Empty Buses

(Here is a little story on public transit I made up based on my experience as a municipal councillor  many years ago.)  

----------

One thing I’ve learned in my short career in municipal politics is that municipal politicians know how to problem solve.  It is what they do.

And the elected officials at Clarovista City Hall are no exception.

Take the issue of public transit for example. 

Public opinion is divided on transit in Clarovista.

Some people want it.  And others don’t.

Now the people who want it are mostly those that use it or would use it if the service was any good. 

Those that don’t want it or don’t want much of it or don’t want it on their street mostly have garages and two or three cars in their driveways.

These people with cars and garages worry about buses a lot particularly the matter of empty buses.  And they let their Council members know how they feel.

Councillor Roger Harris is particularly responsive.  Few buses run through Councillor Harris’ ward.  

Those that do certainly look empty to his constituents.

I’ve tried in public and in private conversations to explain empty buses to Harris. They happen routinely in the transit world, I say. They get empty when going in the opposite direction to rush hour peak flows and at the end of routes. Some times of day are less busy and some areas of the municipality have fewer riders. 

Harris himself has not been on a bus since riding a yellow one to day camp back when Diefenbaker was Opposition leader and C.D Howe and the Liberal Party were arrogant and flogging pipelines.

Harris has ideas for transit management to address the empty bus dilemma. Small buses are the way to go. They cost less and the optics would be better.  And, if the route ran every hour instead of every 20 minutes, we could save money.  Councillor Harris puts energy into the sketching out better routes for the buses.  Tricky stuff.  

Tonight, we receive the annual transit review.  It is the only area we review each year.  Questions of staff focus on efficiency, pros and cons of raising fares, decreasing support from the province.  

Councillors have ideas in all of these areas.

But Councillor Harris’ brainwave stops the meeting.

“Why can’t the buses just go back to the garage when they are empty?”

by

Ken Williams

Former Councillor

Ward 5

Clarovista

A Thought on the Norfolk County 2022 Elections

There was a bit of a brouhaha November 17th 2020 down at the corner of Colborne and Calamity.  Maybe you will remember the occurrence.

Mayor Kristal Chopp called it a witch hunt, proceeded to axe and replace the Deputy Mayor and then left the building.

Of course, when Elvis left the building cheering crowds called for an encore but on the anniversary of the day when two rival municipalities Buda and Pest found a way to get along and merged a similar bonhomie was not to be found in Norfolk County. 

What about this witch hunting phenomenon?  It became the accusation du jour.

Witch hunting can be traced back to 18th century BC in ancient Egypt and Babylonia where punishment for nasty magic was addressed in the earliest law codes. Arthur Miller’s The Crucible  brought the term back and into the world of politics during the McCarthy era.   More recently, former President Trump consistently cast himself as a witch hunt victim on a par with the defendants in the Salem Witch Trials. 

Norfolk has its own tradition with the hunting of witches. Perhaps the witch trap used by Norfolk’s first settler, John Troyer, should be relocated from Norfolk Archives to Council Chambers to prevent any further transgressions.

However, lost in the excitement of that November afternoon’s shenanigans was the whole matter of the need for some clarity on what exactly the Norfolk Deputy Mayor does.

According to Norfolk Council’s procedural by-law as amended in 2017:

Deputy Mayor shall mean a Member of Council who is appointed, by By-Law or resolution of Council, to act from time to time in the place of the Mayor when the Mayor is absent from the municipality or absent through illness, or when the office is vacant and, while so acting, such Member has and may exercise all the rights, powers and authority of the Head of Council and this authority is delegated by Council under Section 23.1 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001 c.25

Not really helpful, is it?

Whatever the outcome on October 24th here is hoping the new Council will function with a much higher level of decorum and respect for its members and citizens.

And maybe they will update that procedural by-law as it relates to deputy mayor duties. 

The Budget

On a long ago budget day, a procedural quirk

put a simple regional ward councillor

in a position to freeze the police budget.

Ward councillors don’t obstruct police budgets

because, as we all learned as kids,

the police(man) is our friend

does important and dangerous work

protects and keep us safe and

for all of this deserves to be well paid.

