A recent article from the California Planning & Developing Report highlights some of the challenges of public engagement when an issue is surrounded with ideological rhetoric.  What happens when the lines (on both sides) are drawn before you engage?

Environmentalists and many fans of cities hail SB 375 as an important step towards both curbing global warming and creating more pleasant cities. But Tea Party activists nationwide have fought against local and regional planning efforts, often invoking the United Nations’ “Agenda 21” sustainable development effort as the enemy. In California, Tea Party representatives have increasingly turned up at regional and statewide planning sessions – including a recent SB 375 “One Bay Area” workshop in Concord, where they disrupted the meeting by challenging its premise.

Steve Brandau, head coordinator for the Central Valley Tea Party, did not attend any One Bay Area meetings. But he said that he understood the speakers’ skepticism about government-led planning and social engineering.

“We would be suspicious of projects that are built around population control and density control,” said Brandau. “We are leery of governmental agencies and their ability, based on the track record, to develop workable solutions.”

You can read the article here.  Note the articles claim that Tea Party reps “disrupted the meeting by challenging its premise.”  Is this an example of an issue that is so caught up in rhetoric (from both environmentalists and libertarians) that civic engagement is impossible?  Where does identifying community values fit into the discussion?