Dear viewers, I welcome you to the lecture series on high performance computer architecture. In 40 lectures, I shall try to provide an overview of computer architecture at different levels and various aspects of advanced computer architecture. And today we shall start with the first lecture and the title of today's lecture is Introduction and Course Outline. So, in this lecture, I shall try to give an introduction of the course and give an outline of the different topics that I shall cover in this course. And here is the outline of today's lecture. First I shall give a historical background because today we find an array of computers powerful array of computers surrounding us performing different purposes and providing the need of our daily life. And this did not happen in a single day and it has taken many years, may be 100 years to reach this stage and how gradually we have arrived at this stage, I shall give a kind of evolution that has taken place to reach this particular stage. And in this respect, I shall discuss about five generations of computers and then I shall talk about the elements of modern computers, what are the different components that builds a modern computer. Then I shall introduce to you the instruction set architecture which is essentially a programmer view of the processor and then instruction set processor which essentially represents the way the processor is realized. Then I shall talk about some related topics like Moore's law which has helped in the progress of the computers and the Moore's law is the force behind this gradual evolution of computers. And then I shall discuss about parallelism at different levels, as we shall see to reach higher performance parallelism is the key idea and how parallelism have been incorporated at different levels that I shall discuss and finally, at the end I shall give an objective of the course and an outline of the course. If you look at the history of computers, as I mentioned the history encompasses more than 100 years, so computing equipments are available may be for 100s of years and the period can be divided into two categories, first one is the mechanical era that means prior 1945 and then after 1945 we can say that electronic era. So in the mechanical era the computers were built by using mechanical components like wheels and other things for example, abacus which was developed in China that dates back to 500 BC that was used for the purpose of calculation of numbers. Then mechanical adder-subtractor machine that was built by Blaise Pascal in France in 1942, this again belongs to this mechanical era because no electronic component was used in building it. Similarly, difference engine that was built by Charles Babbage for polynomial evaluation that was developed in England in 1927, then binary mechanical computer was developed by Conard Jues in Germany in 1941, then electromechanical decimal computer was developed by Howard Iken in 1944 in Harvard and then Mark I by IBM. So this is the mechanical era coming to the electronic era, we can again divide in five generation the first generation was before the invention of transistor. Similarly before the invention of transistor the electronic building block or component that was used is vacuum tubes and that also used relay memories. So what is a vacuum tube? Vacuum tube is a kind of tube small tube with a filament which emits electron and by controlling the flow of electron, by controlling the flow of current you can actually realize the two states on and off and that is how you can realize a digital computer. So vacuum tubes were used and relay elements which are essentially switches which were used to store information for used as memory. These computers obviously when used realized these vacuum tubes they were very large in size, so they were usually these computers were actually occupying big rooms and obviously dissipating lots of power and computing power although the computing power was relatively much smaller in comparison to today's standard. So maybe 1000 times slower and lesser computing power than present a PC that we use nowadays. Then these computers were essentially single user systems, so single user systems mean that operating system that was used can provide I mean can allow only one user to use the computer and so far as the programming language is concerned it was in a very I mean primitive stage that means you can use only machine or assembly language. So these computers were single user systems and the programming language that was available was machine or assembly language.  So these computers were not very user friendly you can say and examples of this type of computers are NEAC, Princeton, IAS and IBM 701. So these computers actually the first generation of computers were primarily developed because of the requirement of department of defense of USA. So they wanted to calculate the trajectory of a cell that is launched from the worships and where it will fall like that so to do that calculation you need a computer. So these computers were primarily developed for that purpose, so in 40s. Then came the second generation computer in between 1955 and 64. So in this decade computers were realized by using transistors. So transistors were invented and which was used I mean for the realization of computers. So transistors, diodes and so far as the memory is concerned magnetic ferrite cores were used to store information. Then high level languages were used with compilers that means now you can write program in high level language and so compilers were developed. So that was a very big step so far as the users are concerned and also it allowed batch processing that means earlier the computers were developed for single user. Now you can do batch processing that means a particular computer can be used one after the other by different users. So the computers like IBM 7090, CDC 1604, Univac, LARC these are the examples of the second generation computers built using transistors and diodes. Then came the invention of integrated circuits. So by integrated circuits we mean you can put more than one electronic component like transistors diode and so on on a single silicon wafer. So depending on the number of active devices that you can put on a single silicon wafer you can categorize into different type known as small scale integration SSI small scale integration where you can put may be one to ten active devices then MSI where you can put ten to hundreds of devices like transistors and diodes then LSI large scale integration where you can put thousands of devices. And nowadays we are in the era of VLSI where you can put millions of transistors or active devices may be say million to billion of transistors you can put on a single IC. So these are the because of this evolution of integrated circuit has led to the development of powerful third generation computers using but in this third generation only SSI and MSI devices were used. And so far as the operating systems are concerned multiprogramming and time sharing OS were used and so a single computer can be used by a large number of users and all of them will be having the feeling that they are the sole users of the computer. So in this category was IBM 360 370 computers so these IBM 360 370 mainframe computers became very popular and widely used throughout the world. And in addition to that you have got CDC 6600 Texas Instruments ASC and PDP-8 these are different third generation computers which were developed by different manufacturers and widely used. Then came the fourth generation as I said with the advancement of VLSI technology this fourth generation computers use VLSI circuits and VLSI circuits and as a consequence they were very powerful and so far as the operating system is concerned multiprocessor operating system were used. That means these fourth generation computers it was possible to realize multiprocessor chips a single IC can contain multiple processors. So multiple operating systems were developed various high level languages were flourished and parallel processing was very popular using these fourth generation computers. That means it was possible to have parallel processing I shall discuss about what are the different types of parallel processing possible in the course of this lecture. And the various computers based on this fourth generation are where IBM 3090 VAX 9000 and Cray XMP and then came the fifth generation which are started may be from 1991 to present day. So these uses VLSI circuits ultra large scale integrated circuits and or very high I mean SIC. So these are the different types of very high scale integrated circuits were used in realizing fifth generation computers and to realize massively parallel processing and earlier so far as the multiprocessor parallel processing were concerned all the processors were homogeneous. That means same type of processors were used in those parallel processors, but in the fifth generation it was possible to have heterogeneous processors. That means one can perform I mean graphics processing one can perform integer processing and so on. So different types of heterogeneous processors were combined to realize a computer systems. And there are the fifth generation compute examples of this fifth generation computers are Intel Paragon Fujitsu VPP 500, Cray MPP. So these are some representative examples, but obviously this list is not complete there are many more fifth generation computers. According to the elements of modern computers you can see a modern computer is an integrated system consisting of machine hardware, system software and application program. So three very important components that makes a computer workable usable to usable or number one is hardware you require hardware, second is your system software and third is your application programs various application programs. And this can be represented with the help of this nested circles. So as you can see hardware is at the core or center of these three circles. So this hardware is being the interface between the application software and hardware is the system software. System software is essentially the operating system and different types of operating systems have evolved over the years. And these system software or operating system allows application software to run on this hardware. So and the actually to the system software or the user or programmer the functionality of the processor is characterized by instruction set. So a processor can execute a set of instructions and which can be used to write a program. So program can be considered as a sequence of instructions. So you can pick up instructions from the instruction set and realize a program. So a programmer's view of the processor is essentially the instruction set and that is why it is called instruction set architecture. So instruction set architecture ISA in short plays a very important role and it is a kind of abstraction and all programmers can look at it. So this predefined instruction set is called instruction set architecture. Now this ISA on instruction set architecture serves as an interface between the hardware and software as I have told. So here you have got the hardware and here you have got the different types of software like system software, application software and this instruction set architecture serves as an interface between the hardware and software. So in terms of processor design methodology an ISA can be considered as a specification of a design. That means so whenever you go for designing a system you have to provide specification. So this specification this ISA instruction set architecture can be considered as the specification. And these instruction set architecture is I mean to realize instruction set architecture you implement a or synthesize a hardware. So the specification is the behavioral description what does it do what the processor can do then the synthesis step attempts to find an implementation based on the specification. And then comes the processor which is an implementation of the design and how is it constructed that means instructions processor design concerns with how a processor is constructed. So it is also