2.         MID-TERM GOVERNANCE REVIEW

 

Examen de mi-mandat sur la gouvernance

 

 

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receive this report for information.

 

 

RECOMMANDATION DU COMITÉ

 

Que le Conseil prenne connaissance de ce rapport.

 

 

 

DOCUMENTATION

 

1.      Committee Coordinator’s report dated 19 June 2009 (ACS2008-CMR-CSE-0007).

 

2.   Extract of Draft Minutes.


Report to / Rapport au:

 

Council / Conseil

 

19 June 2009 / le 19 juin 2009

 

Submitted by / Soumis par: Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee / Comité des services organisationnels et du développement économique

 

Contact / Personne-ressource : Diane Blais, Committee Coordinator /
Coordonnatrice de comité,
City Clerk’s Branch / Direction du greffe
580-2424, Ext. / poste : 28091, Diane.Blais@ottawa.ca

 

City Wide / À l'échelle de la Ville

Ref N°:  ACS2009-CMR-CSE-0007

 

SUBJECT:     PUBLIC DELEGATIONS - MID-TERM GOVERNANCE REVIEW

 

OBJET:          DÉLÉGATIONS PUBLIQUES – Examen de mi-mandat sur la gouvernance

 

 

REPORT RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee receive public delegations with respect to the Mid-Term Governance Review, as referred by Council at its meeting of 10 June 2009.

 

 

RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT

 

Que le Comité des services organisationnels et du développement économique reçoive les délégations publics en ce qui concerne le rapport sur l’examen de mi-mandat sur la gouvernance, tel que référé par le Conseil à sa réunion du 10 juin 2009.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

At its meeting of 10 June 2009, Council tabled the report titled Mid-Term Governance Review (ACS2009-CMR-CCB-0043) and referred it to the 16 June 2009 meeting of the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee for the purpose of hearing public delegations.  

 

 


CONSULTATION

 

This item was advertised in the local dailies as part of the Public Meeting Advertisement on Friday preceding the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee Meeting.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

There are no financial implications since this is to receive public comments.

 

 
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

 

Document 1 -   Mid-Term Governance Review (ACS2009-CMR-CCB-0043) previously issued to all members of Council and held on file

 

 

DISPOSITION

 

Staff to implement Council’s decisions with respect to this matter.

 

 


            MID-TERM GOVERNANCE REVIEW

Examen de mi-mandat sur la gouvernance

ACS2009-CMR-CCB-0043                               city wide / À l’Échelle de la ville

 

Vice Chair Desroches reminded members that this item had been referred to Committee for the purpose of hearing public delegations.  He noted a number of the delegations registered to speak were representatives of Advisory Committees and as such, he proposed allowing them 10 minutes each for their presentations.  Before proceeding to the delegations, he invited the City Clerk to set the stage.  

 

Mr. Rick O’Connor, City Clerk and Solicitor, noted the Vice Chair had already set the stage insofar as the representations from Advisory Committees.  He confirmed this was an opportunity to receive public input and for members to ask questions of the delegations.  He explained the matter would then be returned to full Council for debate on June 24th. 

 

Responding to a question from Vice Chair Desroches, Mr. O’Connor stated the intent was not to deal with any motions or to debate the question at the current meeting and that such discussions would be held at the following week’s Council meeting.

 

In reply to a question from Councillor El-Chantiry, the City Clerk and Solicitor indicated he had not planned on making a presentation.

 

Committee heard from the following public delegations:

 

Mr. Pierre Boivin, Results-Based Scorecards Inc., referred to documents circulated to Committee members:  Results-Based Scorecards Governance System; an example of a governance scorecard; and a draft proposal to Council for the implementation of a governance system.  He then provided a brief overview of his experience in this area, mainly in the federal public service, and spoke to the executive summary of his proposal to Council.  He believed the governance report prepared by staff identified a need for metrics with regards to governance and submitted this was what his proposal addressed.  Copies of Mr. Boivin’s submissions are held on file.

 

Responding to questions from Councillor Bloess, Mr. Boivin confirmed he was proposing to sell a service to the City and that he had not approached procurement staff.  However, he reported having met with the City Clerk in January.  He explained that he had wanted to start with the governance level and would welcome suggestions as to whom he should contact.

 

Ms. Irene Mlambo and Ms. Christine Santele, City for All Women Initiative (CAWI), spoke to a document prepared and submitted by CAWI titled The Peach Paper Re-Visited, June 2009.  In doing so, they provided an overview of CAWI’s response to the mid-term governance review and outlined the organizations recommendations with regards to same.  A copy of their submission is held on file.

 

Responding to a question from Councillor Wilkinson with respect to suggestions for an application form to be used in recruiting members for advisory committees, Ms. Mlambo suggested CAWI would have to get back to members on that. 

