Mediation: the word invokes different images and definitions for different people. Mediation in an environmental and public policy context means simply this:

Parties voluntarily and in good faith engage each other for the stated purpose of finding mutually acceptable solutions to issues in dispute or that could become a source of conflict.

Mediation works best — fact, works only — if all parties agree and confirm to each other that a mediation setting is THE best forum for achieving their best possible outcome. Here is why: When parties examine their interests and options with candor (and often with the help of a third-party neutral), they sometimes find that another forum will yield better results. The other forum may be the courts; legislative lobbying or the passage of time. Parties should not waste their time working toward a mediated result when some at the table cannot participate fully and in good faith. Martha Bean can alert parties to the conditions that must be in place before mediation is attempted.

Through two decades of experience, Martha Bean is continually reminded - and heartened by - the ability people have to create their own, mutually acceptable solutions. Sound, substantive information, a process that is fair, and good mediation coaching are the principle ingredients to achieving results. Martha Bean can provide the environment and the expertise to help achieve these results.

In the last decade, Martha has seen more parties bring a 'mediative state of mind' to their own problem solving. This is a welcome evolution, for often parties can achieve agreement without the help of an outside neutral party. And when they do engage a mediator, it is with an informed and positive understanding regarding the role of the neutral. A principle advantage in using an outside mediator is this: all parties can equally and fully participate in the effort to forge agreement. No one has to be 'switching hats' from mediator / facilitator to participant. Experienced negotiators find it is nearly impossible to adequately and energetically advocate for one's own interests and outcomes while simultaneously assuring a fair and efficient process.

How do parties determine if their issue is ripe for mediation?
How do they know issues are sufficiently well-formed and resolution sufficiently imperative? A strategic assessment can be a first step in unraveling an environmental issue such that it can be determined if the issue is appropriate for mediation.

Ethics and Access
Martha Bean is a member of the Association of Conflict Resolution (ACR), and issue-specific sectors within this organization. Ms. Bean adheres to the code of ethics distributed by ACR, and by the 'best practices' guidance offered for mediators working with governmental entities and issues.

Read more about ACR and Model Codes of Conduct:

Association of Conflict Professionals

Information on ACR Environment / Public Policy Sector

Model Codes of Conduct  (PDF)

The Cowlitz Project
The Cowlitz River is a tributary to the Columbia. The power of the water in the Cowlitz River provides most of the electricity for Tacoma, Washington. At one time, the river also supported a legendary run of Spring Chinook Salmon, sacred to the native people of the area and now an endangered species. Tacoma was required, under federal law, to submit a new plan for operations and management of the dams, known as re-licensing. The re-licensing process opens up the opportunity for federal and state agencies and Tribal Nations to completely re-evaluate and change environmental practices associated with the dam. Given changes in both the law and the approach to environmental issues since the dams were brought into operation several decades ago, all parties knew that much would changes during the re-licensing effort. The managers of Tacoma's publicly owned utility decided to engage in — and help define — a new process encouraged by the federal Energy Regulatory Commission for negotiating with key parties in advance order to secure the new license. And they succeeded.

Read more about the Cowlitz Project:

Keoning Comments

News Article  (PDF)

Summary of Settlement  (PPT)

Negotiating Equitable Utility Rates The City of Tacoma asked Martha Bean to mediate an agreement on rate increases over time. An advisory council had contested rate increases in the past, and an adversarial relationship had developed between the utility and active citizens. A focus of the mediation effort was giving citizens technical, financial and legal information they needed to have in order to be informed advisors. The result of the project was a consensus report on acceptable rate increases, what benefits those rates should bring, and how to measure those benefits. The City Council approved the entire concept, and approved the first of five annual rate increases during a single meeting: a first.

Common Goals, Different Approaches Several non-profit organizations in the Northwest were seeking to jointly address issues of critical importance to all of them. The organizational cultures of each group were quite different: sometimes these differences were distracting, but they threatened fracture the effort. The organizations requested the services of Martha Bean to serve as mediator / facilitator to help them address their differences and work more effectively together. A set of consensus goals, tasks and work plans were devised as a result of three success joint meetings, and several confidential calls between the participants. Ms. Bean has provided intensive, short-term mediation for a variety of organizations and agencies in similar situations; contacts, references and plans available on request.

Who and What is an Engineer? Martha Bean managed and facilitated a negotiated rule-making process for the Washington State Board of Registration for Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors regarding the 'scope of engineering practice'. This was important for defining what sort of certification would be required for an individual or firm to provide professional services on a variety of categories of on-site sewage and small public water systems. The issue was extremely contentious, because it effectively defined who could and could not do work; in some cases potentially obliterated the livelihoods of some professionals who had been in practice for years. The process included convening interviews, caucus meetings, several plenary and small group sessions, as well a final consensus report used by the Commission; the rule was adopted.