referred to as micro architecture. So realization of an implementation a specific physical embodiment of a design is done using VLSI technology nowadays. So in this course we shall discuss about the way this is how it is being done. But before that as we shall see later first we shall introduce the instruction set architecture. I believe before I proceed further it is essential to distinguish between these two terms which you will encounter quite often. One is architecture another is organization. So what is the difference between the two? So a computer architecture and computer organization here as you can see architecture is a short form of instruction set architecture. So it is also known as instruction set architecture as I mentioned this is a programmers view of a processor. So that means it specifies what are the instructions of the different instructions that you can perform that means data transfer, data manipulation like that. So addition, subtraction, multiplication, division and then they move instructions to transfer data between processor and memory, processor and IO loads stored like that. And then it will also provide given idea about the different types of registers which you can use for storing information temporarily while executing a program. So registers provide intermediate I mean storage and then you can have various addressing modes, addressing modes allows you to access operands in various ways from registers and memory and also from IO. So this is architecture is essentially a programmers view of the processor. On the other hand as I mentioned organization represents the high level design that means the way the processor is implemented, how many cache memories it has got, how many arithmetic and logic units it has got, what type of pipe lining control pipe lining is being used, what type of control design is being done whether it is a hardware control unit or whether it is a micro program control unit, whether the processor is single cycle, multi cycle pipeline like that. So these are all decided as part of the organizations. So this is also called micro architecture. So this is sometimes known as micro architecture. So the structure of a computer that a machine language programmer must understand that is your architecture to be able to write a correct program for that machine and a family of computers of the same architecture should be able to run the same program. So here as you can see same instruction set architecture can be realized by a series of machines or processors. They may be realized by using in different ways, one can use can be realized by using transistor circuits, another can be by integrated VLSI circuits and they can be the implementation can be done in different ways. But as long as they execute the same instruction set architecture then we can say that there is a kind of binary compatibility that means a program written for one machine can be run on another machine. So this is a very important concept and this binary compatibility plays a very important role whenever we go for designing computers and we go from one generation to next generation of processors. So you have to take into consideration the binary compatibility whenever you realize the next generation processor so that the programs developed for the earlier generation can be used cannot be I mean need not be thrown away need not be wasted and can be used. So now coming to one very important concept that is your Moore's law Gordon Moore he was one of the founders of Intel he proposed a law based on some his observation. So the computer what has been done what has been found that the computer performance has been increasing phenomenally over the last five decades and this enhancement this performance improvement is an outcome of you can say Moore's law. So this was brought about by Moore's law what is that Moore's law states that transistor per square inch roughly doubles every 18 months. So Moore's law is not exactly a law but this particular rule you can say transistors per square inch roughly doubles every 18 months that has been hold good for nearly 15 years and this is the this is Gordon Moore he is one of the co-founders of Intel and this is what he stated back in 1965 in his famous paper he wrote it for electronic magazine. So he was asked to write an article predicting the future of electronic circuits. So the title of the article was cramming Moore components on two integrated circuits and that was published in April 1995 issue of electronics magazine and in that article he predicted that transistor density of minimum cost semiconductor chips would double roughly every 18 months and obviously transistor density is correlated to processor speed as we shall see. So this shows how Moore's law has remained valid for a large number of for about 50 years you can see here only the Intel processors are being shown and on this side on the y axis you have got the number of transistors and on x axis you have got the number of the years. So as you can see as the as we go from 1970 to 2010 the number of transistors is reaching from 1000 to several millions several millions of transistors are used to realize processors. So starting from simple Intel 4004 which was obviously having few thousands of transistors to present day dual core and multi core processors requiring multi billion transistors may be tens of billions of transistors. So this shows the how Moore's law Moore's law has really influence the growth of computers and Moore's law is not about just the density of transistors on a chip that can be achieved but about the density of transistors at which cost per transistor is the lowest that means it not only says about how many transistors you can fabricate but it also says how economically you can do the fabrication that means you have to realize I mean transistors ICs with more number of transistors in a economic way cost effective way. So as more transistors are made on a chip the cost to make each transistor reduces but the chance that chip will not work due to defect arises of course this problem is there and that is you have to take care of it by reliable processing technology. And Moore observed in 1965 there is a transistor density or complexity at which a minimum cost is achieved so based on I mean a minimum where the transistor density or complexity at which a minimum cost is achieved he proposed his law which has become famous. So we can say that the initial computer performance improvements came from the use of innovative manufacturing techniques advancement of VLSI technology and which actually based on Moore's law you can say and improvements due to innovations in manufacturing technologies have slowed down since 1980s of course the rate at which it was growing has slowed down since 1980s. So smaller feature size gives rise to increase resistance these are the two reasons number one is smaller feature size gives rise to increase resistance this is one problem second is larger power dissipation. So as we shall see the Pentium processor generates about 100 watts of power dissipation. So 100 watts of power dissipation from an IC is a very large power dissipation. So this power has to be dissipated with the help of suitable packaging and cooling technique and so as you put more and more transistors the power dissipation increases the cost of packaging and cooling increases this is one parameter which is which limits the increase in number of transistors on a chip. So as I mentioned a decade ago chips were built using 500 nanometer technology so 0.5 micron technology you can say and in 1971 10 micron process was used and most processors are used are currently fabricated on 65 nanometer or smaller process. So nowadays because of the advancement of VLSI technology thanks to Moore's law which has been followed it has progressively I mean the dimension has reduced gradually from 500 nanometer to sub micron technology now as you can see nowadays we use 65 nanometer or smaller process may be 45 or 33 nanometer. So Intel in January 2007 demonstrated a working 45 nanometer chip and Intel started mass producing in late 2007 based on this 45 nanometer chip. So you can it is very easy to pronounce this 45 nanometer 33 nanometer and like that but you think about the diameter of an atom. So diameter of an atom is of the order of 0.1 nanometer so we can see that we are very close to the diameter of an atom. So the precision at which the VLSI technology VLSI fabrication is taking place nowadays is not far away from the diameter of an atom. So this particular table gives you the amazing decades of microprocessor evolution. So as you can see from 1970 to 1980 the transistor count was 2k to 1000k and clock frequency was 0.1 to 3 megahertz and number of instructions per cycle was 0.1 that means you required 10 cycles to execute an instruction and in 1980 to 1990 the number of transistors increased from 1000k to 1 million and the speed was increased from 3 to 30 megahertz and number of instructions per cycle also reduced. So you can execute more number of instructions in a 0.1 that means you can more or less execute one instruction per cycle and then in 1990 to 2000 the number of transistors increased from 1 million to 100 million and the speed increased from 30 megahertz to 1 gigahertz and number of instructions per cycle changed reached 0.1, 0.9 to 1.9. So you may be asking how is it possible to execute more than one instruction per cycle later on we shall discuss about that that can be done by using superscalar architecture and later on we shall discuss in detail about it. Then came the 2000 to 2000 the present day technology where you can have 100 million to 2 billion transistors on a single chip and speed is from 1 to 15 gigahertz. So 1 gigahertz means 10 to the power 9 hertz so you can see the speed at which it will work and then the number of instructions per cycle is again between 1.9 to 2.9 and it can be still more. So the processor performance has become twice as fast after every 2 years and memory capacity has increased twice as much after every 18 months roughly based on following Moore's law. And I should mention about another name called Mead and Conway actually they described a method of increasing hardware design designs by writing software. So whenever the number of transistors in a processor increases it is not possible to do the design manually so you will require automated technique. So Gordon Moore developed this hardware description language by which you can automate the design of a processor that means whenever you are going for designing processors with millions of transistors you have to use CAD tools computer-added designs tools and Mead and Conway was the founder of that I mean they proposed this method for creating hardware designs by writing software. By writing software you can design hardware that was an important step. Question arises how can we improve performance? So initially as we have seen the improvement occurred because of the advancement of VLSI technology but in subsequent years the performance improvement came from exploitation of some form of parallelism. So some form of parallelism were used in these processors first is instruction level parallelism what do you mean by instruction level parallelism? Instruction level parallelism means you know normally the execution of instruction take place serially that means you execute you fetch an instruction then execute so you can say that instruction say cycle can be divided broadly into two parts instruction fetch plus instruction execution.  