 

Councillor El-Chantiry referenced CAWI’s recommendation with respect to training for members of advisory committees.  He believed the City Clerk’s office already did this but that the sessions were not necessarily well attended.  He recognized the importance of training, noted that CAWI had been successful in this area, and wondered if CAWI representatives could make some suggestions in this regard.  Ms. Suzanne Doerge referenced meetings and discussions held with respect to the white papers and noted that advisory committee members did not always understand how City government worked or how decisions were made.  Therefore, she talked about the need to impart a basic understanding of how City government worked and skills around chairing meetings as well as to facilitate meetings amongst the advisory committee chairs. 

 

Councillor El-Chantiry understood the type of training that could be useful to advisory committee members.  However, he re-iterated his concerns were that when staff did organize sessions, these were not well attended.  Therefore, he wondered how the City could ensure participation.  Ms. Doerge suggested putting the question to the Advisory Committee Chairs who would be presenting. 

 

Ms. Jenny Gullen, Coordinator, People for a Better Ottawa, referenced her organization’s written response to the City’s mid-term governance review, which had been circulated to all members of the Committee.  Speaking to this submission, she explained the organization’s composition, listed its goals insofar as changes to the current municipal governance structure, and expressed support for a motion approved by Council in July 2007 to take a tripe bottom line approach to budget and policy development.  She also spoke to the aspects related to the standing committee structure and public engagement.  A copy of Ms. Gullen’s written submission is held on file.

 

Councillor Wilkinson referenced the speaker’s recommendation that the City hold meetings in an open and transparent manner.  She maintained that the City already did this; that all standing committee meetings were open to the public, people could attend and speak directly to members of Council.  Ms. Gullen suggested having an assessment done to determine the extent to which public delegations felt Committees were accessible. 

 

Councillor Wilkinson raised the issue of ward councils, as referenced in the delegation’s written submission, and indicated she would be going a pilot of this.  She inquired as to the speaker’s views in this regard.  Ms. Gullen indicated her organization held a public forum on May 23rd and with respect to ward councils, people felt these could be a good idea, as long as they were done in a way that promoted inclusion. 

 

Responding to a question from Councillor Wilkinson with respect to encouraging participation, Ms. Gullen suggested working through existing voluntary sector organizations in the community. 

 

Councillor Wilkinson noted that the presenter had spoken against having the Audit, Budget and Finance Committee develop the budget, which was contrary to what the City was trying to do.  She explained what was proposed, in terms of standing committees’ involvement in the budget process and then inquired as to the speaker’s views.  Ms. Gullen supported the basic principle of having public engagement from the very beginning and then transparency and openness throughout the budget process.  She indicated her organization’s fear was that the Audit, Budget and Finance Committee could become more closed; a world onto itself. 

 

Responding to questions from Councillor Chiarelli with respect to budget processes, Ms. Gullen acknowledged that even with a budget process that involved residents from the beginning, there would always be some people who felt the need to comment on the draft budget.  She submitted that was politics.   However, she maintained she was suggesting a need for a more constructive process where the City worked hard to engage people at the beginning; a budget based on an understanding of residents’ needs rather than being based on financial constraints.  She believed starting at the beginning was a better process because it would become a consultation as opposed to a confrontation.  She remarked that there were models for development a more bottom-up budget process and she suggesting that the City engage some of the voluntary sector organizations in developing such a process.  She submitted that when people felt they had been heard at the beginning and that their opinions were respected, there was much less chance of anger and confrontation at the end.

 

Mr. Essam Hamed, Joint Chair, French Language Services Advisory Committee, referenced the recommendations already submitted by the FLSAC with respect to the City’s governance structure, which largely flowed from the Advisory Committee’s last appearance before the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee when it presented a series of recommendations aimed at giving French language services a higher profile within the City.  He talked about the need to actively offer quality services in both official languages in every aspect of City activities and offered examples when this had not been the case.  He referenced the proposed creation of a Board of Health and he maintained the need to affirm that it would be subject to the City’s Bilingualism Policy.  He reminded Committee that implementation of the Bilingualism Policy was a shared responsibility of Council and staff.  He suggested the third objective identified in the White Papers could have referenced the francophone community as a target group.  He recommended welcoming meeting participants in both official languages, having bilingual hosts for events and providing documents in French and in English simultaneously.  He expressed support for the recommendations submitted jointly by the City’s advisory committees and suggested: that the City encourage all of its advisory committees to seek to achieve equitable representation within their memberships by recruiting francophones; that all of the City’s decision-making entities meet the requirements of the Bilingualism Policy; that the selected governance model always reflect the fact that Ottawa has a Bilingualism Policy; and that strategic planning processes ensure an active offer of services in both official languages.  A copy of Mr. Hamed’s written submission is held on file.

