Mrs. David Campbell had an idea. She wanted to close the street in front of her apartment complex to create a new park. There was already a back door to the apartment complex that most people used anyway and she wanted to have a more beautiful and spectacular view out of her window. She gathered the necessary information and signatures on the petition and went to the city council meeting to represent her idea. About half of the commissioners listened carefully, several paid little attention. When it came time to vote, they would not allow it.

Discouraged, but not defeated, she talked to several lawyers and other interested people and was preparing for a second appearance when Joe suggested that she might want to get some more "important" support for her idea before reappearing before the city council. He reminded her that often, in their particular city, unless she had the support of the Presbyterians (not their real name) she wouldn't get anywhere. Mrs. Campbell was a member of that particular denomination but didn't attend regularly. She was aware that most of the members of the city council were. Although she approached both the participants and the information gathering in an efficient way, she had not made "friends" with the supporters or the city council members.

The night before she was to plead her case for the second time, she had a conversation with Joe. Since he was a member of the majority group, would he do some behind the scenes talking and tell them how much he was in favor of the project. Joe was "friends" with Mrs. Campbell and did know several members of the council, but was against the project on personal grounds. It appeared that he would be able to sway to vote. Should he get involved for friendship sake and because he could demonstrate a power position? After all, he was going to run for the city council next year.

1.      Are Mrs. Campbell and Joe "friends" by association only?

2.      Should power groups or influential people be lobbied?

3.      Should the decision be based on "who you know?" If not upon what principle should the decision be made?

4.      Who is causing the harm in this case?

5.      Who should make the decision? Who "owns' the solution?

6.      If you were on the city council, what would influence you?

7.      Are parks better than streets?