in a Long Island "renaissance."

Again, a central theme in Long Island 3.0 is to make the highest and best use of all Long Island resources for the common good.

Certainly all our educational institutions (including our library systems) will play a vital role in Long Island's future.

Perhaps it is time for a new type of "Long Island Studies" curriculum. One that focuses on Long Island 3.0 (or Long Island 3.0 type) concepts.

After all, if we are sincere about wanting our young people to stay on Long Island we should really give them seat at the table and integrate their ideas and concepts into the mix.

Nice to see ...

... NY - Alert now has XML/RSS feeds. 

Hopefully this will start a trend for all New York Political Subdivisions and other public entities (federal, state and local) as we stated in previous posts on this site.

Let's hope this is the beginning of an integrated communications platform.

Long Island as a Meta-Democracy: Part One

First a few definitions of "meta-democracy" none of which is 100% on point for our purposes but helpful nevertheless here, here, here and here (although one could argue democracy is by its very definition "meta").

For Long Island to make significant, positive change, the change must be based upon knowledge. Knowledge is essential to an educated and motivated Long Island citizenry. Education requires participation. Long Island 3.o offers, among other things, a method to encourage participation (virtual or otherwise) in a simple yet robust and effective manner. Hence, the "virtual" Long Island Democracy (Long Island Congress, Long Island 3.0, Virtual Long Island Constitution) leads to a Long Island Meta-Democracy.

This is not a political solution nor does it replace current institutions (at least not for the foreseeable future).

It is a form of "self governance" within the framework of a "self sustaining and self correcting" system.

It is not enough anymore to depend solely on current organizational models. For Long Island to progress and remain vital in the world at large, it will need an active and educated public to do so.

"If you want to change the culture, you will have to start by changing the organization." Mary Douglas

"There is an inverse relationship between reliance on the state and self-reliance." William F. Buckley, Jr.

More in part two.

Creating a "Virtual" Long Island Constitution: Part One

Great ideas, for the most part, transcend the forces which try to hold them back. It may take awhile, but the ideas generally  prevail.

Great ideas need, however a structure which allows them to be heard, develop and, ultimately, become reality. This is the genius of the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. It allows for ideas not contemplated at the time of the creation and modification of those documents to eventually find a voice and have the opportunity to succeed. Long Island requires its own type of  constitution;  a "Virtual Long Island Constitution."

What do we mean by a "Virtual Long Island Constitution?" 

If we view the nature of the universe as one of constant change ("Change alone is eternal, perpetual, immortal." Arthur Schopenhauer) and with apologies to the "strict constructionists" out there, then we must be prepared for change and have instruments which allow us to negotiate change as simply as possible. Luckily for us we live in an era in which great change is occurring, so the tools are readily available to us.

What will our "virtual" constitution look like and what will it contain? At the outset it should contain some type of reasonable, broad ethical framework which governs the way we interact with one another, individually and organizationally, to promote positive change on Long Island. 

Our "virtual" constitution is a living, dynamic, document. It is easily modifiable to fit the rapid change which will be a constant in our lifetime and beyond. 

We may look at this "virtual constitution" as the third leg of the Long Island Congress and Long Island 3.0 process. It helps hold the entire process together and allows it to remain stable and secure. It permits us to overcome the "extraneous chatter" and concentrate on the core issues and processes which will help Long Island move forward.

More in part two.

Thanks to the LI Biz Blog ...

... for adding the Long Island Idea Factory to its "Must Read Blogs" section.

Long Island Congress: Breaking the Cycle of Stagnation

What will it take to break the "cycle of stagnation" that affects so much of what we do here on Long Island?

It is probably no secret by now that communication and accurate information play a large role in any type of significant, positive change.