 

Responding to questions from Councillor Bloess, Mr. Hamed agreed that the current Bilingualism Policy was pragmatic and that, to a certain degree, it served residents well.  With respect to the proposed Board of Health, he indicated the FLSAC had exchanged some correspondence in an attempt to address its concerns and that the respect had not be satisfactory.

 

Mr. Rob Sproule, Chair, Business Advisory Committee, provided a written submission, a copy of which is held on file.  He expressed excitement over the changes being implemented, which he felt would lead to a dramatically improved municipal government.  He commended Council for moving forward on this and staff for putting together the process and putting the concepts into words.  He remarked the process was putting forward an enhanced role for advisory committee and he believed that, as this was implemented, the City would see a stronger pool of candidates coming forward to participate on advisory committees.  Notwithstanding that, he supported the notion of increased orientation and training for advisory committee members, noting this was a complex environment.  He submitted that getting good advice from advisory committees required a two-way dialogue, which he felt had been missing for the past several years.  However, he believed that as the new governance structure was implemented, different forms and approaches of public input would evolve.  In closing, he again congratulated members of Council and staff on a job well done and he encouraged the continuation of these efforts.

 

Responding to comments from Councillor McRae with respect to the need for training advisory committee members, Ms. Leslie Donnelly, Deputy City Clerk, confirmed that to date, the City Clerk’s office had conducted advisory committee orientation, but not training.  However, one of the things staff had learned early on was that an orientation was not enough.  Therefore, she advised that staff had begun a very productive dialogue and a new direction with the advisory committees.  She indicated staff would be working with the advisory committees to talk about how best to train them for their roles and how best to train the chairs.  Further, she suggested that once this was successful, it could potentially be opened up to community associations in order to enhance public involvement and public knowledge about how to be engaged. 

 

Councillor McRae, appreciate that and pleased to hear you talk about community associations.  Was just speaking with the City Solicitor this morning about how some run like independent organizations and don’t offer transparency and don’t know how to conduct themselves.  That’s why I’m glad Mr. Sproule raised this issue because, when you look at how important the advisory committees’ role is, it’s also important for advisory committee members to know what their role is.  Have talked to many chairs who say they get new members on and members think they’re here to provide legislation and go off on a political bent when that’s not what the role of an advisory committee is. 

 

Mr. Sproule added that, as the process evolved to the point where there was a city-wide strategic plan and standing committees had actions plans to achieve Council’s goals, it would become easier and more effective for advisory committees to plug into this process and become more productively engaged. 

 

Ms. Sheila Perry, Vice-Chair, Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee (PRAC), suggested the principles of good governance were key.  She talked about: the importance of training advisory committee members in terms of getting to know how things worked; the need for dynamic communication between the PRAC and its standing committee, the Community and Protective Services Committee; the PRAC’s role in terms of the development of the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan; mechanisms for communicating with the community, including recent improvements in terms of web based tools; the importance of seeing where advisory committee workplans fit into the bigger picture; members’ terms and the fact that when members were appointed for one-year terms, it was taken up by a learning curve; the need to involve youth; and the need for training.  A copy of Ms. Perry’s written submission is held on file.

 

Mr. Roger Beauchesne, Chair, Roads and Cycling Advisory Committee (RCAC), suggested planning was paramount for any well managed organization and he believed the system has been broken for some time.  He referenced the City’s Transportation Master Plan, which listed cycling as Council’s number two priority and remarked that no money was assigned to this priority in at budget time over several years.  Therefore, he maintained that there was a disconnect between planning and budgeting.  He noted the City had approved a Cycling Plan the previous year but in the last budget, there had been no mention of the Plan’s prime objective nor was there a mention of the $26M allocated.  He stated very little money was presented.  He wondered why the City would spend money to create plans if these were to be shelved.  He reported that starting last November, the RCAC had worked to prepare a workplan, that all members had participated and that he was very pleased with the quality of the document.  He indicated the previous week, he had received an e-mail saying the workplan would no longer be required.  He felt this sent a message.   He maintained plans were important, that they created expectations, but that they needed money and staff in order to be implemented.  In conclusion, he expressed his belief that Council was on the right track and he urged members to continue their outstanding work. 

 

Vice Chair Desroches noted that any time the City did a new road widening, it included cycling facilities.  Therefore, he felt there was progress being made and he did not want to leave the impression that nothing was being done with respect to trying to improve cycling facilities throughout the City.  In response, Mr. Beauchesne listed examples of what he referred to as disconnects in terms of cycling infrastructure. 

 

That the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee receive public delegations with respect to the Mid-Term Governance Review, as referred by Council at its meeting of 10 June 2009.

 

                                                                                                RECEIVED