Someone’s in the Kitchen with Democracy

I know I haven’t commented on lately on items from Alameda Daily News lately, but news that “Kitchen Democracy” (KD)  will be gracing Alameda’s shores is a compelling topic.   Haven’t heard of KD?  Well, let them tell you about themselves, from ADN:

Alameda Point Forum on Kitchen Democracy Web Site

Following are highlights from a press release from KitchenDemocracy.org :

The politically neutral web site forum, KitchenDemocracy.org, has announced its expansion into Alameda with a forum on the question: “Should development plans for Alameda Point be decided exclusively by Alameda residents and politicians?”. Residents and elected officials are invited to learn about and provide feedback on this controversial issue by going to http://www.KitchenDemocracy.Org/85 .

Robert Vogel, CEO and co-founder of Kitchen Democracy stated, “Alameda is an ideal town for Kitchen Democracy because while the community has a diverse population of insightful residents, unfortunately many of these residents aren’t able to attend city hall meetings to learn about issues and express their opinions”. Robert emphasized that, “Kitchen Democracy is intended to augment (not replace) the traditional ways that residents and elected officials interact, and that’s how Kitchen Democracy increases and diversifies civic engagement. Over the past 18 months, residents and elected officials in Oakland, Berkeley and Kensington have been using Kitchen Democracy as one of many ways to openly discuss issues concerning their communities”. Robert also stressed that his organization is politically neutral, doesn’t take a position on any issues, and strives to maintain a civil forum.

In response to Kitchen Democracy’s announcement, Kate Quick, the president of the League of Women Voters of Alameda, stated, “We can’t endorse any content, but your statement of the aims of your Kitchen Democracy Project to forward the cause of non-partisan civil discourse and discussion are certainly in keeping with the principles of the League of Women Voters. It is a welcome addition to outlets for people to contribute to the dialogue and get in touch with other’s thoughts.”

David Howard, Co-Chair of Action Alameda said: “The tenor of debate on important topics in Alameda has been lowered by forums in which participants are subject to anonymous mudslinging and insults. I know there are many people in Alameda who refrain from participating in discussions on important issues, such as the decision process for Alameda Point, for fear of being unfairly labeled with some epithet. I believe the use of KitchenDemocracy.org in Alameda can reverse this problem.”

Development at Alameda Point is a huge issue for the town, and its potential impact on the region makes the decision process for this development especially controversial. To read what others think about this issue and state your position in a civil forum, go to http://www.KitchenDemocracy.Org/85 .

Kitchen Democracy is a 501c(3) non-profit corporation whose mission is to strengthen democratic communities and thereby improve their quality of life. The organization is politically neutral, and takes no position on issues. To learn more about this organization, establish a Kitchen Democracy community, or launch an issue on the web site, go to http://www.KitchenDemocracy.Org .

Sounds good, no?  I always appreciate more public participation than less and the internet is certainly the perfect medium for busy folks who cannot make it out to meetings.  So I went to the KD website to check out what the Alameda portion of the site and there is only one ”Issue” for Alameda, as mentioned above, but here is it again:

Should development plans for Alameda Point be decided exclusively by Alameda residents and politicians?

Really?   That’s an “issue”?  Also, I have to say that as of 6:30 am this morning there are 5 “statements”, statements, as I understand it are a way for people to vote yea or nay or neutral and then write a comment about why they voted that way.  Like a comment.  Only with a radio button.  But as of 6:30 am of the 5 statements, only two are from “registered Alameda voters.”  Of course everything on KD is on the honor system, so you could say you are from Alameda, but not really be from Alameda.  Also, the 3 out of 5 not from Alameda comments sort of defeats the question before it really gets off the ground, if there was any ground for it to get off of to start with.

I have to say I really enjoy the comment from Action Alameda that posits that somehow KD will reverse the trend of “anonymous mudslinging and insults” on the other forums.  (Et tu ADN?)  Interestingly enough, KD doesn’t require you to be “someone” either, from an article in the East Bay Express about KD:

…At least one user, Karen MacLeod, publicly fretted that anonymous outsiders might have inflated the apparent support for the Wright’s Garage proposal. “It is absolutely impossible that 98 people living close to this project are in favor of it,” she wrote amid the debate. “No adequate parking — come on! I have experienced this before with Kitchen Democracy. People can vote more than once and so can the people trying to ruin our neighborhood, even if they do not live in our city! I could live in San Jose and vote. Using this information is an irresponsible way of representing your constituents. And it is happening too often.” …

So even though anonymous comments are technically allowed, it tells me that there is a strong hand that will be “moderating” statements, but who it is and how they do it not known.   Where does the line get drawn between moderating statements that are considered ”mudslinging” and a statement that the moderator simply does not agree with politically?  

But if people find it useful, I say, good luck to KD in Alameda.   I just don’t know if that particular ”issue” is going to have much traction with Alameda residents, but hey that’s just one opinion from the peanut gallery.

More from the EBX on KD, taken with a grain of salt as all reports from all newspapers are, right?

