Connect the dots for effective change ...

"A new study has identified a sea of parking lots and vacant space in Long Island’s downtowns, land whose development could bring about the downtown renaissance many locals and politicians have been asking for.

The Long Island Index 2010, a nearly 40-page report by the Regional Plan Association released Thursday, identified 8,300 acres within a half mile of downtown centers as ripe for redevelopment, including more than 4,000 acres of parking lots."

Another potentially useful study in a sea of potentially useful studies divorced from one another.

Until and unless Long Island commits to a dynamic, flexible uniform method of data collection and analysis (common language project) it will be very difficult to reach a consensus on anything of sustainable value.

No one group has all the answers. We handicap ourselves by not working collaboratively and by not reaching out effectively to all Long Island residents.

There is still too much of the "protecting my own turf" mentality from organizations and entities of all types.

There is a basic lack of trust in the populous which can only be overcome by approaching the problem differently. "One Long Island" is a suggested method of doing so.

For true reform, we need merely look in the mirror.

"It is, of course, an unrealistic dream. Politics, image-making and sloganeering are easy. Governing - especially the nitty-gritty of state and local government - is hard. It has a way of tarnishing the veneer of idealism. And political idealism raises expectations that are almost impossible to fulfill, leading to disillusionment. Once the original idealism fades, as it did for Lindsay and Schundler and appears to have done for Suozzi, it is difficult to recapture.

The old Tammany Hall politician George Washington Plunkitt put it best over a hundred years ago: "A reformer can't last in politics. He can make a show for a while, but he always comes down like a rocket."

Of course a "single" reformer will ultimately fail if his or her reform is based upon personal charisma.

Where there is no structural reform, failure is almost always certain.

Where there is no participation by the governed, reform will almost always fail.

This is a story as old as recorded history, yet somehow we cling to the concept of being "saved" by an individual.

If someone wishes to show true reform, create a system where collaboration and the free exchange of ideas and methods is made dynamic and simple. "One Long Island" is an attempt at "creating" this type of system.

True reform will break the "cycle of stagnation" we currently find ourselves mired in, on Long Island and in the country in general. True reform will assist the public in creating a fair, just and efficient society in a way that no top down dictate can.

We are the "reformers."

For true reform, we need merely look in the mirror.

A suggestion ...

"State law currently does not allow counties to abolish governments. The new law allows a county executive and county legislature to create a master plan, subject to a referendum, that could merge or dissolve local governments."

"The most dysfunctional city on the planet is going to tell us how to streamline government?" Southampton Village Mayor Mark Epley said of the bill signed into law Thursday by Gov. David A. Paterson. "What drives the tax bill on Long Island is the cost of education. That's what the state should be focusing on."

A suggestion.

Nassau and Suffolk are already in the process of doing a master plan for Long Island through the Long Island Regional Planning Council. My understanding, through discussions with those involved in the process, is that it will be collaborative, comprehensive, thorough and perhaps even dynamic.

Do we really need another master plan for one particular purpose?

Can't we yet see that most things we do on Long Island are interrelated?

Can't we yet base our decisions on a rational, deliberative approach such as (but not exclusively obviously) we suggest in the "One Long Island" series of concepts?

The truth is that no one has the information we need in a format that is usable for the intended purposes on Long Island or in New York State.

Until we make that a priority, we will continually be subject to "chasing our own tail" stuck in a cycle of stagnation.

One Long Island creates an "open system" for collaborative development.

Current events ...

"The significance of the report, however, is debatable right now.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that a cap would help, regional consolidation would help, and taming the power of the unions would help. But even now, with the state in a fiscal crisis, Albany can't come to grips with cutting some money out of school aid -- and so great is the power of the status quo that reforms of the underlying causes haven't even been put on the table.

So, Suozzi ends up with a report that identifies the problem, but doesn't really identify a legislative strategy for achieving change against the opposition of NYSUT and the other special interests. And without a strategy, it's all just paper."

"Taking a page from The Great Depression’s playbook, Nassau County on Tuesday unveiled its “New Deal for Nassau,” a program designed to boost government efficiency by cutting down on delays caused by bureaucracy and red tape.

The program, which is in its preliminary, fact-finding stages, is a mission by Legislature Presiding Officer Diane Yatauro and Legis. David Mejias to make it easier for businesses to operate in the county, stimulate the economy and attract new companies, development and jobs."

The two most recent well intentioned acts only serve to point out the continuing difficulty we are having on Long Island coordinating our actions for the "greater good."

There are many fine ideas on Long Island, or in many cases programs and activities in various stages of completion. What is lacking is dynamic collaboration of the type we have been advocating.

