Carie's Notes Archive

November 3 Draft Document Containing Updates from Carie Fox [388kb PDF, 12 pages]

Update from Carie, October 20th 2008

Getting started.

You have e-mailed me because I will be facilitating a workgroup to augment the Forest Service's analysis of the Rosemont Mine proposal. As promised, here is an update of my progress.

First, I want to thank all of you, those with whom I have touched base and those with whom I have yet to touch base. Your generosity of time and attention is very much appreciated. I need to learn from you, to listen to you well, and to benefit from your coaching. To do the design work, I am really taking your knowledge of the conflict, of your community, and of the things that matter in this issue-then I try to synthesize that information, test it, adjust it. I have a lot to learn. Thank you for helping me do that.

I was in Tucson a week and a half ago and met with about a third of the people I need to talk with at this phase. That doesn't mean that after I listen to the next two thirds I shut the rest off. I'll keep listening and learning and revising the design even after this phase is over. And what I mean by "this phase" is a time when I learn enough to at least get the process underway.

There will be an evolution of membership and/or groundrules in the first few months, so it's not as though there's some sort of starting gun and if you don't get up to the line before the gun, you're out. As well, whether you are in or out of the working group, you are still a stakeholder. I cannot, would not take that away from you.

I am hoping to get this learning phase done by the end of the month.

If you haven't been interviewed yet and you want to be, how does that happen?

1. In the interview process, I do give priority to people who are willing to represent a group of stakeholders and I am particularly interested in people who are willing to bring together a smallish (usually 6 to 12) group of people whom I can hear from at one time. If you have such a group, please e-mail Kimberly Caringer at caringer@ecr.gov and see if we can schedule some time together the last week of October.
2. Yes, I am interested in individuals who bring expertise or a unique perspective to the workgroup. In the interview process, what I am tending to do is focus on the groups I described in the paragraph above to sketch in my mental map of the situation. Then I tend to interview individuals to adjust that sketch and also go into more detail on very specific issues. If you fall in the "individual" category, E-mail me at Rosemont@foxmediation.com, tell me about yourself, and forgive me if I don't get back to you immediately.

What have I learned so far?

One thing I have learned is to make sure I am consistently available until this working group is underway. I had an intense couple of days scheduled on another project (the Giant Sequoia National Monument). Alaska Airlines sent my cell phone charger to another state. For a couple of days I did not respond to "mining controversy" stakeholders, and I frustrated and confused some people. I am just not going to do that again. The charger goes in the carry-on, and breathing room gets maintained in the schedule so I can be more responsive.

I am trying valiantly NOT to think about design until I have interviewed more people, but some things are fairly clear (and for the most part subject to the direction of the eventual working group):

• Alternates: the working group is going to have to have a flexible alternate policy.



• Open Meetings: Decision-making meetings will be open to the public and to the press. Tony Davis quoted me in his recent article: If I design something that, after trying it out, leaves people feeling shut out, then I have failed and I have to adjust the design. (http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/263159) This applies to the logistics of the meetings as well as the composition of the workgroup, the groundrules, etc.



• Timing: There are three timing issues. First, the big timing issue-how frequently might the meetings occur? Do you want short, evening-type meetings often or longer meetings less frequently? A longer meeting could be a weekend retreat or an all-day meeting on a Saturday. Then there's my personal timing issue-everything will be easier when I can schedule things out further ahead, but for the next few months we'll have to navigate my existing commitments and family needs as well as the upcoming holidays. So, finally, that brings us to the near-term timing questions:
  
  
  • Nov 13 or 14 we could have a first working group meeting, but as that is only two weeks after my major interviews, it feels crammed to me. Save that time, though, I may use it some other way.
  • Nov 22 and/or 23 might be the right time for the first working group meeting.
  • Dec 6 and/or 7, Jan 10 and/or 11 pencil those on your calendar for working group meetings.



• Comments: As most of you know, the first job of the working group is to sort through the comments, organize them, and summarize them. I've been asked about the tally of submissions (e-mails, public comment notes, letters etc). John Able, who is in charge of the web postings at the Coronado National Forest Service, says that all the comments will be posted this Friday. I've also asked for a simple table that shows how many comments have been lumped in what category (especially "unique" versus "duplicates.") I'll share this with you. One of the questions we'll have to address is how far the workgroup wants to go in verification and how to go about it. Philip Murphy, who is on our team, can probably help with a statistically sound protocol as I doubt you are going to want to physically verify each of the thousands of comments received-I am not even sure that is possible. But I also get that when there is a glitch in communication (and for the Forest Service to post only part of the comments is a glitch), you become suspicious.



• Location: This will be the working group's working group. I am going to count on them to figure out where the meetings should be.

OK, dear stakeholders. Onward and upward!

Carie Fox

For comments or questions about this website, please contact: usiecr@ecr.gov. This page was last updated 1/13/2011.