These are things that ward councillors,

even simple ones, should understand.

But since the common sense drumbeat

set the revolution in motion

we have come to know that the best government is

to have practically no government at all

and respect for hard earned taxpayer’s dollars

is the order of the day.

Others are compelled to run their ship tightly

while the law and order liner sails unimpeded

through the calm waters of political indifference.

On that budget day, the simple ward councillor

Having, for a time, ascended

to the lofty heights of budget committee member

advanced what was (by his own humble admission)

a particularly persuasive presentation

convincing the one colleague who needed convincing

that police spending should be apprehended and

it was a great day for local democracy

or at least it seemed that way.

But the votes aren’t counted

until the politicians raise their hands

and when they did

the police got their money, as they always do.

No media or public witnessed the sad event though

police brass made time in otherwise busy days

to behold the councillor’s misbegotten manoeuvre.

Following his 15 minutes of small town fame

our councillor drove his car like an undertaker.

Even now, my lane changes are by-the-book perfect

and inviolable police budgets escalate still.

This piece was originally published in the Dream, the Glory and 

the Strife edited by Raymond Fenech, Hidden Brook Press, 2018.

Receive and File

A leak of  raw sewage into Cootes Paradise in Hamilton over several years caused quite an uproar in the Ambitious City. Citizens were outraged that City Council decided to keep the spill a secret.  Council has the right to keep certain legal matters confidential.  Was it appropriate in this case?  Probably not.  But it is hard to judge when you don't have all the facts that were shared in camera.

Anyway, I've been writing on municipal politics and decided to share a chapter that deals with in camera meetings and Council transparency in the fictional town of Clarovista.   Here it is.  

---------

Receive and File

By Councillor Kenneth Williams

I find land use planning stuff kind of complicated. The reports are like those
instructions for putting together the kid’s Christmas presents in that, while the salient points were repeated so as even the thickest reader can understand them, they always seem sort of back to front to this dim-witted decision maker.

Case in point is tonight’s Planning Report 14-2727-17.

It is dealing with what our staff call redundant park space.

Apparently, we have too much park space in Clarovista.

And we have a policy that if none of our public sector partners want such property, we can sell it off at market value price to whoever wants it. But how does one put a monetary value on parkland? I, for one, have no idea.

This particular “redundant” space is a small parcel of land located along the shoreline of Lake Vista. The property measures about 7.5 acres. I’ve heard it referred to as a passive park.  Such a park allows for the preservation of natural habitat and permits only a low level of development.  The park is well used by families, birders, picnickers and seniors. There are picnic benches and in the summer a Music in the Park program - Vista Voices - draws small but enthusiastic artists and audiences.  J.P Gormley owns an adjacent property. His plans for a hotel/marina/convention centre at that site aren’t going anywhere – or so it seems.

Mayor Martin has been aggressive in pursuing the sale of unneeded municipal assets.  But he hasn’t championed a park sale.  Not until tonight.

There is great public interest in this issue.  The Council Chambers are full and there is an overflow crowd in the Atrium.

The staff report supports a rezoning that would enable a sale but has many, many conditions attached to it - fourteen to be exact.   The report features several appendices, maps with different shadings, asterisks here and there and a suggestion for a holding zone.

In my view, the person who would purchase this property with all these conditions is the kind of guy who would invest in a Trump Tower in Bathurst Inlet. I mean no one is going to buy it.

The report is under discussion.

It seems my colleagues are interested in calling the vote and as it stands now the sale of the parkland will not happen.

For his part, Mayor Martin is not smiling tonight.  He asks to go in camera.

The public is never happy to see Councillors go behind closed doors.  However, the Municipal Act lays out clear situations where in camera meetings are allowed.

In this case, as our discussion relates “to a proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality or local board” an in camera session is permitted.

Before we head into closed session in an adjacent committee room, we clear all other items from the evening’s agenda.

Most of the public remains seated.

We have a long discussion in camera – about 45 minutes.

When we return to the Council Chambers a significant portion of the public has remained.

