Attachment A: Civic Governance Basin Team Training
Outcomes from March 26th, 2014-4thTraining
Civic Governance Identity Statement- Civic Governance is a new approach to policy making (governance) that
produces the civic infrastructure needed to govern for the common good and sustain democracy as a just system of
governance while achieving particular water quality goals.
The Purpose for Training. Members will be introduced to the Civic Governance Policy Document as it would be
applied to water governance. This document summarizes a civic organizing approach. Members will determine its
relevance to their role.
Reminder: In 6 sessions we will introduce the civic organizing disciplines listed in your copy of the Civic
Governance Policy Document. We will do so through practice and outcomes will be tracked through this
document.
Civic Standards guide all decision-making Reminder: These civic standards guide our practice during the training
but also in all actions taken in the name of Civic Governance. (See Civic Governance Policy Document)




All those impacted by the problem are stakeholders and help define the problem in light of civic principles and the realities of
their situation.
All stakeholders are accountable for contributing resources (leadership/time, knowledge, constituencies & dollars) to solve
the problem.
All stakeholders are engaged in decision-making and policy-making that contributes to the common good.
All stakeholders implement policies (agreements) grounded in civic principles in the places where they have the authority to
act
Participants Present: Chris Gaetzke, Amanda Hanson, Kyle Kulow, Sam Martin, Ron Verdon, John Haack,
Dan Zerr, Buzz Sorge, Danette Olson, Dan Prestebak, Rodd Webb Eric Wojchik, Lynne Kolze, Peg Michels.
Those not able to participate: Tim Ritten, Julia Olmstead
Reminder: Meeting evaluation is based upon approved purpose for the meeting and civic organizing measures
that integrate both the specific goals and outcomes each initiative and meeting needs to achieve but requires
leaders to use the civic organizing disciplines we have been introducing to organize their key stakeholders to
achieve them. Civic organizing disciplines and skills support leaders to meet civic principles and standards.
Civic Organizing Measures:
 Meet the specific purpose/goals
 Use civic organizing disciplines to organize key stakeholders to achieve the specific purpose and relate
the experience to the civic governance standards.
 Timeliness. Meet specific deadlines and give lead time to organize key stakeholders.
Reminder: Proposed March 26th Meeting Agenda





Final approval of the Feb Outcomes Document.
Individual Check-in:.
Evaluate to ensure we meet purpose for training given expectations.
Continue to introduce the civic organizing discipline of Power Analysis as the basis for introducing the civic organizing
discipline Work Plan.
Determine next steps and do meeting evaluation.
1
We did not follow the exact agenda based upon the need to address the funding opportunity to move
forward as a civic organizing agency. Revised Agenda for March 26:
 Final approval of Feb Outcomes Document.
 Determine who will move forward to form a Wisconsin based Civic Governance Civic Organizing
Agency. Addressed the issues: What is a civic organizing agency? What are the obligations of
membership? What is the budget? Answers to these questions are all part of doing a civic organizing
power analysis but we decided to not have a specific agenda item time for consciously producing that
document.
 Organized small group meetings related to specific jurisdictions in which members would test the
Civic Governance Policy Document:
o Red Cedar- Chris Gaetzke, Dan Prestebak , Buzz S, Ron Verdon, Dan Zerr
o Farmer Led- Amanda Hanson, Kyle Kulow, Rodd Webb, Eric Wojchik
o Individual applications-John Haack, Sam Martin, Danette Olson
I.
Meeting Evaluation. 4.4 out of a possible rating of 5.0.
What worked?



Restructuring the meeting to address key governing questions made the meeting authentic. Outcome was that
members agreed to move forward to explore being a “civic organizing agency” having been introduced to
roles, expectations. (See III) This decision provided a concrete focus for meeting in work groups.
Learning from practice in work groups.
Know what to do between now and April 30. (See II)
Gap? Had a shaky start and didn’t get to all of the agenda items-i.e power analysis.
Steps to address the gaps:

II.
We were actually producing important information for doing a power analysis when we restructured to
do a large group meeting around the questions What is a civic organizing agency? What are the obligations of
membership? What is the budget? Where will the dollars come from? Who plans to move forward? What will
our work plan be? Next Steps. These are key questions for any strategic planning process. (See II for specifics
on pre-work for April 30th)
Pre-work for April 30, 2014 Meeting 6.