Those of us who have been observing communities, government and organizations here on Long Island (I'm into my 25th year of observation, a mere child compared to some!) are continually struck by the "themes" which continue to appear time and time again with different players playing the same tune. Whether its taxes or development or energy or any of a thousand issues, we never seem to make the progress we feel we should, or can. This feeling is obviously not unique to Long Island and Long Islanders (many of the themes in this blog are transferable to other regions), but it is what we are interested in and will continue to focus on.

It is not that our leaders (from whatever discipline), are "bad people," corrupt or are misleading us or that the general populous of Long Island is unwilling to change or that we don't have sufficient resources and brainpower to make the changes. It is just that we are not organized properly and have not empowered ourselves with the right tools to get the job done.

There are no short term, magical solutions to addressing Long Island's issues. For example, comparing Long Island to other regions to find solutions may be part of an answer, but it will never be the entire answer. Why? Because each region, including Long Island has a uniqueness, sometimes easily quantifiable, sometimes not that requires us to use a higher level of analysis (which is why we need diversity of opinion).

Additionally, making pronouncements that changing a part of the problem is in fact the answer to all our problems is equally destructive ("The greatest enemy of progress is not stagnation, but false progress." Sydney J. Harris). We all have a desire to have people say good things about us and obviously those in power have a need to maintain the staus quo to some level (even while appearing that they wish to change it!). Why? Ego, power, fear, money, ambition ... you name it. This hasn't changed since the beginning of human existence. This does not make them bad people. It makes them, and us, human.

"How to be innovative is a burning question for top management in the world today. Most organizations are looking for ways to improve their ability to create ideas and to develop the best environment for idea creation. More organizations are turning to the practice of knowledge management for sharing experiences and expertise, integrating knowledge, and generating new knowledge. What organizations need is a better understanding of how knowledge management is related to the innovation process and how it can be used to help foster innovation within organizations."

So how do we change?

First we have to accept that we can and must do things better. Here there is probably universal agreement.

Second we have to identify what the primary and secondary issues are. Here we can probably get a substantial majority to agree.

Third we have to design an approach to address the issues. Here we have a problem.

We generally don't speak the same organizational language and probably can't even agree on a way to get started. Sure we convene a "task force" from time to time on related subject matter that issues a report that sits on a shelf somewhere and we make a stab at bring folks with a "common" issue together for a common purpose, but it's kind of like being invited to a dance with no music. Everyone looks at each other, says nice things (generally) and goes home without ever truly interacting. There's no rhythm, no dynamism and therefore ultimately no purpose, in a real sense, to the dance.

So how do we begin to change this "lack of rhythm" on Long Island?

By first agreeing on some way to communicate in a dynamic way. Long Island 3.0 can give us the tools. Long Island Congress can give us a non-confrontational organizational structure.

Real answers based on accurate information presented in a dynamic format.

It's up to us if we want to change. There is really nothing else preventing it.

"But in some ways it'€™s less the business model that they chose, but the commitment to being transformational that I found most intriguing. It takes guts to revisit every assumption, premise, brainstorm, strategy and relationship on a regular basis. It's uncomfortable not to have familiar benchmarks; reinventing the wheel is harder than it sounds on a whiteboard. Reversion to the mean happens for a very simple reason: Innovation is terrifying when done right."

Some interesting material ...

Innovation Focus

"If innovation is not widely understood to be the community's lifeblood, the pace of member acquisition will slow and membership will slowly erode." (Net Gain: Expanding Markets through Virtual Communities, by John Hagel III and Arthur G. Armstrong)

The principle of "innovation focus" is concerned with 4 architectural layers as 4 domains of innovation, and with their cross-pollination. The measure of innovation value of each is in the value of new possibilities that they can open to the community.

For example, good design brings social and knowledge innovation into interplay with one another and with business and technical innovation. That interplay will lead to more consistently high returns than environments strong in only one or two dimensions of innovation.

Therefore, virtual learning environments should be optimised--with effective, real-time feedback loops--for synergy across the social, knowledge, business, and technical layers of the architecture."

More here ....