Clerk Melissa Belmonte reports:

“As you are aware a closed meeting was held. The only item considered was a matter respecting the acquisition of property. There is nothing further to report.”

Mayor Martin takes charge.

“As far as the staff report, do I have a motion,” asks the Mayor?

“Receive and file,” shouts Councillor Wright.

“All in favour?”

“Carried.”

“Motion to adjourn?”

“So moved.”

And, so, abruptly the proceedings are finished.  It is 11:15 p.m.  We should all go home.
But many citizens linger outside the Council Chambers chatting.

“What just happened Councillor,” I’m asked as I leave the Council Chambers?  “What was decided?”

“I’m sorry but I can’t tell you what went on in the in-camera session,” I respond meekly.

Councillors can’t talk about matters discussed in camera that remain confidential.  This, of course, is somewhat at odds with the duty of Council to ensure the accountability and transparency of the operations of the municipality.

 “OK, but what does receive and file mean?  Has the park been sold or what?”

It is a reasonable question.  But what is the appropriate answer?

“Hmm.  It means Council received the information contained in the staff report and didn’t act on it tonight and may or may not act on it in the future.  I’m not sure if that is helpful.”

Developer J.P Gormley

As one of the citizens begins to formulate another question J.P Gormley, his senior planner, associate planner and other subordinates pass the group on the way out of the building.

They look pleased.

-----

A leak of  raw sewage into Cootes Paradise in Hamilton has, not surprisingly, caused quite an uproar in the Ambitious City. Citizens are outraged that City Council decided to keep the spill a secret.  Council has the right to keep certain legal matters confidential.  Was it appropriate in this case?  Probably not.  But it is hard to judge when you don't have all the facts that were shared in camera.

Anyway, I've been writing on municipal politics and decided to share a chapter that deals with in camera meetings and Council transparency in the fictional town of Clarovista.   Here it is.   

---------

Receive and File

By Councillor Kenneth Williams

I find land use planning stuff kind of complicated. The reports are like those
instructions for putting together the kid’s Christmas presents in that, while the salient points were repeated so as even the thickest reader can understand them, they always seem sort of back to front to this dim-witted decision maker.

Case in point is tonight’s Planning Report 14-2727-17.

It is dealing with what our staff call redundant park space.

Apparently, we have too much park space in Clarovista.

And we have a policy that if none of our public sector partners want such property, we can sell it off at market value price to whoever wants it. But how does one put a monetary value on parkland? I, for one, have no idea.

This particular “redundant” space is a small parcel of land located along the shoreline of Lake Vista. The property measures about 7.5 acres. I’ve heard it referred to as a passive park.  Such a park allows for the preservation of natural habitat and permits only a low level of development.  The park is well used by families, birders, picnickers and seniors. There are picnic benches and in the summer a Music in the Park program - Vista Voices - draws small but enthusiastic artists and audiences.  J.P Gormley owns an adjacent property. His plans for a hotel/marina/convention centre at that site aren’t going anywhere – or so it seems.

Mayor Martin has been aggressive in pursuing the sale of unneeded municipal assets.  But he hasn’t championed a park sale.  Not until tonight.

There is great public interest in this issue.  The Council Chambers are full and there is an overflow crowd in the Atrium.

The staff report supports a rezoning that would enable a sale but has many, many conditions attached to it - fourteen to be exact.   The report features several appendices, maps with different shadings, asterisks here and there and a suggestion for a holding zone.

In my view, the person who would purchase this property with all these conditions is the kind of guy who would invest in a Trump Tower in Bathurst Inlet. I mean no one is going to buy it.

The report is under discussion.

It seems my colleagues are interested in calling the vote and as it stands now the sale of the parkland will not happen.

For his part, Mayor Martin is not smiling tonight.  He asks to go in camera.

The public is never happy to see Councillors go behind closed doors.  However, the Municipal Act lays out clear situations where in camera meetings are allowed.

In this case, as our discussion relates “to a proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality or local board” an in camera session is permitted.

Before we head into closed session in an adjacent committee room, we clear all other items from the evening’s agenda.

Most of the public remains seated.

We have a long discussion in camera – about 45 minutes.