All Members would continue to:
o Identify over-all purpose and achievable 1 yr. goals/objectives for the jurisdictions in which they are
proposing to test Civic Governance. (See above working groups)
o Identify key stakeholder groups needed to achieve goals and establish a list of individuals to recruit as
governing members. Begin doing 1-1’s to recruit governing members. In the process review goals,
get feedback, and make the case for the need for a structure and method for governance.
o Begin to get agreement on specific s for a structure and method for governance. This would include:
 A regularly scheduled meeting of primary stakeholders who would take on governing
responsibility for achieving the specific goals in light of the initiatives larger purpose.
 Agreement that civic standards will guide roles and the governing process.
 Meeting Agenda will be structured to establish check-in on progress towards meeting goals,
accountability, transparency, and support for members.
o Review all documents sent and ensure they are in agreement. If not they will contact John H.

Peg M will:
2
o
o
o
III.
Draft the March Outcomes Document. (This document)
Integrate the specific agreements reached at the March 26th meeting into a document that will be
entitled Power Analysis Worksheet number #2. It will be sent with the proposed April 30th Agenda
one week before the April 30th Meeting. Members will be asked to review the document to see how
the agreements we reached March 26th are integrated. Do not spend too much time on this draft. We
will finalize the draft of the power analysis at the April 30th Meeting.
The agreements will set up the basis for a civic organizing work plan that will apply to our civic
organizing agency.

John H will review documents, make sure they make sense and send them out.

Buzz S and Lynne K will move forward to do a funding proposal.

All of this information will be used to advance a civic organizing approach to strategic
planning at the April 30th Meeting.
A. Specific Outcomes-Large Group Meeting-called the question of who intends to move forward as
members of a Wisconsin Civic Governance Organizing Agency. Process addressed the following
questions.
Question 1. What distinguishes civic organizing from other approaches to achieving water quality?

Civic organizing builds upon what is working in all approaches and adds the need to restructure
governance to get the ownership needed by the broad base of stakeholders impacting the issue.
Why governance?
If existing structures and methods for governance in a jurisdiction do not produce hoped for public
expectations (water quality goals) those methods need to be addressed before any application of new
resources (time, technical expertise, people, dollars) are used to “solve the problem”. If the governing
process is not addressed, any such application will sustain and embed unproductive practice.
(dysfunction).

A civic organizing approach is an on-going process that is advanced in 4 stages succeeding into the next
generation. The outcome is a permanent, intergenerational, “civic infrastructure” whose members have
the mindset and resources needed to address complex public issues and sustain democracy as a just
system of governance in each generation.
Each stage takes about 5 years. Stage 1 starts with a 3 year pilot phase which gives a leader time to
determine (get evidence) the value of civic organizing to their institution/role.
Question 2 What is the structure for advancing civic organizing in each stage, method for governance, and
what are member expectations?

Structure-A civic organizing agency. Particular civic organizing agencies for a base or civic
infrastructure. I.e Civic Governance has 2 existing civic organizing agencies-MN St. Croix Civic
Governance Organizing Agency, Como Neighborhood Civic Governance Organizing Agency. A
Wisconsin civic organizing agency will expand that base. Members use the same disciplines for
governance so that they can work together across sectors to make a case for Civic Governance as it relates
to achieving water quality.
3

The only purpose for a civic organizing agency is to support members to organize the civic capacity
and a civic infrastructure within their jurisdiction while achieving particular goals. (Please note the
purpose statement on the Civic Governance Policy Document) The document is the primary policy
(governing) document for the structure.

Members of a civic organizing agency are leaders within their institutional settings. Please note that in a
civic organizing approach a community is considered to be made up of institutions-households, schools,
congregations, businesses and non-profits, governments. Each member takes responsibility to advance
civic organizing in their role, in their institution stage by stage. Particular members may drop out at any
time, however, the civic organizing agency is sustained as long as there are members who are making
progress towards achieving criteria for each stage.
A civic organizing agency has:

