The document presents techniques and lessons in community engagement from Saint Paul, Minnesota, emphasizing the importance of a meticulous method, managing the message, and ensuring meetings are constructive rather than chaotic. It outlines psychological principles that can be leveraged in public processes and provides case studies on bikeway projects, highlighting successful and ineffective engagement strategies. The key takeaways stress that to effectively engage the community, one should communicate clearly, establish ground rules, and focus on fostering civil discourse.

1. Techniques and lessons
in community
engagement from
Saint Paul, Minnesota
presented by
Emily P.G. Erickson
Shrink My
Problems:
How psychology
can help save your
public process

2. Saint Paul, Minnesota

3. Sustainable
Transporta0on
Planner
est.
January
2011
• Facilita(ng
a
balanced
and
flexible
transporta(on
system
in
Saint
Paul.
– Coordina(on
– Planning
– Implementa(on

4. Psychology
• Academic and applied discipline that
involves the scientific study of mental
functions and behaviors
• Goal of understanding individuals and
groups
• Psychotherapy: “A planned, emotionally
charged, confiding interaction between a
trained, socially sanctioned healer and a
sufferer.”

5. Psycho-logy?

6. Freud says…
1. Meticulous method
2. Manage your message
3. Meeting not a mob

7. The fine print
• Caveats
– Not going to be able to
please all of the people
(generally best can
expect is 85%)
– Politics remain
• Benefits
– Support
– Insight

8. Meticulous method
Lay out what you’re going to do, do it to the best of your ability, and show people
you did it.
• Psychology at play
– Procedural justice (Thibaut & Walker,
1975)
– Social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner)
• How to use it to your advantage
– Clarify rights and responsibilities
– Demonstrate freedom from bias,
consistency, good-faith effort
• Project timeline/next steps
• Up-to-date multiple channels of
information
• Early and easy-to-understand
notification
• Document and share

9. Manage your message
What we say (and don’t say) and how we say it has a very real impact on how people
will react.
• Psychology at play
– Linguistic determinism hypothesis:
different languages impose different
conceptions of reality (Whorf, 1956)
– Presenting issues in different ways
elicits different responses (Marteau,
1989; McNeil & others, 1988; Rothman
& Salovey, 1997)
– “Telling more than we can
know,” (Nisbett and Wilson, 1977)
• How to use it to your advantage
– Frame your message
– Control the message
• Say the thing you’re most afraid they
will first

10. Meeting not a mob
In-person community engagement experiences should improve buy-in and add
insight, not be a platform for venting.
• Psychology at play
– Individuals
• Theories of self: Belief = self, change of belief =
annihilation of self
• Confirmation bias (Wason, 1960)
• Venting can add fuel to an anger cycle
– Group pressure and conformity (Asch, 1955)
• Fundamental attribution error: Overestimating the
influence of personality and underestimating the
influence of situations (Heider, 1958)
• Mood contagion (Neumann & Strack, 2000)
• Group polarization: If group is like minded, discussion
strengthens its prevailing opinions (Bishop, 2004)
• Compliance with social pressure dominant behavior
(Milgram, 1963, 1974)
• Normative social influence: We are sensitive to social
norms – understood rules for accepted and expected
behavior
• Seeing another person’s eyes fosters empathy and
communication (Lapidot-Lefler, 2012)
• Foot-in-the-door phenomenon (Cialdini, 1993)
• How to use it to your advantage
– Select and arrange the space carefully
– Ground rules
– Get early buy-in on something
– Establish caring and empathy

11. Saint Paul Case Studies

12. Jefferson Avenue Bikeway: Take 1
• February 2008: City applied
for FHWA Non-motorized
Transportation Pilot Project
funding for complimentary bike
boulevards on Highland
Parkway and Jefferson
Avenue. Only Highland
Parkway was awarded funding
at the time. The District
Council voted to discontinue
this project.
• March 2009: City reapplied for
funding for a project located
entirely on Jefferson, which
would establish a 4-mile east-
west connection on this
residential street

13. Jefferson Avenue Bikeway: Take 1
(What not to do)
• Message
– Instructed not to come across as
supportive
– Left a lot of information unsaid
• Method
– No clear community engagement
plan communicated to public
– 13 public meetings with unclear
ownership
– Poor website (e.g., no contact
person, no handouts, etc.)
• Mobs
– Over a dozen public meetings
– No ground rules
– Auditorium style seating
– Yelling, etc. permitted

14. Jefferson Avenue Bikeway: Take 1
Outcome

15. Jefferson Avenue Bikeway: Take 2
(Intervention)

16. Jefferson Avenue Bikeway: Take 2
Meticulous methods
• Laid out the project
timeline, and stuck to it or
gave plenty of notice for a
change
• Established ground rules,
“We’ve got a lot to cover
in our limited time tonight,
so In the interest of
efficiency, I ask that you
keep your questions and
comments until the
appropriate time. I
appreciate your patience.”
• Told public how input
would be used, and
proved it

17. Jefferson Avenue Bikeway: Take 2
Manage your message
• Traffic calming toolbox: Shared
benefits and drawbacks of each
potential treatment and project
cost, to provide similar context
for each
• Included slides on what wasn’t
in traffic calming toolbox (e.g.,
stop light, stop sign, etc.)
• Framing public comments with
analysis cover sheet, e.g., “Two
sided parking: 10 different
people concerned (11% of
those who provided feedback)”

18. Jefferson Avenue Bikeway: Take 2
Meeting not a mob
– Ground rules
– Used active listening in
responding to
comments (e.g., “I
understand that you are
worried about snow
removal, and we were
too, so…”)
– Selected and arranged
the space as best we
could to promote civil
behavior
– Demonstrated honesty
and trustworthiness
through information
shared

19. Jefferson Avenue Bikeway: Take 2
Outcome
• 82% approval rating
on most controversial
design element
• City Council approval
of community
supported plan
• Added bonus:
Councilmember who
tweaked plan at last
minute was called out
by those who testified
for undermining public
process
www.stpaul.gov/jefferson

20. Griggs Street Bikeway
• Transportation Plan
– T3.8 “Promote ‘bicycle boulevards’ as a new type of bikeway.”
• Bike Walk Central Corridor Action Plan
– Griggs Street Proposed regional bikeway
– Priority: Provide combination of bike lanes and bike boulevard treatments from Summit
Avenue to Minnehaha Avenue
• Funding through FHWA’s Non-motorized Transportation Pilot Project

21. Griggs Street Bikeway
Meticulous method

22. Griggs Street Bikeway
Manage your message

23. Griggs Street Bikeway
Meeting not a mob

24. Griggs Street Bikeway
Outcome
• Of the traffic calming
treatments that we proposed,
we received an average of 91%
of the surveyed population
being in favor of or open to the
treatments
• Of the free response,
approximately 85% was
positive and supportive of the
bikeway and the treatments
staff ultimately recommended.
• Last minute community
opposition; staff was prepared
with evidence to undermine
significance of opposition
• City Council approved project
with tweak
www.stpaul.gov/griggs

25. The least you need to know…
1. Manage your
message.
2. Meticulous method.
3. Meeting not a mob.
Emily P.G. Erickson
Sustainable Transportation Planner
City of Saint Paul
emily.erickson@ci.stpaul.mn.us