When we return to the Council Chambers a significant portion of the public has remained.

Clerk Melissa Belmonte reports:

“As you are aware a closed meeting was held. The only item considered was a matter respecting the acquisition of property. There is nothing further to report.” 

Mayor Martin takes charge.

“As far as the staff report, do I have a motion,” asks the Mayor?

“Receive and file,” shouts Councillor Wright.

“All in favour?”

“Carried.”

“Motion to adjourn?”

“So moved.”

And, so, abruptly the proceedings are finished.  It is 11:15 p.m.  We should all go home.
But many citizens linger outside the Council Chambers chatting.

“What just happened Councillor,” I’m asked as I leave the Council Chambers?  “What was decided?”

“I’m sorry but I can’t tell you what went on in the in-camera session,” I respond meekly.

Councillors can’t talk about matters discussed in camera that remain confidential.  This, of course, is somewhat at odds with the duty of Council to ensure the accountability and transparency of the operations of the municipality.

 “OK, but what does receive and file mean?  Has the park been sold or what?”

It is a reasonable question.  But what is the appropriate answer?

“Hmm.  It means Council received the information contained in the staff report and didn’t act on it tonight and may or may not act on it in the future.  I’m not sure if that is helpful.”

Developer J.P Gormley

As one of the citizens begins to formulate another question J.P Gormley, his senior planner, associate planner and other subordinates pass the group on the way out of the building.

They look pleased.

-----

CITY HALL MATTERS - City Managers (CAO’s)

Finding a New CAO/City Manager can be a challenge for municipalities.

Take Hamilton, for example.  Their previous City Manager, Chris Murray, left for a similar position in Toronto last summer.

In August, Council put a process in place by determining who’d be on the Steering Committee for hiring a new manager but didn’t do much else, it would seem.

Council’s composition changed significantly with seven new members elected in the fall.  But the process set in place didn’t make room for new Councillor’s involvement in the very important decision of hiring a manager.  Council’s questionable decision to move a Hiring Committee meeting to another City has raised public concerns.  It is a bit of mess and one wonders how it will all impact the work of Council over the next four years.

(An article by Cameron Kroetsch provides some historical context and analysis
https://raisethehammer.org/article/3613/whats_at_stake_in_the_city_manager_hiring_process)

Another Fine Mess

The Southwestern Ontario City of Sarnia has a mess of a different sort.

It has to do in part with building a wall.  No, not that wall. This wall is a real one and separates the mayor’s office from the administrative staff.

A 2016 report concluded that long serving Mayor Mike Bradley had created a toxic work environment by engaging in "egregious bullying and harassment" when dealing with senior city staff.

Mayor Bradley

Council acted on the report by putting sanctions in place against the Mayor.
They docked his pay, restricted his access to City Hall to work hours only and permitted him to only speak with staff through an intermediary.

Perhaps surprisingly, (voter is always right) Bradley won re-election by a large margin in October.  Many incumbent Councillors were defeated or retired.

Now the City Manager has left and a new one is needed.

Earlier this week, Sarnia Councillors voted to keep in place the sanctions on the Mayor.  An issue was whether the sanctions (on or off) will hurt the search for a new manager.

Council also voted to get an outside legal opinion on keeping the sanctions on.  That will take time and cost money.
https://www.theobserver.ca/news/local-news/sanctions-to-stay-for-now

In the Soo

Meanwhile Sault Ste. Marie Council is also looking for a new top staff person.

Mayor Christian Provenzano recommended that a Selection Committee made up of himself, an experienced and a new Councillor be approved.  Those other two members would be gender balanced.
https://www.saultstar.com/news/local-news/cao-and-city-to-part-ways-at-end-of-contract

Council, then, in an open meeting voted for three members to be part of a Selection Committee.

Sault Ste. Marie - City Hall

Mayor Provenzano also put forward the idea that money would be saved by not hiring a consultant.

It that doesn’t work they’ll start the process over again.

“But obviously if that comes to pass, we'll be back here (to Council) and we'll be talking about that," the Mayor told the Soo Today. https://www.sootoday.com/local-news/mayor-hilsinger-niro-lead-search-for-the-next-horsman-1238890

They have some time as the current City Manager doesn’t finish his four year contract until August.

