ARTICLES

MOBILIZING SUPPORTERS FOR A PUBLIC HEARING
Breaking the Development Logjam (ULI) – January 2006

by Debra Stein

How do you get citizens to actually attend a hearing, stand up at the microphone, and tell politicians, “I support this development proposal and want you to approve it right now”? Mobilizing supporters involves six distinct steps:

Target Supporters: Developers often spend too much time trying to convert die-hard opponents into flag-waving supporters. When hearing time rolls around there may be plenty of people eager to testify against the project but few people willing to say, “I support this proposal!” At some point, the practical sponsor must look beyond citizen resistance and focus on motivating and mobilizing people who will benefit from new development.
Create Favorable Attitudes: Developers can use a variety of persuasive techniques to create favorable attitudes about their proposals. Rational persuasion presumes that listeners have the time, interest, and ability to evaluate the facts and logical arguments about why a land use plan is good for the community. Project opponents often use emotional persuasion such as appeals to fear (“Our kids will get killed crossing the street”), threats (“We’ll sue!”), and appeals to pity (“How could you do this to us?”). Peripheral persuasion recognizes that the external context of your communication may be more important than its internal content. For example, neighbors engaged in peripheral evaluation might simply decide that, since it seems that “everyone” hates a proposed shopping center, it must be a bad idea. Sophisticated advocacy campaigns utilize rational, emotional, and peripheral messages to shift attitudes and create pro-project beliefs—for example, by showing how many school children in the new development will be able to walk to their local school on streets designed for pedestrians, or by demonstrating the variety of day-to-day service needs that will be incorporated in or near the proposed project.
Get an Initial Commitment: It is tempting to immediately ask a potential supporter to testify in favor of your project, but citizens are much more likely to agree to a big request for support if you can get them to first comply with a smaller request. A sociologic study conducted in the mid-1960’s offers a stunning example of this “foot-in-the-door” technique. Sociologists went door to door asking homeowners to comply with a seemingly trivial request: to place a three-inch-by-three-inch card in the front window reading, “Be a Safe Driver.” Two weeks later, researchers went back to those houses asking permission to install an enormous and hideous billboard in the front yard reading “Drive Carefully.” Just 17 percent of those who had refused to post the tiny cards in their windows agreed to the larger billboard request. Of those who had innocently made the initial commitment by posting the card, however, a whopping 76 percent agreed to allow the billboards to be installed in their front yards. While petitions and endorsement cards can certainly persuade decision makers at city hall, their primary value is to help you get an initial, public commitment of support that can be used as a starting point for later, larger requests for assistance.
Ask for What you Want: While you used the “food-in-the-door” approach to get the initial commitment, you use the “door-in-the-face” strategy when it comes to actually turn out the troops for your approval hearing. With the DITF approach, you basically aim high and then settle for less if you have to. Open with a big request that you are prepared to have rejected (“Will you attend the hearing on Thursday evening and tell the council you support the expansion of the office park?”). If this large request is accepted, congratulations. If it’s refused, then retreat to the smaller request you’ve had in your back pocket from the beginning (“If you can’t attend the hearing, can you telephone the mayor and urge her to vote “yes” on the expansion?”). Starting with a high demand and then retreating to a smaller, more reasonable request will usually produce higher turnout than staking out an extreme position and refusing to back down gracefully.
Get a Decision to Act: It isn’t enough to ask for what you want; you also have to give your supporter the emotional support he needs to turn pro-project attitudes into a decision to take pro-project action. What “hot buttons” do you need to hit to get your supporter to decide that he will, in fact, attend the hearing?

Goal Reinforcement: A citizen will agree to come to a hearing only when the ultimate outcome is desirable enough to make it worth the effort. Urging supporters to engage in personalized outcome visualization (“Picture yourself walking through the new town center”) makes the benefits of your project more immediate and can inspire supporters to take action to make that vision a reality.

Consistency: Reminding your supporter that she already took an earlier pro- project position increases the likelihood that she’ll sustain that position and agree to your request for more help: “We’re asking people like you who signed our petition to …,” or “You’ve been a longtime activist on affordable housing issues…”

Easy Action: Supporters will be reluctant to undertake pro-project action that seems too troublesome, too time consuming, or too complex. You can make a daunting task such as “testifying at the Planning Commission hearing” seem more manageable by breaking it into smaller steps: driving to the county offices, parking the car, entering the hearing room, coming up to the microphone, and so on. Similarly, providing draft testimony or talking points to your supporters can be very helpful for people who are willing to speak up in favor of your project but can’t figure out what to say. Just be certain that not all supporters will use the same talking points.

Peer Approval: A supporter will agree to help you only where he thinks he will gain some kind of social reward for doing so, or at least avoid being condemned by “everyone else.” It is therefore crucial that supporters know that other people also like your project. In a classic series of studies about peer pressure, researchers found that participants were almost seven times more likely to take a minority position when they thought they had company than when they believed they would be the sole dissenter. The bottom line: make certain supporters know that other people share their enthusiasm for the project.
Encourage Actual Performance: It is much easier to promise to attend a hearing than it is to actually follow through on that pledge, and many developers end up waiting at City Hall for supporters who never show up. There are several ways you can increase the likelihood that an ally will actually perform as promised:

Process Simulation: A major reason why supporters don’t do what they promise to do is that they don’t make plans until the last minute. You can increase turnout by getting your supporters to consider the mechanics of performing the promised action in advance: “You’ll probably have to leave work a little early in order to get to City Hall by 6:00 p.m. Once you get into the City Council Chambers, you just walk up to the clerk at the front of the room and sign up to speak in favor of the project.” By mentally rehearsing the promised even, the supporter can anticipate potential obstacles and distractions and be ready to deal with them when they arise.

Put It In Writing: Once you’ve gotten a supporter’s promise to attend the hearing, put it in writing. Send a follow-up E-mail or letter confirming that your supporter is coming, reiterating the time and date of the hearing, and providing draft testimony or key messages. Putting your supporter’s promise in black and white will make it much more likely that your ally will perform as promised.

Getting supporters to show up and testify on behalf of your project can be the most difficult and the most important part of a community involvement campaign. Numbers count. With a strategic approach and careful appreciation for some fundamental psychological principles, you can get the vocal citizen support you need at your next hearing.

Debra Stein is the president of the San Francisco-based public affairs firm, GCA Strategies. She is the author of several books on NIMBYism and her firm specializes in controversial land use projects across the nation. For more information, e-mail Stein, call her at 415-391-4100 or visit the GCA Strategies Web site at www.gcastrategies.com.