So in this way it goes on serially there is no parallelism but subsequently techniques were developed for instruction level parallelism and pipelining is the first technique which used instruction level parallelism. In pipelining you will see the instructions later on we shall discuss in detail we shall see the instructions can be executed in overlap manner that means you say that instruction fetch when you are performing instruction fetch of instruction one or instruction execution of instruction one you can perform instruction fetch of instruction two and again instruction execution of instruction execution of instruction two is going on then you can perform instruction ph of instruction 3, and in this way it goes on. So, later on I shall discuss it in more details, and also there were other techniques which were used, which is known as dynamic instruction scheduling, in which multiple instructions can be scheduled dynamically with the help of hardware, and particularly wherever you have got multiple execution units, and then out of order execution can be performed, and then superscalar processor where you have got multiple processing elements within a single processor, then you can have VLIW architecture which can use superscalar architecture. So, the compiler will pack several instruction in a single instruction, and which can be fetched and executed serially. So, these are the instruction level parallelism, I shall discuss in detail in my lecture. Then there is another level of parallelism, second level of parallelism that is your thread level parallelism. So, thread level parallelism you can say it is medium, and different threads of a processor executed in parallel on a single processor or multiple processors. As you know, you are familiar with what is process, process is nothing but a program in execution, then a single process can have multiple threads you can say, multiple threads which can be executed in parallel, if you have got multiple processing units. For example, in a superscalar architecture, you have got multiple processing elements, so different threads can be executed in different processing elements. So, for example, you are performing a loop program. In a loop program, different iterations can be considered as different threads and which can be executed on different processing elements in a single processor. So, a loop can have multiple threads. So, this thread level parallelism is another medium-grade compared to instruction level parallelism which is fine-grained. So, you can categorize in three types, first one is instruction level parallelism, instruction level parallelism or in short ILP, this is your fine-grained. The second is your thread level parallelism which is medium-grade and third type is, as we shall see later, process level parallelism and which is coarse-grained. So, these three types of parallelism can be used and this simultaneous multi-threading is a technique for improving the overall efficiency of superscalar CPUs using hardware multi-threading. That means, in a single processor where you have got multiple functional units that is present in a superscalar processor, you can have this hardware multi-threading. That means, this thread level parallelism is exploited with the help of hardware and which is known as SMT or simultaneous multi-threading. Then, of course, you can have software level multi-threading on multiple processors or coarse-grained multi-threading, software multi-threading that can be done on multiple processors or cores. So, this is your symmetric multi-processor SMPs. This is very popular shared memory multi-processor architecture. So, here as you can see, you have got multiple processors. Each processor is having a private cache, each of these processors is having a private cache and all of them are connected through a bus to main memory and I O. So, this main memory and I O are shared and sharing is done through a common bus and it is called symmetric multi-processing. The reason for that is each of these processors will take the same time to access main memory as well as I O. So, the access time for main memory and I O devices is symmetric for all the processors or uniform. So, it is also called uniform processor architecture. And process level as I mentioned, process level or coarse-grained architecture where you have got different processors that can be executed in parallel on multiple processors and you can use symmetric multi-processors as I have already shown. Also, you can have distributed memory multi-processors as you can see in this diagram. So, this particular model which I have already shown here, each processor has got a private cache and there is a shared bus through which main memory or shared memory is accessed. So, this is called uniform memory access because each of them can access it in a uniform manner and it is also called symmetric multi-processors as I have told. Then you have got non-uniform memory access. Here as you can see the memory is distributed, main memory is distributed and when this processor is accessing this memory, obviously access time will be smaller. When this processor 2 is trying to access the main memory attached to processor 1, obviously it has to do it through this network or called interconnection network. So, whenever it is accessing through this interconnection network, the access time will be longer and also this access time can be variable depending on the type of network being used and availability of the network. So, this is your distributed memory multi-processor where you have got multiple processors and the different memories attached to different processors are accessed through a interconnection network or it can be a local area network. Now, what is the objective of this course? So, I have discussed broadly given an idea about the different types of processors that you can have and also we have discussed about the different types of parallelism that is possible, instruction level parallelism, thread level parallelism, process level parallelism and different types of processors architecture. Now, what is the objective of this advanced computer architecture course? We shall see that modern processors such as Intel Pentium, AMD, Athlon, etcetera use many architectural and organizational innovations that has not been covered in the first level course. So, each and every student who are attending this course must have attended a first level course on computer architecture and organization. So, in that first level course these advanced topics were not in covered. So, which are and it is very essential for them for the computer science students to learn these details of these processors. So, particularly various innovations that have been used in implementing these processors then innovations in memory, bus and storage designs as well. So, as we shall see we shall discuss about hierarchical memory organizations the way the performance gap between memory and processor can be bridged. Then we shall also see multi processors how multi processors can be realized and clusters can be implemented. And in this way you can say the objective of this course is to study the architectural and organizational innovations used in modern computers. So, in a single sentence we can state the objective of this course study the architectural and organizational innovations used in modern computers. Now, let me give you an outline of the course that I shall discuss and the course has been divided into several modules 5 modules. So, in module 1 I shall present the review of the basic organization and architectural techniques. So, fundamentals the fundamentals of different I mean processors like risk processor, what is risk processor, what is SISC processor and what are the characteristics of risk processors and what are the differences between risk and SISC processor. And then the classification of instruction set architecture these we shall discuss in this particular module and also we shall discuss about the way the performance of processors are measured. So, it is very whenever we say high performance question naturally arises how do you really measure the performance. So, we shall discuss about the technique by which the performance can be specified and performance can be measured and we shall review these performance measurement techniques. And then I shall discuss about the basic parallel processing techniques as I have already told instruction level, thread level and process level and I shall also discuss classification of parallel architectures in this module 1 the various parallel processor architectures that is possible. Then coming to module 2 I shall focus on instruction level parallelism and as I mentioned the first approach which exploits instruction level parallelism is pipelining. So, basic concept of pipelining will be introduced and based on that basic concept we shall discuss about the arithmetic pipelines, how different arithmetic operations like floating point addition then integer multiplication can be for pipeline that I shall discuss. But most important is the instruction pipelines which are used in all modern processors. So, I shall discuss in more details about instruction pipelining and particularly whenever you go for instruction pipelining you will find that there are different types of hazards that is present in pipeline processors that mean whenever you do instruction pipelining you want to utilize each and every cycle processor cycle. But unfortunately because of various types of dependences like data dependence, control dependence and structural dependence you will find that it is not possible to avoid these hazards and I shall discuss about the three different types of hazard that is your structural hazard, data hazard and control hazard. And also we shall discuss various hazard resolution techniques that can be used. Then as I mentioned I shall discuss about dynamic instruction scheduling that can be that is important in the context of your superscalar architecture and also branch prediction technique which is related to control hazards, how we can predict branch and we can minimize the effect of control hazards. Then we shall discuss about instruction level parallelism using software approaches and as I will discuss about supercalar techniques, speculative executions and highlight how these various techniques have been implemented in modern processors. So, I shall review some of the modern processors. According to module 3 I shall discuss about memory hierarchies as I mentioned the speed of processor is increasing and later on we shall see the speed of memory is not increasing at the same rate. So, how do you bridge the gap? So, to bridge the performance gap one important approach that is being used is known as hierarchical memory organization where memory is organized in a hierarchical manner in terms of speed. So, the memory which is very close to the processor is known as cache memory then you have got main memory. Then the third type of memory is secondary memory. So, I shall discuss about these different types of memories like main memories, cache memory design and implementation, virtual memory design and implementation, then secondary memory technology and also I shall discuss about read which is used in the context of secondary memory redundant array of independent disks that I shall discuss and how it is used to improve reliability as well as performance. According to module 4 I shall discuss about thread level parallelism and in this context we shall discuss centralized versus distributed shared memory architecture, then various interconnection topologies, multiprocessor architectures and then symmetric multiprocessors and in this context there will be a problem known as cache coherence problem. Because whenever you have got say private cache and shared memory that will lead to cache coherence problem leading to some inconsistency in the information that is stored in memory and how it is overcome I shall discuss and then multi core architecture is essentially an extension of multiprocessors in which the different processors are implemented on a single chip and I shall discuss about modern multiprocessor and give a review of modern multiprocessors. Coming to the fifth module where process level parallelism will be considered I shall discuss about distributed memory computers, different types, different alternatives, possibilities and three different types of computing which are increasingly becoming popular one is known as cluster computing, grid computing and cloud computing that I shall cover in this process level parallelism. So, with this we have come to the end of this lecture and in the next lecture we shall start with instruction set architecture. Thank you.