It will be interesting to see how this all turns out for these three cities.

Some Reading

Michael Szarka researched the whole idea of the problem of recruiting CAO’s for small municipalities in Ontario. It is an interesting read.  https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1173&context=lgp-mrps

Police Budgets and Driving Slowly

(Here is a bit of a rewrite of a story published three years ago.  It appeared as a Bob’s Blog piece in http://foreveryoungnews.com/)
 
Lately there has been a lot in the media about police budgets. Unlike most people’s, police budgets keep getting bigger.

In December 2014, criminologist Michael Kempa wrote about the issue in a piece in the Toronto Star (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/how-to-get-a-grip-on-swelling-police-budgets-1.1172442)

He cited “leapfrogging” contracts and the ever-increasing complexity of social problems that police deal with as two reasons for the increases.

Kempa thinks we need to get police services back to their “core functions.”

This is, of course, not a new idea. Long-time police critic and former Toronto mayor John Sewell reiterated his long-held view that “police should go back to the fundamentals.”

“Get out of the car instead of using the drive-through lane,” he told the London Free Press (http://www.lfpress.com/2012/12/11/former-toronto-mayor-john-sewell-says-police-need-to-return-to-fundamentals-such-as-dedicated-beat-cops-and-neighbourhood-patrols.)

This week in Toronto (February 15-21, 2016) there is a budget battle in the works with some Councillors determined to make some change to the police budget.  Good luck to them.  We’ll need courageous municipal politicians to step to the plate, draw a line in the budget sand and force police services to explore these or any new ideas.    

I was once such a courageous municipal politician. That’s my story anyway.


Simple, Definitely not
Courageous
and a Slow Driver

There was a day when, through a procedural quirk, I, a simple Ward Councillor, was poised to freeze the police budget. This was when I was Regional Councillor and had for a year ascended to the lofty heights of budget committee member. There were only four on the committee and one member was absent that day. Following my persuasive presentation I believed I had convinced a second member to vote for a freeze to the police budget. We would win the day with a 2-1 majority. Long story short: I had, of course, overrated my procedural and oratorical prowess and the police got their money as they always do. I don’t remember any members of the public or media present that day. All the senior police brass were there though.

I drove like an undertaker for some time after my 15 minutes of oppositional fame. To this day, I bet there is no one who does the textbook-perfect lane changes that I do. 

 

Gentrification Becoming a Problem for Hamilton Tenants

(An earlier version of this story appeared on www.hamiltonjustice.ca)

More than 200 central Hamilton residents rallied in McLaren Park last Wednesday..

Amidst chants and drum beats, tenants and housing advocates were putting out a message to all three levels of government the signs captured the feelings of those in attendance.

“Housing is a Right”

“Canada Needs a National Housing Strategy”

“We are the Faces of Affordable Housing”

The mainstream media was present.  Dan Nolan from the Hamilton Spectator reported on the evening event in the July 30th edition of his paper.

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/5766988-tenants-say-low-income-housing-under-threat/ 

Speakers called on all three levels of government to take action. Demands included

• That the City of Hamilton immediately take measures to mitigate the negative impacts of gentrification. The city’s current planning and policy documents have failed to take into account the very real impacts of gentrification on low cost rental housing.

•  That Ontario’s Long Term Affordable Housing Strategy (LTAHS), which is currently under review, include measures to protect affordable housing so that units like ours will not be lost.

•  That the federal government develop a national housing strategy. The emphasis should be on maintaining and creating and affordable rental housing that is safe, accessible and in a state of good repair.

Gentrification is a growing concern in the City the Clinic’s Maria Antelo told CBC Hamilton.
“Right now, what tenants want is whatever is available to keep (rent) the way it is and prices shouldn't going up because our city is becoming a bit trendy.  At the same time there has to be a balance. Tenants understand that we do want beautification in our city, we do want investment in our city but we want politicians, developers to understand housing is a basic need, it's not a luxury." http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/news/hamilton-tenants-rally-against-gentrification-1.3171560