Before the tools existed to support the dream of a digital community, many of us of a certain age grew up listening to the radio call from an NBC TV program, which ran from 1968 to 1975, called Adam-12. The program concentrated on Los Angeles police officers Reed and Malloy, who encountered people involved in both humorous and serious incidents. Adam-12 introduced Americans to police work in an age when state-of-the-art policing meant a fast response to radio calls in a "black-and-white," supported by technological and communications advances like the 1968 introduction of a 911 number for reporting emergencies. The high-tech, radio-equipped patrol car let officers respond to service calls received by the police switchboard. It took officers off the sidewalk and put them on the street, racing from incident to incident.
But public safety officials have already moved on to a better model. They learned that rapid reaction is important, but insufficient. Now the broader, more critical question for law enforcement is how best to identify and deliver high-quality services to the community. To get beyond the shortcomings of the rapid response system, community policing programs gathered momentum among progressive police executives and academics in the early 1980s.
The lessons learned through community policing laid a foundation that local governments can build upon, and the time has come for forward-thinking communities to use those lessons to create community-governing programs.
Advances in IT and communications systems allow digital communities to change how they engage their residents and how they identify and respond to service delivery opportunities.
Successful government and community leaders recognize that public safety isn't just police responsibility, just as a healthy and successful community isn't just the responsibility of elected or appointed officials. A healthy and successful community requires participation from local governments, civic and business leaders, public and private agencies, residents, religious institutions, schools, and hospitals. In short, local government and the community partner in community governing, working together to address community needs.
But successful partnership requires open communication and information sharing among all partners. It requires public officials to leave City Hall and "walk the beat." But without the proper tools, the demands of collaboration and information sharing can become unmanageable. IT tools can either add to the problem or help solve it.
Although technology maximizes efficiency, it sometimes isolates government from constituents. It's hard for the average resident to participate in community governing since letters and notices are generated and signed by a machine, and picking up the phone lands you in "voicemail jail." A digital community is one that benefits from the operational efficiencies of technology and ensures technological innovations are integrated into community governing activities in a way that fosters meaningful communication and cooperation, and aids in problem solving.
Engaging the entire community in the governing
process requires many communities to change their governing philosophies and practices. To be successful, they must move, just as many police agencies did, from a militaristic command and control top-down model to one of greater participatory management. This has implications for elected officials, executive administrators, public employees, community leaders and residents. It requires power sharing and mutual accountability, but in exchange fosters camaraderie.
Elected representatives can benefit greatly from participating in a system that positions them to draw on the insight and support of community coalitions. This community governance will work with whole communities; increase grassroots and civic engagement; promote diversity, collaboration and advocacy; increase the opportunity for professional staff to engage and support policy-makers and improve a community's overall health and competitiveness.
While such partnerships make sense to many, they won't occur without government leaders' purposeful commitment, courage and willingness to institute a new order. The very purpose of the Digital Communities Web site and associated programs is to help communities embrace change and technology to reinvent themselves as successful 21st-century communities. Just as communities found it necessary to fundamentally change their view of law enforcement and adopt community policing practices 25 years ago, communities are realizing that an "elect 'em and forget 'em" strategy perpetuates a paternalistic, top-down governance structure that isn't in sync with today's realities.
David L. Carter of the Michigan State University School of Criminal Justice, in an article titled Community Policing and Politics, identified some political axioms to help law enforcement officials explain community policing and gain political and community support for change. By simply replacing a few specific references to policing, they can easily apply to the broader implementation of community governing.
* New issues or controversies tend to generate emotional rather than logical responses. Community governing may generate initial opposition because it challenges traditional public-service views at many levels.
* A superficial understanding of new programs and initiatives often takes precedence over in-depth knowledge in the political arena. Politicians who may only vaguely understand the community governing concept will jump on the bandwagon without recognizing its complexity or the depth of change it requires.
* Ideas requiring substantive explanation and thoughtful consideration are difficult to "sell." Society is accustomed to receiving information in simple sound bites. Ways must be found to describe community governing without losing the concept's subtlety.
* A new concept or initiative needs an easily identifiable "hook" or gimmick to gain a political foothold. Readily understood symbols or icons can increase public recognition and support. Focusing on a small part of the community governing effort -- disaster recovery or electronic government service delivery -- may enhance political backing for the larger project.
* To gain maximum support, new initiatives should be tied to current and high-profile public needs. Officials may "package" new programs as responding to particular high-priority issues, rather than focusing on the broader implications, as a way to generate support.
* Sharing credit, even if unwarranted, can build political support. Key policymakers can be credited with leadership roles to solidify sponsorship.
* Evidence of progress or success must be provided in the short term to maintain political commitment. The political maxim to consider here is, "No demonstrable success, no demonstrable support."
* There's a direct relationship between public concern and political maneuvering. Public backing for institutional responses to problems is notoriously fickle and must not be taken for granted because it ultimately governs political action.
Change is always difficult, but more so when it must be done in public and it must consider diverse needs and desires from citizens, elected officials and public employees. Someone must have the vision and courage to step forward. But challenging the "as-is" is only the first step. There must also be a basic plan that can become a shared vision of the preferred future. By encouraging broad participation, advocates for change can move the
basic plan to specifics while encouraging a sense of investment and responsibility.
Early community policing advocates also learned change must be grounded in logical, defensible criteria. Change for change's sake will not do. It must answer a problem to get the political support, resources and time it needs to succeed.
The real problem many communities now wrestle with is how to ensure their communities enjoy a successful and prosperous future. That requires initiatives that involve building out community-oriented wireless infrastructure or investing public money in applications and services to improve the efficiency of the government work force, as well as encourage digital inclusion and economic development. A digital community should provide a vision for the reinvention of our communities. Community governing captures that vision.