Well, good afternoon and welcome. I'm Barry Rave. I'm a faculty member here at the Ford School and the Director of the Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy Close-Up. We're very pleased to collaborate with our colleagues at the Nonprofit Management Center here at U of M in sponsoring this event. You know, a major growing theme in issues of state and local government and governance involve issues of performance, how you measure it, how you manage for it, how one even begins to think about it. And here in Michigan, especially in the Snyder era, we're really in a revolutionary time thinking about how states and localities engage these activities, but it's true across the country. Another emerging theme in state and local government is public involvement, public participation, whether that takes the form of disclosure of information to the citizenry, holding a public hearing, or a ballot proposition. A really interesting question emerges when you put these two issues together. And I'm not sure that anyone has thought more about these issues or as thoughtfully as our guest today, Mark Funkhauser. Mark has a really intriguing background if you've read the biosketch. He's been involved in Academe, a number of public service roles in local and state government. Worked through the auditing ranks and became the auditor of Kansas City during one of those years was named a public official of the year by Governing Magazine. And then did what probably doesn't happen that often for those in the auditing ranks ran for public office and won and became mayor of Kansas City and now finds himself as an alum of public official of the year, working with Governing Magazine, blogging, writing a wonderful column in Governing Magazine, and working very closely with states and localities as they think about a number of these really, really pressing challenging kinds of issues. So we are just delighted to have Mark with us today. We had a chance to meet him last summer when he came to Lansing to convene a summit on different aspects of governance and state and local issues here in Michigan. My understanding is he'll be coming back in the fall. And his plan is to provide a talk on the major theme, but then allow plenty of time for a question and answer and conversation as we go forward. But without further ado, please join me in welcoming to campus Mark Funkhauser. Mark. Thank you, Barry. It's really an honor and a pleasure to be at the University of Michigan. I sat next to a guy, I was telling people flying out here from DC, it was a direct flight from BWI actually to Detroit, it seemed like everybody on the plane was wearing Michigan garb. Apparently, it was a good day to show your blue. And the guy sitting next to me had a shirt that I really loved.  Ah, I loved it.  This will be an interesting conversation for you and for I, and I'm looking forward to your questions. I think I'm probably going to approach this issue differently than you would have imagined. And so I hope you're not disappointed. And then we can fill in the spots that you want to fill in when you get a chance to have your say when I'm done and we deal with questions. So civic engagement and performance management are a means toward an end. And that end is the purpose of government. Why, what is government about? What is it trying to do? What's the point here? So my talk today, I'm going to have three parts. The first will be to talk about what is the purpose of government. And then to talk about the challenges to achieving those purposes. And then finally, what I see as a path forward. And the path forward is all about citizen engagement, authentic citizen engagement. But first, let's talk about the purpose of government. What I want out of government is for things to be okay to the point that I can sit on the porch and have a beer with my kids and my friends and not worry too much that things are going to fall apart. I don't want nirvana. I don't want paradise. I just want okay. That's what folks want. They want us to make it okay. And it is not okay in lots and lots of ways. A lot of critics of what we do in government talk about, you know, well, this won't solve all the problems or this is not the silver bullet or this is not the panacea. Nobody wants that. They want to be left to be able to sit on the porch, talk to their friends. They want their life to go on and they don't want it to be upset by wars and plagues and famines and global warming and unemployment and foreclosure and so on and so forth. So, start with Hobbes, Thomas Hobbes. He said without government, there's no arts, no literature, no labor because the fruits of the labor can't be protected, that there is essentially a war of all against all and that life is nasty, brutish and short. We need government to be able to have all the other things that we want. If we don't want our lives and the lives of our loved ones to be nasty, brutish and short, then yes, we depend on government. Those who talk about how wasteful, bad, terrible government is depend on a government employee, a police officer and the bullet in his or her gun to keep them safe. Then you take a more positive view. Hobbes took a negative view. You take a more positive view. Thomas Jefferson. We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are given certain unalienable rights and among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Then the second sentence of that declaration of independence. We put among ourselves government to secure these rights, which derives its just powers from the consent of the government. Those who talk about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness need to understand that Jefferson thought you needed government. You're on unalienable rights, but if you want to actually have them, you need government. You come forward another 100 years or so and you come to Lincoln. Here you see a shift because up until now we've been talking about laws, regulation as it were. Lincoln says the purpose of government is to do for us what we cannot do ourselves, acting in our individual capacities. Treat the sewage, build the railroads, whatever. I mean Lincoln was big for infrastructure and right, I think. But he looked at government as a deliverer of services. And so we went from governing, regulating, building laws and so forth to building railroads and canals and locks and dams and so forth and so on. We went to service delivery and I'm a big fan of Abraham Lincoln. I've got a huge portrait of Lincoln in my office. I've read tons of his stuff and tons about him. And so I have really, if you look at the Charter of the Governing Institute, you'll see that quote from Lincoln. The little abstract that I sent for this talk has that quote from Lincoln. But I heard another guy recently who talked about the purpose of government, Jim Keen, a city manager with Palo Alto, California who has been lots of other stuff in local government. He's been a city manager in Montgomery County, Maryland, and he's been all over the country. And he said, when we asked him what the purpose of government was, he says, the government, the purpose of government was to allow us to figure out how to live with each other, how to get along with each other, to make agreements and then to enforce those agreements in a crowded and complex world. How can we live next to each other? And Keen is balancing back. We don't think about, we don't think, I almost never hear about people talk about governing. The purpose of a city government is to govern. It is to make and enforce laws. And so far, particularly in municipal government, we started having city managers who were trained engineers and we wanted to run it like a business and we wanted to deliver services and we wanted to manage those services well. And we tipped the balance toward service delivery. And so it has to do both. It has to make and enforce laws, regulate how we're going to deal with each other. And deliver services. But frankly, in 2013, it's less about delivering services now. And a little bit more, we figured out how to run the city more or less. I mean, the initial problems that we had, you know, we needed to have the sanitary city. We figured that out. We pretty much know sewage treatment and so on and so forth and streets and roads and all that. But now figuring out how to live with each other is getting to be kind of a challenge. Now, what did Rodney King say? Can't we all get along? Well, apparently not. And we need some help with that. So government, in order to have the community conditions, in order for it to be okay, there has to be this balance where government has to deliver services and allow us to come together to make agreements and abide by those agreements. So what's the challenge? So that's the purpose of government. That's what we're trying to do here. The biggest challenge is the disconnect between the people and their government. People no longer, and this isn't just in the United States, although it's particularly virulent in the United States, people don't trust government. They don't have any confidence in government. They think government is inefficient, ineffective, and inequitable. And part of that comes from the denigration of politics. More and more, we have forgotten that politics is the sacred duty of a citizen. It is your job. We talk about rights and taxpayers' rights and so on. It is your job to be politically involved. And to the extent that we're not, this disconnect grows. People talk about how bad the government is. You are the government. You are the government. I mean, Lincoln wasn't kidding when he said of the people, by the people, for the people. And so it can't work any other way. That's how it is. We have denigrated politics and we have more and more handed things over to the experts. And I'm reading a book right now by Paul Light. And it's called A Government Ill-Executed. And he talks about the need to have a government that works well. Aside from the issues of big policy and so forth, just a government that trains right on time.  Things work. And he talks about the thickening of government. By which he means more and more layers, more and more bureaucracy, particularly in the federal government, more and more red tape. And here's the way I look at it. When I read what Professor Light is writing about the thickening, I think about how distant the policymakers are from the world they're creating. In the class where Mayor Walling and I were just talking, somebody asked about public education. And I launched into a rant about public education. Reform and so forth. When Bill Gates works to have schools like the ones where he sends his kids, will be in good shape. The people who design the policies are not impacted by the policies. The world is distant from them. They don't understand what it's like. Peggy Noonan, who writes for the Wall Street Journal, was a speech writer for Reagan way back when I read her stuff. Sometimes it's reasonable. Sometimes it infuriates me. She's got a right-wing slant that is a little hard to take sometimes. But she has certain themes, and she is a good writer. In this morning's blog, I woke up early, early this morning rehearsing this in my head. And so I decided to go ahead and get on the computer and read some stuff. And her blog this morning picks up a theme that she has talked about a lot of times. And that is that the people in charge have lived privileged lives. They've gone to the best schools. They've never dealt with adversity. And they're always shocked when things don't work out. And she's specifically talking about the Iraq war, but she means the theme larger. When I get on the bus in D.C., when I go to the metro and get on the metro, I know that the people who designed that system don't ride the bus. They don't ride the metro. When I go to the DMV, I know the people who designed the DMV don't answer by the DMV. When you visit a public