So Sunday came and went and Parisians voted overwhelmingly to ban shared electric scooters in the capital. Of those who voted, 89.03% were against them. And this, to be honest, is not all that surprising. Also not surprising is the low voter turnout (7.46% of 1.3 million registered voters).

But I do think it raises important questions about this "democratic" process -- and not just because I happen to like electric scooters. One problem is that there's an inherent bias. And this same phenomenon can be found in community meetings for new developments.

If you're upset about something (and you have the time), then you are probably more intrinsically motivated to participate. In other words, if you think that electric scooters are a horrible nuisance, then you're more likely to take the time to say something about them. But if you think electric scooters are just, like, fine, then you're probably less motivated to go out and vote.

Maybe this doesn't matter. Maybe the turnout percentage itself is the answer you're looking for. Only 7.46% of registered voters cared enough about electric scooters to voice an opinion. So if the rest actually liked them, it's their problem for not voting.

But if you think that this percentage should be higher to be more representative, then one solution is to try and reduce the barriers to participation. And I think there's an argument to be made that something as dumb as a Twitter poll, open only to Parisians, might have been more inclusive.

A few weeks ago I received a community meeting notice in the mail for a new development happening in my neighborhood. I am excited about the project and so I immediately put it in my calendar and told myself: “I’m going to this.”

But then a work commitment came up and I skipped the event. I always do this. I put these public meetings in my calendar with every intention of going, but then as soon as something else comes up, it gets bumped. So in the end, my voice will not be heard.

I say this not because I think my singular voice is all that important, but because I suspect I’m not alone when it comes to these community meetings. I live and breathe city building and if I struggle to attend these things, what does that mean for the average resident?

As soon as you create friction – such as having to go somewhere, physically – you’re going to lose a large segment of people. This also means that only those who are highly motivated will attend.

I saw this phenomenon play out in my condo building. At our first annual general meeting – when the building still had a bunch of deficiencies and the elevators were spotty – we had a sold out and lively crowd. 

But as soon as things started humming along in year two (we are now a well-oiled machine), we then struggled to reach quorum. Why show up unless you’ve got a bone to pick, right?

What was the last public meeting that you attended in your city?