OUR VIEW: Citizens Shut Out (Again)

Posted November 5th, 2009
in
Vancouver’s city hall is in the midst of the decision-making process for the annual operating budget during the biggest financial crisis in a generation. Millions of dollars have disappeared from city coffers due to out-of-control Olympic costs, downloading and transfer cuts by senior governments and reduced revenues from development. 

For the second budget in a row, balancing the books will include some tough choices to deal with the projected multi-million dollar shortfall. As city manager Dr. Penny Ballem has said in the media, the impact of the expected cuts to city services mean changes that “are going to affect and impact everybody."

It’s official, the city is in deep trouble. Gather citizens, we have a crisis to solve!

Yet city council has not made an adequate attempt to bring the people of Vancouver into this all-important budget debate. Instead, council and staff have developed their plans in secret leaving little time or opportunity for citizens to have meaningful input.

City hall has been working on the 2010 budget since Feb. 3 as part of an organization-wide review of city operations mandated by council and designed to help address the significant budget shortfall. In comparison, citizens were brought into the budget debate on Oct. 23, when city hall issued a Friday afternoon press release announcing public budget consultations that would begin Oct. 25 and wrap up by mid-November.
 
In all, citizens will get a bare three weeks to review, mobilize and provide input on the 2010 budget. In comparison, staff and elected officials will have had ten months to consider their options for service cuts, tax increases and user fee hikes.

On top of the limited time for public involvement, city council has also rolled out what can only be described as a tokenistic consultation effort for the 2010 budget that utilizes an approach to consultation that has consistently received a low rate of public participation going back to 2007 in Vancouver.

Take the 2009 budget consultation process for example. There was a series of public meetings that attracted less than 100 attendees, an online/offline survey that drew less than 540 people, and a telephone survey of only 600 hundred residents. The cost for engaging just over 1,200 citizens was $175,000 or almost $150 per person consulted. But despite 2009’s spectacular failure, the 2010 public process is using the exact same consultation format.

Past poor showings have been mostly due to a combination of limited citizen awareness of budget issues and the use of engagement tools and techniques that provide a very limited opportunity for citizens to participate. Moreover, Vancouverites are likely experiencing consultation fatigue, as these stale and unproductive public engagement exercises provide the same old surface level engagement that is all-too-familiar in this city – citizen consultation that shows little evidence of having any impact compared to the effort citizens are asked to put in. 

When cities face the kind of tough decisions Vancouver has been presented with in the 2010 budget, this is precisely the time to bring citizens into the debate. Citizens can and want to understand the choices their government is facing. We need to feel our elected officials are listening and acting on our concerns.

Instead of making an effort to bring citizens back into the decision-making process, Vancouver’s 2010 budget consultation has continued the same kind of public engagement format that has proven to be a high-cost bust. This has to change.

If Vancouver’s government wants a credible budget consultation, this means they will need to better allocate their $175,000 budget to initiate the engagement process long before the final budget decisions are being made. Plus, they need to provide a strong information campaign promoting the main budget issues and develop newer and more relevant opportunities for public participation. But most importantly, this city council has to demonstrate to citizens that their participation has real impacts on the decisions city hall makes.

But there is some good news coming out of the broken 2010 budget consultation process. Mayor Gregor Robertson and some of his fellow Vision councilors appear to be getting the message.

In response to Think City’s comments at the Nov. 2 special forum for community organizations and businesses on the 2010 budget, both Mayor Robertson and city services and budget chair Councillor Raymond Louie invited our organization to provide guidance on future budget consultations. With the input of Think City supporters we will take the city up on this offer in the new year.

Mayor Robertson and his Vision Vancouver councillors campaigned on “restor[ing] accountability and trust, and put[ting] citizens back into the decision-making process.” It’s now up to them to make sure Vancouver’s 2011 budget consultation process meets this goal.

City Hall

On November 6th, 2009 Anonymous (not verified) says:
I agree. This is a very secretive mayor and council. I have sent numerous emails to the mayor and council and not one councilor has replied to me. This council and mayor are very arrogant, believing they have all the answers and can do without any consultation or input from anyone else. Other than allowing chickens (and thus rats and disease) in residential areas and giving cyclists a bike lane on the Burrard Bridge what else has this city done this year? Nothing else green but a lot of talk. And... oh yes, they went to the province for a change in the city charter so they could spend over their budget on the Olympic village and acquiesced when the Olympics told us the RCMP can abuse our charter rights to freedom of speech. That's a great "vision", Gregor. I think you are just biding your time until you take over from Carole James. And then you'll make Campbell's secretive government look like show and tell.

How about putting the consultation money to better use....

On November 5th, 2009 Avril (not verified) says:
....by adopting a truly deliberative process that first informs citizens and then solicits their input? Of course people can't be expected to comment knowledgeably about budget allocations if they haven't been given any information that is clear, accessible and understandable! (And unbiased. That would be good too.) Something like the National Issues Forums (NIF) in the U.S. would be just the ticket. No doubt it would not be cheap. On the other hand, the quality of the deliberation would improve by about 1000%, and the quality of the decisions made would also improve significantly. Check it out: http://www.nifi.org/forums/about.aspx

Budget

On November 5th, 2009 allan zeller (not verified) says:
I cannot comprehend one cent being spent on a retractable roof for B.C. place stadiumI have polled one hundred people not one agrees with this expenditure,Nor is it in their one hundred top priorities.. We have not recovered from the Canada Line the Olympic venues, The Convention Centre, The Sea to sky highway and all the hidden associated costs. Cambie street is an absolutely beautiful showcase for the world but at what cost? Several years ago I was fighting with the city to keep all the teetertotorsrs in the City at an annual cost of $ 900.00 I truly feel citizens can't begin to comprehend the huge numbers. Someone needs a reality check!

Disagree on consultation process

On November 5th, 2009 Bill Tieleman (not verified) says:
Having just heard a City of Vancouver radio ad about the public consultation process I was amused to then get the Think City email on the same topic. The reality is that most citizens have neither the inclination, time nor ability to comment meaningfully on a City budget that is approaching $1 billion. You would get more people out to meeting if the topic were a bylaw on dogs on or off leash - or banning pitbulls or you name it other than city finances. I also see that in addition to radio and print ads, the front page of the Vancouver city website is devoted to consultation on the budget, with lots of info for those interested. So while I appreciate the effort you are making to encourage participation, to blame City Council for not spending more money to tell residents about the consultation in a year when service are being cut and when the information is readily available, I think your criticism is ill-founded.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.