school, you know that the people who designed that school probably never will send their children there. That's certainly the case in my town that I was in in Kansas City. And that's a problem. That's a problem. And that leads to this distrust and this disconnection. More and more public means poor. Public service, public transit, that's transit for poor people. Public schools, those are schools for poor people. Public safety, we live in gated communities. We've got private security. More and more of that disconnect is a real problem. And so in terms of citizen engagement, we have to be really, really smart about how to figure out how to make these connections. I'm going to give you a quick example of what I mean. There was a New York Times article, I think yesterday, or maybe Saturday, about the Atlanta school cheating scandal. And I commend it to your reading. It's an interesting, interesting story on like half a dozen different levels. But the part that struck me was how no one seemed to know among the policymakers and the elite in Atlanta that this cheating scandal was going on. And they did not want to know. They were darn upset with Sonny Perdue, the Republican white governor, when he launched an investigation. What the investigation found out, 85 teachers so far have confessed. And it wasn't just sort of idle stuff. I mean, you know, schools that should have gotten more funds because they had disadvantaged kids didn't get the money because the test scores went up. The principals got bonuses. The superintendent, who I'm sure was very well paid, got a half million dollars in bonuses. But anyone who asked the parents, hey, little Johnny's test score last year was 28. This year it's 72. Does he seem like he's doing better? Anybody who talked to the actual parents, anybody who talked to the actual children, this was not hard to find out. 30 years as a performance editor, I know how to do stuff like this and this was like a piece of cake. I wouldn't have to have somebody wear a wire.  You have to know the roots of it. I mean, altering test scores? Is that like a shock? Oh my God, who would have thought of that?  You know, and so you have to be able to, if you're going to use numbers, and God knows, I believe in using numbers. I do have an MBA in accounting and finance, but examine the numbers and engage the folks. What do these numbers mean to you?  I think this is the central deal, is the disconnect between the people and their government. Here's a path forward. First, recognize that the outcomes that you want are co-produced between the citizens and the government working together. Children's test scores will go up when parents read to them, right? I mean, we all know that. Now, there are lots of reasons why parents can't read to them or won't read to them. In some cases, I mean, the kids don't have parents. They're being raised by a grandchild. The parents work in two or three jobs. The parent has mental health issues. There's a million reasons. But the outcomes that we want are co-produced. The school is not solely responsible, and the parent is not solely responsible. The teacher who says, it's the parents. We're the professional, the policymaker who says, it's the parents fault. I blame the parents. No, these outcomes are co-produced. You know, as mayor in Kansas City, whenever there was a disaster, a problem, you show up. You talk to folks. You see what's going on. And we had tornadoes. I mean, Kansas City is kind of a mecca for tornadoes. And so when I would drive to wherever the tornado happened and get out of the car at whatever time it was in the morning, 7, 8, whatever, the sound I would hear, chainsaws, chainsaws. The chainsaws were being operated by regular folks, ordinary citizens who were cutting up the trees. The trees that fell on so-and-so's house, you know, and dragging them to the curb or whatever, where the public works truck with this big grappling arm was picking them up and putting them in the bin to haul them away.  You know, the fire department is not there when the tornado levels your house at 4 in the morning.  It's your neighbor.  This is the first time this really, like, resonated in my head. As I was reading this public health journal about, you know, emergency response to the Loma Payeta earthquake, major, major earthquake. These researchers counted 35,000 ordinary citizens who drug people out of the car, did this, you know, rescued people. Where were the emergency responders? Well, the freeway had collapsed. They were stuck wherever.  You know, and so the public health outcome was influenced by the regular folks. It's the chainsaws in the morning. It's us. Fortunately, we're pretty decent people. So we need to recognize this, that underpinning the results that we get in terms of performance management, underpinning all those results are political choices. Shall we pay the teachers more or less? That's a political choice. Shall we give the fire department more money or less?  Shall we close a police station here, put in a new one? Shall we build new sewers in this part of town? Shall we ignore the sewers that are collapsing in this other part of town? Those are all political choices. And those are all governance kinds of choices. As an auditor, you spend sort of like an ambulance chaser. It's one scandal after another.  And what you find, the big failures over and over are failures of governance. Management's important, but the big failures, the real corruption is always a failure of governance. I mean, y'all are paying a lot of attention to Detroit. They had a what, a kleptomaniac mayor, Kwame Kilpatrick. Those were failures of governance. Those are not management issues. So, recognize that the outcomes are co-produced, rehabilitate politics and recognize that every citizen has political responsibility. Improvements in performance, whether they're educational outcomes or public safety outcomes and so forth, are always the result, real improvements, are always the result of a series of political acts. Showing up, doing stuff, making different decisions in terms of the allocation of resources and so forth.  I mean, that's, if I'm improving performance dramatically, then I have to, you know, we can't, what is that old joke, you can't keep doing the same thing and expect a different result, so we need to do something different. Well, if you do something different, people are going to push back. And there's this Frederick Douglass quote that comes to mind when I think about this stuff. You know, you said there is no progress without struggle. Those who want progress without struggle want, you know, they want the rain without the thunder and lightning. They want crops without plowing up the ground. I mean, there's always going to be pushback. And as Mayor in Kansas City, I wanted to change the pension system, particularly for the firefighters. I said so in my inauguration speech after I got elected. And of course, people knew it when I was running. So I had, what, 200 firefighters show up at every public appearance with signs, keeping the funky hands off my pension. That's democracy, folks. You know, that's the way it works. And we worked, that took us four years, but we worked out a deal that worked okay for everybody. But you can't not have that. You can't say, you know what, I want to change the pension system, but I don't want anybody to say anything. Because if nobody says anything, you haven't changed anything. You are all pursuing, at least to be, hey, most of you are probably getting a graduate degree of some kind. And you're going to be an expert at some point. But you need to discard the veil of expertise. You, of course, know certain facts, certain ideas that ordinary citizens who don't have your degree aren't going to know. Although lots of the citizens you deal with are going to have degrees in something else, engineering or chemistry or electric or law or something. Well, you have to deal with them recognizing that they have virtually no respect anymore for institutions or expertise, because those institutions and experts have let them down over and over and over. And so you have to kind of, you can't march in and say, I'm the expert, believe it to me, I'm handling it. You know, you have to engage them where they are and recognize their own expertise. And you have to, as a public official, as a political official, you have to also act as a public official, say you're a professional, say you're a professional city manager, you have to act politically as well. And to pretend that you don't is a fraud.  So for example, and you have to shape your profession as well as practice it. So as a practicing performance auditor, as a city auditor, as a state auditor, I would do my job every day and I would try to push the frontiers, you know, do it as better than other folks, more innovative, more interesting. I won lots of awards for being an innovative auditor. I know it sounds like an oxymoron. But at the same time, I would argue and fight and write papers to GASB, the Government Accounting Standards Board, to push them to do things differently than they were doing. I would argue and fight with the Government Accountability Office, GAO, that sets the standards for auditing in the United States. I would, you know, those are political acts. Changing how people do accounting matters a lot. You know, changing what auditors are required to do matters a lot. In fact, it matters so much right now that people are trying to destroy or dismantle GASB or at least put a shackle on it because they've actually gone too far. But you have to recognize that, that you do your job every day and, you know, you think firefighters haven't figured this out? They do their job, but they also lobby city hall. Well, you have to do the professional equivalent of that. So you practice your profession and you shape it as well. Now I'm going to go to three specific strategies that I think will work in terms of citizen engagement. And these things are not sort of packaged discreetly or separately. They're all sort of, they flow together. First is placemaking. You can Google this if you haven't, look it up. There's a lot of elements to placemaking. But essentially it involves working with the people who live in a particular place, particularly in the neighborhood, and make that place better as they understand it, as what they want. The folks who do a lot of research in placemaking say that for a place to be successful, there need to be at least ten different reasons for people to show up at that place. A place that is extremely successful, Bryant Park in New York City. If you've ever been to it, it was a wreck 20 years ago. It was an absolute wreck. Today it is like one of the nicest places in the city. And I was talking to a guy the other day, so I'm beggin this placemaking. Kansas City, we had an affordable housing program where we would build houses in the distressed areas of the city. And we'd build brand new houses and nobody would buy them. Why would nobody buy them? They'd sit vacant literally for a couple of years. Nobody wanted to live there. What does a real estate agent tell you? It's location, location, location.  