Rather than start a "new" program or report, perhaps we should take stock of what we currently have and what has been issued before. Perhaps this information should be "converted" into a dynamic format we've been talking about and analyzed prior to starting a "new mission."

The problem with "new" programs which cover existing problems is that they very rarely take into account the work and information that is available. This is generally not the fault of the proposers of a new project since the information must be made available to them (and us) in the "meta" format we have also been promoting.

The danger with new programs which don't take into account the fine work that has come before it is that we then contribute to the "cycle of stagnation" by never moving beyond the "new, bright and shiny" phase where everyone is excited by the expectation of something new and better. This is the allure of "change." Everyone defines it in their own way because we have no "common language" to help us define what it is we are actually talking about so therefore we never truly make progress on solving our problems.

This is one of the issues the One Long Island series of ideas attempts to address.

Is it true?

One of the overriding benefits of the One Long Island series of projects is the gradual construction of a "self regulating" or "self policing" system of information vetting and analysis.

Sites such as this one are useful, but are still dependent on traditional means of gathering and analyzing information. These practices will continue to be useful, but will not be enough as information becomes (or has already become) more voluminous, more nuanced and available in more and different formats. The human brain needs assistance in analyzing information accurately and quickly.

One Long Island attempts to anticipate Web 3.0 technologies even while we work to get the Island up to Web 2.0 standards.

As we've previously stated, a major impediment to creating sound public policy (in its broadest definition) is the lack of flexible, dynamic systems and standards for gathering, vetting, analyzing and distributing information. This is obviously not just an issue for Long Island, but I believe we have the tools on Long Island to create a model for other regions around the world.

If you want the general public, elected officials and other organizations and leaders to "get on the same page" for the benefit of Long Island, we first must have a way to satisfy most reasonable people that the information they have is accurate and has been fairly analyzed in the most complete possible manner.

Because until we can do this, we will always be behind the curve in creating and implementing innovative public policy for Long Island.

Long Island School of Meta-Interdisciplinary Study: Lesson One

We've posted previously about the need to create an environment where we can all learn to think in a "cross disciplinary" manner.

Meta-interdisciplinary simply means you are exhausting all possible means of determining the correct public policy by leaving no one or no possible solution or idea out of the equation.

Here is a simple exercise.

Take 100 randomly selected "things" (concepts, ideas, existing programs, physical structures what have you) and put them on index cards. Next, select five cards. Create three possible connections (collaborative activities) between all of the five cards selected.

As you get more adept at the process increase 100 to 200, five to ten, three to five and so on until your brain starts to hurt. Now we're thinking "out of the box."

If you are a software savvy, there are "randomizer" programs out there that connect to databases to achieve the same results.

It doesn't matter that some or most of the ideas won't work. That isn't the purpose of the exercise.

The purpose of the exercise is to get us to think differently.

The purpose of the exercise is to break the "cycle of stagnation" we've talked about on a number of occasions.

More in Lesson Two.

LIA Breakfast ...

I attended the LIA breakfast this morning featuring the Nassau and Suffolk County Executives as I do most years. It is always a well run, well attended event and this morning was no different.

Both individuals are bright fellows, it seems, and their hearts are in the right place. But I came away more convinced than ever of the need for better communication and collaboration along the lines of the efforts we're engaged in with our One Long Island series of projects.

Without going into too much detail, there is a disconnect between all of the various projects, commissions, ideas, between organizations, between the various levels of government, between existing projects and proposed projects ...

Healthy competition is great, so long as we can shake hands after the competition and get things done. To the victor belongs the responsibility to reach out and collaborate, even with his or her oppponents. Long Island requires this type of magnanimity to move forward.

Whether its the new "tax cap" commission" leaving out school administrators (there may be good reasons for this) or Suffolk and Nassau talking about creating alternative energy centers when Stony Brook is already in the lead on that issue (again there may be valid reasons for this) or a whole host of issues which require the type of "dynamic collaboration" we've been promoting, again, there is just a "disconnect" which prevents us from acting as a region while the reasonable amount of autonomy and local control that residents seem to like and demand.

For all the talk about consolidation and streamlining and all the benefits it may bring, we don't seem to be able quite yet to consolidate or streamline our ability to organizate projects and ideas for the greater good.

The good news is that more folks are recognizing that we're in this together, regardless of affiliation of whatever type, and that we must find a way to "get things done." And as I stated many times previously, I'm always impressed by the sheer number of bright folks we have at our disposal her on Long Island.

We just need to break this "cycle of stagnation" which impacts on all Long Islanders.

I'll keep trying to do my small part.