Robert Vogel remembers going to Berkeley City Council meetings and waiting hours to speak, getting heckled, and feeling intimidated. He couldn’t miss that less. “They are really unpleasant affairs,” says Vogel, who last stepped foot inside City Hall in January.

…

Yet despite his physical absence, the retired software executive is among Berkeley’s most active political residents. Vogel says he logs a hundred hours every week to maintain and promote KitchenDemocracy.org, a nonprofit Web site he and his wife, Simona Carini, launched in March 2006. They envisioned it as a virtual town hall where citizens and elected officials could suggest, vote for, and comment on local issues outside the three-ring circus of Berkeley public meetings.

…

Their dedication appears to have paid off. Besides attracting more than two thousand registered users by Vogel’s count, Kitchen Democracy has become increasingly influential in local politics — too influential, some say.

…many city officials have embraced the site. In the sixteen months since the first Kitchen Democrat signed up, locals have debated and “voted” on 21 Berkeley-related issues, one-third of which were authored by city leaders. Mayor Tom Bates, for instance, polled the KDers on his Public Commons for Everyone Initiative, and presented the vote tally and comments at a council meeting. Cisco DeVries, the mayor’s chief of staff, says the site has been especially helpful in soliciting comments on controversial issues: “Politics and policy in Berkeley is a full-contact sport, and that dissuades a lot of people from getting involved. I have seen people hissed and hollered at for making comments at a public meeting.”

…

The site also has its critics on the council. Max Anderson says he prefers direct contact with constituents. “I don’t use it that much, because I already have pretty good avenues of communication,” he says. “And I think that I get a broader sampling than I would with the limited reach of Kitchen Democracy.”

Councilman Kriss Worthington, whose South Berkeley district includes the university, is less generous. He argues that the “limited reach” is a fatal flaw. “There was a preselecting bias with the issues when it started, and it was pretty much focused on a particular neighborhood, which votes for the losing candidates in citywide elections pretty much every time,” he says.

Kitchen Democracy’s “moderate, pro-landlord” bias is unfair to Berkeley’s large racial-minority student population, Worthington says. He note, for instance, that while Berkeley residents have consistently voted against changing the city’s rent-control laws, 85 percent of KD users in an ongoing poll favored reforming those laws.

…

Leaders have given the concerns of Kitchen Democracy users too much weight in recent public debates. The most egregious example, he says, involved the Wright’s Garage project — developer John Gordon wants to turn the large former auto-repair shop near Ashby and College avenues into a big restaurant, among other things (see “The Wright Stuff,” Water Cooler, 6/20).

The project at first seemed doomed since it exceeded Elmwood’s quotas on full-service restaurants, and since many neighbors and local merchants were opposed. But the quotas are flexible if a project garners significant neighborhood support. Members of the city’s Zoning Adjustments Board found that support on Kitchen Democracy, where 80 percent of 217 voters favored Gordon’s project in an online poll.

The zoning board’s approval was immediately appealed to the city council, where Wozniak felt compelled to remove himself from the debate and vote because he had explicitly supported the Wright’s project on Kitchen Democracy.

For his part, Worthington says he has “serious legal concerns” about the zoning board’s use of the poll. “Given that that poll was people voting in reaction to an explicit advocacy agenda by a councilmember who is forced to be recused, how can the results of that poll be used as an accurate barometer of the opinion?” he asked his colleagues at a June 26 council meeting.

Anonymity is another issue. Roughly one-third of Kitchen Democracy commentators withhold their names from postings. Some do so to avoid backlash — on the rent-control issue, for example, one person outed wealthy friends who “have held their Berkeley ‘pied-à-terre’ for casual and recreational use while having true residency elsewhere.” Another wrote, “I have kept my name off because I do not want to expose myself to harassment by the ideologues at the Rent Board.”

…

To register, Kitchen Democracy users must provide a name, home address, and e-mail address. While Vogel admits he has no practical way to ensure that a registered address truly belongs to the user, he doesn’t believe trying to influence the vote tally would be worth the trouble. DeVries concurs — what he and the mayor ask themselves, he says, is, “Is this a good comment? In this sense, it doesn’t much matter whether it’s a real person or not.”

A critique of KD from a Berekely resident from the Berekely Daily Planet, with similar criticisms as Berkeley Councilmember Kriss Worthington.  The irony of the whole KD in Alameda thing is that the only issue on their site for Alameda is regarding whether development plans for Alameda Point should be exclusively decided by Alameda folks only, but KD itself the vehicle for this new forum is an “outsider,” if the “yeas” get their way, then a forum like KD wouldn’t be able to have an impact on Alameda politics the way that they have had on Berkeley politics.

Edited to add: a few more critiques on KD, both positive and negative and neutral.

Kitchen Democracy turns into Online Oligarchy

Commentary: Kitchen Democracy in the Gourmet Ghetto

Board Debates Propriety of Using Web Poll as Measure of Public Support

A Misleading Question from Kitchen Democracy