You know, you still have to make the location nice. But then this guy, Rick Baker, used to be the mayor of St. Petersburg. And he was talking to me, one of our former public officials a year when he was mayor, retired from that now. And he said, you know, it's got to be like Winnie the Pooh. I said, excuse me, Winnie the Pooh? He said, yeah, Winnie the Pooh is a theory of downtown development, for example. And I said, so please enlighten me. This is placemaking. He said, you know, Christopher Robin and Winnie are walking along in the Hundred Acre Wood. And Winnie the Pooh says, you know, Christopher Robin, you're my best, best friend. He said, Tigger and New York, they're my best friends. Because with them, I can do anything. But you are my best, best friend. Because with you, I can do nothing at all. What Baker meant about that was that downtown should be a place where you would want to go for no particular reason. Because it was just interesting and fun. And you didn't know what might happen if you went down there, but you would see other people. In other words, you could build a downtown where people would come down for the baseball stadium. You could build a downtown where people would come down to shop. But what you needed was a place where people would come down just because they knew it would be fun and interesting. Where they would go when they didn't have anything better to do. And that's placemaking. What you want, you know you're winning when people make more money and they have a better life. And their number one objective is not to move the hell out of the neighborhood. Because usually, as soon as people get enough money and they're doing well enough, they want to get out of the neighborhood. So your objective is to make a place, a neighborhood that they're attached to, that they're loyal to, that they feel good about and they want to stay in placemaking. And it starts with asking the folks who live there, it never works to bring in a new retail box or bring in a new stadium or bring in a whatever. This is not the kind of thing where you can spend a million dollars or a billion dollars and build something pretty and oh, it's one. In fact, that works. It doesn't work over and over. Community economic development. Real economic development. Again, focused on the people who live in the community. Not bringing something in necessarily, but focused on the people who live in the community. Asking them what do you want? What would you like? What are your hopes, dreams, aspirations? How would you do better? And then allowing them, focusing on them, doing better. Classic deal here. There's a nonprofit called Make Mine a Million.  And her names popped out of my head. But her whole idea is to focus on women entrepreneurs because and focus on investment, small amounts of capital to women entrepreneurs and training in terms of how to better market their stuff and so forth. And she said the reason for doing this is first of all, their companies are very small. They generally have 1.1 employees. And so if they could make more money and employ more people, employment would grow up and they don't leave. They're not footloose. They're not going to move out of the neighborhood. So Make Mine a Million, she wants to take their average size of one of these companies is about $150,000 and she wants to make it a million dollar company. And she got a real track record of success in doing this. But that's the kind of small entrepreneurial, incremental economic development that is community economic development and taking venture capital kinds of funds and focusing on those kind of people. And then finally, and this is the thing that is the most important and that weaves together all those other things, is deliberative democracy. And you can Google this and look it up. You'll see all kinds of stuff about deliberative democracy. But first, let me tell you what it's not. Okay, so you've gotten a real flavor. We've been talking now for about 45 minutes. You've gotten a real flavor of who I am and sort of where I come from. I'm a raging populist. I started out as a social worker. I wanted to save the world. I still sort of want to save the world. And so I really worked as mayor to try to engage with regular folks. I did 116 town hall meetings as mayor. Take all comers, answer all questions, stay as long as they like and so on. And I'm here to tell you it was ineffective. It did not work because who shows up? It's the usual suspects, no matter how hard you try, who speaks up? You've got 100 people in the audience, 15 of them talk. Is that representative of the 15? Is that a balanced, interested point of view? No, that's whoever could get the microphone, whoever could yell the loudest, whoever could be the most provocative, whoever could call the most attention to him or herself, whoever was most successful in getting a sound bite on the evening news, or in the morning paper. That's, you know, so-and-so told funcals are last night, thoughts and such. And they get their, you know, seven seconds of fame. No, that didn't work. I wish I knew about this stuff when I started. I wish I knew about it as well as I know now. Deliberative democracy is this. And Mayor Welling just left, but he described it in a previous class. He's doing some of this in Flint. First of all, you take a representative selection of the people in the town, in the jurisdiction. And you get, you know, so you deliberately make sure that you have one of these, two of those, and 12 of the others, and so on and so forth, so that income and race and gender and language, everything represents the actual population. And you will have to find, you know, you have to provide transportation. You have to provide childcare. You have to provide food. You know, you may have to provide translation services. But you get these people together, and then you get them together in significant numbers. So at least 100 or so. And maybe several hundred. I've been in deliberative democracy forums with 1,500 people. I've heard about them with four or 5,000 people. And you put them at tables with about eight or nine persons, again carefully selected so that it's a diverse group, at each table with a professional moderator, with a person who's able to moderate a discussion in such a way that the loudest, the most educated, the most articulate doesn't dominate the discussion, that the shy, the quiet get their voice heard also. And you give it time. So it's not just, so what do you think? Put up their hand. But they deliberate. They talk about it. They trade points of view. They share experiences about what they think about the situation. You give them data. You give them real facts about whatever the issue is, whether it's public education or transportation, or whatever the pressing problems are for the jurisdiction that you've convened them to talk about. You give them real data and real facts. And you let them, and you ask them questions. And they debate those questions. And then there are ways to, you know, basically do the instant voting so forth. And so this, you know, each group comes up with their answer to the question. And there's usually the ones that I've seen. So there's the moderator. Then there's somebody sitting there at a laptop pounding in what folks are saying, the major themes and so forth, what the answers to the questions are, and they're feeding this to a central group who are for the whole 100, 500, a thousand folks taking in from all the different tables, the stuff. And then every once in a while, they put it up on a board for everybody to see, and you do the instant voting. How many of you think what we ought to do to deal with transportation, for example, in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area? You know, we need X dollars to maintain the metro. We have X minus Y. We've got a funding gap. What do you think we ought to do? You know, cut metro service, you know, add tax and so on and so forth, and people vote. You know, and then they discuss, well, seeing 70% of the people want to do X. What do you think about that? And they discuss some more, and they take time. It takes time. But over the course of time, over the course of say six or seven hours a day, the people begin to have confidence in each other. They begin to understand each other. They begin to have a sort of sense of camaraderie, and often what they want to do is stay together afterward. You give them the option to trade phone numbers and so forth, and they say, yeah, you know, I really got to know Susan here. You know, and even though she lives in a different part of town, and she has a different point of view, I think, you know, I think I'd like to stay in touch with her. It's connected to political leadership. This can't go on, this deliberative democracy stuff can't go on sort of over here with the city government or the state government or whatever over here. The political leadership needs to be engaged. They need to be there. They need to hear the discussion. They need to see what's going on. People need to see them. Now, I mean, they need to be visible at the event. They need to give it their support. Yeah, I'm going to listen to what you all have to see here today. And the political leadership needs to commit to follow through. Yes, you all have said that what you would like to do about this is X or Y and so forth, and so I'm going to try and do that. And I'm going to report back in this way or that way. There's going to be a website. You're going to be able to see what we have done. One of the best examples of all this, put all this together. When Tony Williams stopped being the financial manager of Washington, D.C. and ran for mayor and got elected. You talk about, I mean, Tony was XTAO of being counter, you know, and who had been imposed by the federal government and fought with Marion Berry the whole time and ran for mayor, got elected, and every budget that he did for the first five or six years was built on this kind of community engagement. He used a not-profit called America Speaks, and he did this. And as evidence of the fact that it worked, look at the, this is not the only reason, but I think it's a major reason for the resurgence of Washington, D.C. I mean, Washington, D.C. went from being a basket case at about 1998, not a long, long time ago, to leading the nation now in terms of economic growth per capita income, the cool factor, all that kind of stuff. I mean, pick a number, and they're like number one. So, all that stuff, what's that got to do with performance measurement? Those are the fundamentals. It has to be the thing that I talked about in Atlanta. You have to measure stuff that actually matters. You have to continually be engaged with the public, and you have to recognize that whatever you do by yourself isn't going to change anything.  I mean, pick a community condition, and you know you can't change it with just the government, and you can't change it necessarily with just the citizens. The outcomes that you want, to be able to sit safe, in my case, on the porch, and have a beer with my wife and my kids, the only way to get those outcomes is a smart government picking and measuring the numbers grounded in reality, attached to its citizens. So, final word. I talked about the thickening of the government, more and more layers, more and more distance from the people, more and more. More and more the elites come from like five colleges. I mean, both candidates for president last time, Republican and Democrat, both from Harvard. One of the things, you know, we need to push back. The elites are sort of self-selecting after a certain point. Kind of like a self-selecting board. What we need to do, I think, is push back on that. Challenge it. We need less Harvard and more University of Michigan. Go over it. What would you like to talk about? Thank you for talking. So, I'm curious about your experience in performance audit, how it's informed your world view. I'm curious about two specific things. One, if you could talk a little bit more about the issues you brought up with the GAO and GASB in relationship to the conduct of performance audits. And then if you could also touch more on how it's informed your world view as crises, being more governance crises than management crises, because I'm not sure that that's a popularly held opinion. So, that's the other thing I'm curious about. All right. So, first with GAO and with GASB. The GASB fight, I mean, and there have been a number, some of which we have, the good guys have won. Some of which the good guys have lost. One of the things that when I first, so I was already working as a performance auditor when I went to get the MBA. I wanted to get promoted. I wanted to have a good career. I loved doing the performance audit work. I fell into it by accident. But I could tell I was never going to get promoted if I didn't have, I mean, MSW. People looked at me like I was something weird, you know. And I was, you know, so I went and got an MBA and accounting and finance. You know, I'll show you. And in my very first accounting class, the guys talking about the cost of capital and I said, well, what about in government? You know, I mean, we don't, we don't depreciate. There's no recognition of the cost of capital. Surely it's not free. And he said, ah, no. He said, you can't depreciate things like the Statue of Liberty. You know, that's irrelevant for government. Well, that's nuts. The laws of physics weren't repealed for government. I mean, the Statue of Liberty actually required several hundred millions of dollars of repairs. Concrete, deteriorate, steel, rust. GASB35 said we will charge the cost of capital. It was a 15-year fight. The GFOA and others hated the idea. But I think it's part of the reason we have the infrastructure crisis we have today is we were able to carry on our books as if the capital never, the steel never rustic, concrete never deteriorated.  