A stated jurisdiction. A jurisdiction can be:
o An individual’s role in an institution (I.e. Buzz Sorge, John H. ,Lynne Kolze).
o A key structure within an institution, (I.e. a department, program)
o The whole institution (Kowalski Markets, Citizens League, Islamic Civic Society of
America)
o An initiative made up of a number of institutional partnerships, including households,
congregations, non-profits, businesses, educational and government organizations. (I.e.
Farmer Led Project, Red Cedar, Civic Governance or the Minnesota Active Citizenship
Initiative)
Jurisdictions expand as individuals successfully organize their key stakeholders to
intentionally advance a civic organizing approach in their jurisdiction.
In year 1 of a civic organizing pilot, members of a civic organizing agency focus on learning civic
organizing disciplines as they apply to practice within the civic organizing agency. They adapt
what they are learning within the specific jurisdictions in which they are testing civic organizing.
Year 2-3, members expand the civic organizing agency depending upon their particular situation.
This practice provides the evidence to make a case for Civic Governance and outcomes determine
who will move forward to complete the criteria for Stage 1.

An established time and place for governance. This is the meeting time for the civic organizing
agency. We agreed if we moved forward we would reserve the 4th Weds of each month as the time for
us to meet and St. Croix Falls as the place for our meeting. Meeting will continue to be 4.0 hours.
Members will put in additional time for pre-work for the meeting. Important: In order to ensure that
members can test the value of restructuring time to learn how to do civic organizing, they need to
apply this learning to the work they are expected to do within their current work load. They will be
applying what they are learning to organizing themselves and the key stakeholders to achieve goals.

Roleo
o

Peg Michels and Lynne Kolze will be the Civic Governance Pilot “lead organizers”. Lead
organizers have the primary obligation to sustain the integrity of a civic organizing approach.
In this case we will be supporting members to learn how civic organizing would integrate into
current work. Members will be introduced to the criteria for practice through the pilot
process and would meet that criteria in 3 years.
Buzz Sorge and John Haack will be the Wisconsin contacts for Lynne and Peg M and
continue to play the role they have done during the training.
Resources needed to achieve work plan goals:
o
Primary resource is time of leaders to integrate a civic organizing approach into role.
4
o
o
o
Knowledge of civic organizing is owned by members of the civic organizing agency.
Primary educational track is membership in a civic organizing agency and 1-1 public
meetings. Members sustain and develop the educational tracks they need to support their
organizing in each stage of civic organizing.
Constituencies are key stakeholders needed to achieve goals. A civic organizing approach
produces a common language and approach to governance to ensure particular outcomes
contribute to achieving the scale of impact needed to address the issue of water quality
Budget supports the civic organizing agency and members to do organizing.
Question 3. What is a civic organizing work plan and how would it relate to current work plans and current
work load?
Members of the civic organizing agency co-author a yearly Work Plan for the civic organizing agency based upon
agreements from the power analysis and the stages and strategies of the Civic Organizing Framework and criteria for civic
organizing disciplines:
 We are in the pilot phase of Stage 1. Our overarching goal is to establish a Wisconsin based Civic
Governance Organizing Agency.
 Our work plan will be formed around the following organizing strategies and we will use a template
that has already been established.
o Create a climate for civic organizing-Strategies that make a case for the need for Civic
Governance are needed before Civic Governance can be implemented. But the case is made
through practice and then relating the practice to Civic Governance.
o
Restructure existing approaches to problem-solving and policy making through the use of
civic organizing disciplines. Existing goals and particular outcomes you plan to achieve in
the jurisdictions you are testing civic organizing will be integrated in this section of the work
plan.
o
Organize a base of Influence. Members identify the key stakeholders they need to achieve
particular goals and commit to using civic organizing disciplines in the process of achieving
goals. These names will be integrated into this section of the work plan.
o

Ensuring Sustainability. Members do a mid and endpoint evaluation of work plans. If they
achieve their particular work plan objectives, they will sustain progress towards achieving
each stage of civic organizing.
This work plan will be our primary work plan in the 1st year of the pilot. We will take a year to learn
how a civic organizing work plans works. Members will adapt strategies to existing or start up work
plans.
A. Small Groups met in “jurisdictions” in which they plan to apply civic organizing disciplines. Outcome:

Agreement on the need for members of any initiative to produce and own a conscious “governing
infrastructure” to support achieving goals.

Civic Governance provides a way to achieve that end.

Agreement on next steps and pre-work for April 30th. (See II)
5