Collaborative Consensus Building

Citizens Be On Your Guard

Springing up all over California are watershed groups, councils, and stakeholder groups whose intended purpose is to protect and restore the local environments, establish ecosystem management plans while at the same time supporting the overall economic base of communities. These groups are run by a politically correct process affectionately called "Consensus Building".

Just what is consensus building and is it a good thing for us? The consensus process claims to be a collaborative process that builds broad public support. But its founders really have set predetermined policies and agendas. Most people believe that the process only works on the principle that decisions are only made if everyone agrees. But it really only works when there is an absence of disagreement. In the consensus process there is a predetermined objective in mind and that objective can only be reached when all objections are eliminated. The program is advertised as open and welcomes anyone to participate. But if someone should voice objection or there is disagreement the trained facilitator or leader minimizes the participant by making the participant look foolish, uneducated, or unreasonable. Participants who disagree are quickly labeled as "troublemakers", "extremists", "narrow-minded" or "stupid". The hope is to exclude all objectors from the entire process.

Usually the groups form non-profits or loose run groups made up of preselected influential individuals within a community who share similar philosophical beliefs or objectives. They usually include industry leaders, landowners, and elected officials. These representatives are expected to support the objectives of the plan. In addition, the groups include a composite of state and federal bureaucrats, who all agree to the objective and are ready to implement the program(s). Partners with the process group include Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) such as Nature Conservancy who work hand in glove with the bureaucrats and often take leadership roles in the process.

So what is wrong with this process? The "collaborative consensus" process is "designed to take the public policy-making function away from elected officials and place it in the hands of professional bureaucrats, while giving the appearance of broad public input into the decision making process." The Consensus Process: Developing an appropriate response, Eco-logic, May/June 1997. Usually the plan includes more that one political jurisdiction such as several counties or sometimes even states. While the process supports the ideas of broad community input, the real purpose is to inform members and the general public regarding the benefits of such programs and why they should be supported.

Often times these groups claim to offer the local community a "voice" in the process, input, and protection against regulations or the influence of agencies, however, the fact is they have no authority to do so. The only true voice citizens have is thought their duly elected officials. It is our elected representatives who should be responsible and accountable for all public policy. It is not only the duty of citizens and patriots to demand local control but also to participate in local government. It is only through this local participation that we will promote and maintain individual freedoms and protect private property rights.

Thanks to Eco-Logic for their continued study of the consensus process.