And eventually we won. It was not a clean victory, but now if you look at the financial statements for the city of Flint, you're going to see a cost of capital in there. And that's reflecting reality. A battle that we lost was on service efforts and accomplishments reporting. What good are financial statements if you can't tell what you got for the money? Other people have figured this out.  You know, these measures fairly represent and so forth. Now imagine a situation like the Atlanta cheating scandal and I could name a thousand more like it if the auditor for the school district was required to opine on the performance data as well as the financial data. But the forces of evil won that fight and we haven't got that yet. And with GAO, well, the first fight was to call it performance auditing and we won. You know, when performance auditing first came about in the late 70s, it was operational auditing, it was expanded scope auditing, it was whatever. And we couldn't figure out what it was, we couldn't define it and I and others won a fight with GAO. A, it's performance auditing and B, here's the definition and since GAO is sort of the bellwether for the world in many respects, it certainly was in the 70s, less and less so today, the rest of the world went that way. So now if you look intoside, the International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions, you have performance audit standards called performance audit defined correctly coming from intoside, worldwide standards. You look at the auditor's office, auditor general for Kenya, performance auditing, you know, so that's a fight we won. A fight that got a very, very small partial victory was the audit standards and again, this is what drives all the auditors, they have to do the standards, they're required to do it. They talk about efficiency and effectiveness. I wanted them to add equity. So that we would opine on the efficiency and effectiveness and equity with which dollars are spent. The reason that's important is that the city of Kansas City is not Walmart, it's not, I mean we have a police department. We give the government, you give the state of Michigan, the city of Ann Arbor, you give it money, you also give it authority and responsibility. The police officer has the authority to shoot you dead. The city of Ann Arbor has the authority to issue a permit or not to condemn your property or not. In other words, there are multiple opportunities for the abuse of equity, just as there are for efficiency and effectiveness. I wanted GAO to recognize that and the standards. I've fought with them about 10 years and there's a niggling little something in there now but it ain't much. But that stuff really shapes the world in ways that most people don't understand. Like I said, I think we have, part of the infrastructure crisis we have today is because for 150 years we pretended that capital only managed, mattered if it was a private business. It didn't matter if it was public. Hi, I have a question about your place building and working with communities to build a place where they want to be. And I think that is a very important part of building public policy and meeting the needs of people but the other part of that conversation is what happens after, which is often displacement or justification. So as soon as a neighborhood or community is getting the light shined on them and things are improving it becomes too expensive for those people who are there building it to live there and then they're accused of hindering economic development and growth and new business and new people. So how do you strike a balance when working with communities to both build a place where people can live now and 15 years from now, 20 years from now? Gentrification is, you know, it is, I'm trying to figure out how to say this without sounding too politically incorrect but it is a good problem to have. It is much better to have rising property values and try to figure out how to make it okay for people to keep their houses and stay in that neighborhood and there are ways we could do that. Affordable housing would work in a place with rising property values where people want to live. But it is so much better a problem to have than the problem that Detroit has, that Kansas City has, that Flint, Michigan has where property values are declining rapidly and people are trapped. It's kind of like bad traffic downtown. Whenever somebody comes to visit in DC for example, they talk about how horrible the traffic is. That's because people want to be there. So there are ways to deal with gentrification and we should try to think about that but we should get ourselves to a place that is our problem. We want to get to a place where we have to figure out how to keep so and so in his or her house because what I saw, I used to have maps on the wall in the mayor's office that would show me city blocks where there was one house occupied. Two houses occupied and I'd go see Mrs. So and So because it was almost always an older lady they tend to out-lived men and she'd be there defending her space keeping her picket fence and so on and so forth in absolute desolation. I mean you drive down Euclid Avenue in Kansas City and it looks like you're in the country and there's the only way you know you're in town is that there are concrete steps from the street to nothing. Houses have been torn down 20 years ago and then you come to Mrs. Smith's house you know you know so she's worse off than I think than if she were surrounded by a neighborhood that was sort of trying to price her out and we can find ways circuit breakers, homestead exemptions we can find ways to stay in the house and stay there. It is also true that you know unemployment is always a problem employment for people without skills is always a problem but again to have the tax base from which to work on those to be able to support the community college system the vocational system and so on and so forth that's just a dream in places where the property values and particularly in United States Mayor Walling talked a lot about this in the class that he and I were just in about Flint where most of the money is property values property tax you're just in a world of hurt so gentrification is a problem but it's a good problem. Hi I do research on democratic deliberation so it was really hard to hear your pitch for deliberation. Did I get it right? I think that was great. And so my question for you is what we've seen a lot of sort of experiments with democratic deliberation like the one that you describe in DC and you know sort of small scale things that happen occasionally all around the country but what needs to happen to make that sort of thing a more routine process a more routine part of governing like you know you can think of parallels like public comments on regulations or even like the kind of town hall meetings that you were talking about earlier how do we get it so that democratic deliberation becomes something like that? The politicians who do it need to win. I mean I'm serious about that you know nothing as soon as they start winning that's why I tell the Anthony Williams story because it's sucker one and he won in ways that people wouldn't have thought and Adrian Fenty did not do it and he got beat and so the lesson was not lost on the current mayor Vincent Gray it was his meeting that I attended I mean you know so you know Vince looked around you know Tony won Adrian got beat I'm doing what Tony did I mean really nothing succeeds like success and believe me mayors and governors watch each other like hawks it's not an accident that you know somebody does you know this or that kind of deal proposes this or that kind of tax reform and it spreads like prairie fire if it wins. Right here they're running to you I had a question on your example about the DC transportation system and we had a course at the beginning of the semester talking about transport and one of the things I realized was I represented one of the agencies advocating for the people in the community and yet when asking the president or the director of the organization if she'd ever or she routinely rode the transportation public transport she definitely did not and I guess when you talk about how how to minimize the loudest voice in the room and you go to those public forums but you continue to hear the same people how do you put yourself in a situation where you are hearing the other voices or everyone has an opinion but the people who really utilize the resources what would you advocate for the best way to do that? Well a couple of things. One the techniques of deliberative democracy that I talked about where you recruit people and so forth where you don't wait for volunteers you sort of go get them and make it really really easy for them to come but with regard to transit you do want to listen to the people who don't use it also because you want them to use it you want to figure out why they don't use it I mean you want to grow your customer base so to speak and you want to figure out why they don't use it and get them to use it but I have a friend who is my age who retired from Disney World in Florida and he spent an entire career there and accounts payable and basically the accounting stuff except that every year he had to go out as Chippendale or whatever and mingle with the folks and he had to do the silly stuff that makes Disney World run and so so and so is the operations manager or the chairman or whatever for your transit agency I think they ought to drive a bus a couple of days a year I think they ought to ride a bus a couple of days a year and it ought to be part of the job just like my friend at Disney World I mean you know you can't know what it's like otherwise and you make stupid decisions now there are lots of good marketing techniques in between of course you can do focus groups and you do rider surveys and so on and so forth but until you do it yourself you have no idea what it's like and so here's a guy or a woman regulating say an amalgamated transit union you know 500 bus drivers never once having sat behind the wheel and driven a bus say in DC I mean I ride the bus a lot I see all the public criticism I wouldn't have those people's job for nothing I mean my God I can't even drive in that city I'm not in a resort to Gunfire I mean and does everyone's father be some outrage in the paper oh my God they make $65,000 a year why shouldn't a bus driver make $65,000 a year in DC that is not a lot of money to live there and shouldn't they be able to have a middle class life and raise their kids and participate in the community and so forth so to me I want to know what the non-riders think I want to know what the riders think but you have to cut through that thing where the chairman or whoever is in charge has never ridden the bus, never driven a bus never been involved they're not going to understand what's going on and they're going to make bad decisions I think Hi thanks again for your talk my name is Ebony and my question is what suggestions do you have for a city like Detroit who's already struggling that's already struggling fiscally in terms of implementing direct I'm sorry, deliberate democracy in the way that you described without burdening the city with more cost okay first of all my piece this morning on Governing.com is about Detroit so it's about that question I'm going to comment in there so they've got a new financial manager Kevin Orr and he's saying I believe some of the right stuff which is that it is not going to be it can't be all about cutting, cutting, cutting privatized, privatized, privatized you know that's not what ultimately will not save Detroit and Detroit is in enormously bad shape I mean I look at cities in bad shape and Detroit is an anomaly I mean they're way, way out there but there is a loyal core of people who still are willing and able and happy to live in Detroit and pay taxes and that group of people needs to be respected and dealt with and honored and we have to find a way to grow that base you know there is a reason why there is a city there and whatever that original reason is has to be reconnected with and rebuilt you know of course you want to manage the money well of course you're going to have to bring revenues into line with expenditures of course you don't want to waste money but if you can't get people middle class people moving into your city and staying you're never going to make it you're never going to make it I mean that is the bottom line you have to now more than ever people can live anywhere they want I mean they can my company is a national company we've got people across the United States they live where they want to live so it's more competitive than it's ever been and you have to find ways there are strengths that Detroit has that they have to play to to keep people there Philadelphia seems to have turned around it was in the receivership it was I didn't realize I was telling Barry when I started looking into the whole receiver control board, financial manager yada yada yada I wasn't aware of some of the successes it's actually worked several places and you don't hear about those but where it works the way you can tell it works is an uptick in population Philadelphia got an uptick in population for the first time in like 40 or 50 years I actually did a column where I went and looked in the 2010 census at every city that got an uptick in population for the first time in 30 or 40 years and Philadelphia was the largest of those cities it seems that most people who are elected mayor or to a city council suddenly feel they have the divine right of kings and they really show no interest in the public's participation in decision making in fact they really see it as bothersome and how do you overcome that to implement the things you have been talking about you know I talk to a lot of mayors a lot of them and I don't generally feel that I don't generally hear that but I do see this I do see that city governments including the mayor are frequently incredibly irresponsive to citizens as mayor in Kansas City I was stunned to be able to see how unresponsive we were I mean I do a town hall meeting people would want us to add police officers I would do surveys I would do focus groups I would do everything there was no question I go to the city council I propose a budget that adds police officers we cut police officers literally there is no limit I guess to how stupid cynical venal bad politics can be within the city hall but the chairman the city council chairman of the finance committee looked at me and I said this is stupid we can't do this why are you doing this and she said I don't like the police chief I want to teach him a lesson he wasn't nice to her I mean he had agreed with me yes he would like more police officers he and 4,000 other folks but the decision was you know I don't like him I'm cutting the budget and I got the votes mayor and you don't and you can get away with that I mean you can get away with it again I don't think most mayors like that the ones I've talked to but you can get away with it because you can get the money I mean she she ran for mayor and was considered a favorite for a long time and she had hundreds of thousands of dollars behind her so you don't need the people if you've got the money you know and so there is a huge disconnect to go back to what I said before I don't think my experience is not it's not necessarily always with the mayor it is with the city government it is with the county you know state you all done? have a where you at? you're much easier than a town hall meeting of citizens by the way I could ask this very angrily if you want me to actually I just wanted to say first I'm actually from Kansas City and if you can believe this it's a pretty small world campaign for you door to door in Waldo God bless you I knew you were a fine young man so actually in our public management class and I really appreciated your comments about policy makers being disconnected and trying to get this more deliberative process on the ground or we're getting more of the constituents involved how do you see that competing with larger private or interest groups like maybe in Kansas City like Kauffman Foundation or Sprint or Surner or private interests which are looking at like TIF commercial all these things to get their own advantage where in Detroit we have similar comparisons the Kresge Foundation Dan Gilbert how do you see their interests which are representing a smaller subset but they have much more resources and maybe in a certain capacity can do more but maybe they also have different visions than like the constituents who are still living in Detroit can you just talk about that a little bit it's you put your finger on a real problem and you wrap together two or three different things there the foundation like the Kauffman Foundation or whatever can sort of only work its will through the political process you know I mean ultimately you know they either can get you know in Kansas City's case seven votes on the city council or sometimes they can circumvent the city and go to Jeff City or Lansing the state capitol and get a preemption and so that's you know and other than sort of limiting money into campaigns and of course making it much more transparent and I don't know how you can limit money I mean everybody's tried the various campaign finding and stuff only make it more transparent it's about the only thing I can see but with regard to TIF tax increment financing and that sort of stuff those are flat out bribes those are just bribes I don't know I can't tell you I I would say to so and so prominent individual and so you gotta raise money right to run for mayor in fact in Kansas City you gotta raise a lot of money hundreds of thousands of dollars and you gotta ask people for money and just like Willie Sutton said you gotta go where the money is I never talked to so many millionaires until I decided I wanted to be mayor and so you ask him I'd like your support and he says it depends what's your position on TIF and he said well in very carefully controlled circumstances I think it makes sense but most of the time it's not a good idea he said oh well thank you and you know $50,000 to the other guy who by the way wins so that's just I mean we ought not to do that and there has to be some sort of national law I mean there has to be some sort of stop to that I mean the New York Times recently did a piece really great investigative journalism on this $80 billion a year in tax expenditures tax preferences if I go and pay you essentially you know X thousand in bribes and basically I'm you're given a certain amount of money I will give you so much in future tax donations or tax forgiveness for campaign contribution it's essentially what it is it's just corrupt but you're not going to stop it without some sort of national law and it ought to be illegal it ought to be illegal there's a Walgreens across the street from a CVS and Walgreens pays three times as much in taxes as a CVS because they got a tax deal they had a better tax lawyer that's just corrupt in Kansas City I mean it was virulent and we got elected and we put a squash on it and then when I ran for re-election I didn't know that you were involved there but there were all these grainy photographs of television commercials and you can imagine how I look in those kind of parodies but there's in black and white slow motion this great big bearded guy just stomping on jobs and killing jobs you know whatever it is always good to have a job stomping innovative auditor raging populist in your midst especially when that's Mark Funkhauser please join me in thanking Mark for sharing some time with us today thank you thank you very much


What are spam comments on Instagram, and should you delete them? Spam comments are unsolicited, unrelated, and fishy comments users get on their posts. Bots often post these comments to get users to follow an account or click on a spammy link. Sometimes they're harmless comments from regular users attempting to gain followers for their account, and other times they're naughty words accompanied by suggestive emojis. Should you be worried about spam comments on your business Instagram account? The answer is yes. Do you want to know why? Even though sometimes these spam comments come from harmless bots, they're still unrelated to your content and out of place. And, they often contain fishy, misleading links that can make genuine commenters avoid your posts.  No, don't ignore spam comments because it can make you look incompetent at managing your account. It is not good for business and can result in a bad customer experience. Instead, delete spam comments as soon as they show up and block the commenters to prevent future spam from them. The best way to handle spam comments on Instagram is to block them ahead of time and prevent the bots from seeing or commenting on your posts. Here is a proven method to stop the annoying spam comments on your Instagram posts. Visit your profile. Click on the three dots, then privacy, and hidden words. Click manage custom words and phrases. Separate words with a comma. Click hide comments. This method only hides the spam comments from your followers, it doesn't delete them completely. To avoid getting the spam comments completely, you can block the sender from commenting on your posts. Visit your profile. Tap the three dotted lines, click setting, privacy, and then comments. See block comments from. Click people and enter the name of the account you want to block. Click block. Do this for all the accounts you want to deny access to comment. Blocking comments from these accounts does not automatically remove their previous comments on your posts. You have to delete previous spam comments from your posts manually. Deleting spam comments affects engagement on an Instagram post. However, it is better to have fewer quality comments than more spammy, useless ones.  Read the full blog post from Lisa Sikard at InspireToThrive.com.


This study investigates the impact of caesarean section, CS, and vaginal delivery disparity on timely initiation of breastfeeding, TIBF, and identifies factors that contribute to TIBF in Nigeria, using data from the 2018 Nigerian Demographic Health Survey. The results show that women with CS delivery had five times lower odds of TIBF compared to those with vaginal delivery, and that skin-to-skin contact can reduce the negative effect of caes on TIBF. Early mother-child contact is critical for improved breastfeeding practice. This article was authored by IWK video.