Last week, the Vision council brought out the first recommendations from its Engaged City Task Force, with more heavyweight ones to come later on.
The report with their recommendations is here and my story, one of several done on the day, is here.
A few of the quick starts here inspire me with a certain nostalgia. Participatory budgeting (allowing community groups to decide how they want to spend a set amount of money on local projects) was much loved by the COPE council of 2002 but disappeared shortly after they were elected, lost in the dust as that council had to grapple with one daunting issue after another, from the Canada Line to Wal-Mart.
But, as good or as long-standing as some of these ideas are, there are residents who are going to wonder why they are coming forward now and how much they’ll really change the culture at the city. Many people have had the experience of participating in a city process only to walk away and wonder, “Did anything I said really matter?”
Obviously, not everyone can get 100 per cent of what they want from the city all the time. Not only a logistical impossibility (since there is always one person who wants exactly the opposite of another), but not good planning. But I do believe there is a longing by many to feel that they are more than just the window-dressing, brought in towards the end of a development proposal or a new bylaw, to spout their little “concerns” and be over-ruled.
As my story in Vancouver magazine this month showed, there’s a critical mass of changes going on in the city that is making the city hall-citizen conversation very tense. The task force is one attempt to address that.
Whenever I’m asked at panels/workshops/conventions what the problem with public dialogue is in Vancouver, my usual answer is: Regular people have no idea what part their opinions should play in the process. Not really. Too many of them believe that if they just line up enough delegates at the microphone, they should get to prevent anything from coming into the city.
So if they don’t get their way exactly, then council and planners are “bulldozing ahead” or “in the pockets of developers.” Which I know the more thoughtful readers of this blog will understand is too simplistic an explanation.
But there is a tendency for those at city halls to assume they know what’s best, bring people in too late in the process for their opinions to have any real impact and then dismiss them as NIMBYs when they go berserk.
There are some recommendations in here, and to come, that I think could have an impact on all of that. But it will take real faith on the part of the city that its citizens aren’t just knee-jerk Opponents of Everything and some effort on the part of citizens to understand the how and why of planning.
Will any of the quick steps help? They’re a tiny start. I await the bigger news.
(Advance warning: I won’t be posting the boring old name-calling comments. People who’ve been through city processes or observed them and have thoughtful things to say about how that went are welcome, as always.)
Vancouver, whose council has been accused of not listening to the public and whose residents say they are lonely and alienated, launched the first steps on Wednesday of a plan to make people who live there more connected. “Vancouver is a dynamic city undergoing a great deal of change,” Mayor Gregor Robertson said. “The connection between city hall and citizens is tenuous at the best of times. I felt a real need to invest more in engagement.” Some of the ideas from his Engaged City Task Force:
THE PLAN: Vancouver will declare a city-wide neighbourhood block party day each year – date for 2013 still to be decided – so residents can block off the street to hold an outdoor get-together. The proposal specifies that it is not just for single-family neighbourhoods, where residents already frequently organize impromptu street parties, but also its many districts dominated by condo towers and small apartment buildings. The hoped-for results, according to the official plan? “To empower neighbourhoods.”
REACTION: “We think it’s a great initiative. When you bring people together, they get to know each others’ names and you have a more engaged, involved and safer city.” – Martin Livingston, vice-president of the Vancouver Foundation, which last year released the results of a survey showing that a significant number of Vancouverites feel alienated and lonely.
ADVANCE VOTER REGISTRATION ONLINE
THE PLAN: Turnout in civic elections is abysmal, with typically fewer than a third of registered voters bothering to show up. “People who register to vote in advance are much more likely to cast a vote than those who don’t,” says the city report on the task-force initiatives. The idea is to ensure that residents can register to vote any day of the year at any time before the election, using a form on the city website.
REACTION: “This might help. I’m not sure it’s the best. I’m a fan of people going out and knocking on the door to enumerate. But anything that can improve turnout helps.” – Max Cameron, director of the Centre for Democratic Institutions, University of B.C.
MORE INFORMATION ON DEVELOPMENT
THE PLAN: A requirement for developers to hold public open houses before submitting a design proposal to the city. Improved signs on lots where developments are proposed, with plans explained in plain language. More notice to the public about development decisions coming before council. “Vancouver has always had reactions to development,” Mr. Robertson said. “There’s no doubt the pressure has increased and it’s shifted right into neighbourhoods.”
REACTION: “They already tell us what they’re going to do and that works fine. It’s how they deal with the feedback that’s more important. And there’s nothing about that yet.” – Mike Andruff, organizer of Dunbar Re-Vision, a community group formed in opposition to several projects in the west-side neighbourhood.
MOBILE KIOSKS
THE PLAN: Rather than force every person needing to buy a dog licence, pick up a recycling bag or pay their taxes to travel to city hall, the municipality will create a mobile kiosk that provides services in city buildings in every neighbourhood. The proposal says that areas poorly served by transit should get priority.
REACTION: “I’ve been wanting that for a long time. I’m delighted. A lot of people just don’t know how to access city hall, and 311” – the simplified phone system introduced five years ago to make it easy for people to access city services – “didn’t have the push I thought it would.” – Eileen Mosca, long-time community volunteer in the Commercial Drive area.
PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING
THE PLAN: The city will set aside some money in its capital budgets and neighbourhood committees will propose ways to spend it. “Winning projects could be used for … park enhancements, new playground equipment, amenities for seniors, street upgrades or new green space.”
REACTION: “People are always talking here about community gardens, but there’s a limited amount of space. If there was a certain amount of money put aside for things like that, it would be a worthwhile conversation to have.” – Brent Granby, long-time community volunteer in the city’s West End.
178 responses so far ↓
1 boohoo // Jun 4, 2013 at 11:54 am
Hey look GR and Walt jump in and straight down the toilet this goes.
Having a threaded format where one can ignore certain tit for tats would be very helpful.
2 waltyss // Jun 4, 2013 at 2:56 pm
boohoo@151. What, I have stayed silent today and the conversation has certainly been insightful. Spare me.
Frances, since you have appointed your neighbourhood snitches, please clarify the rules.
I won’t call him the troll anymore. I will grit my teeth and call him Mr. Remmy. Is that okay.
However, can i criticize him. Higgins for example, one of Mr,. Remmy’s devoted camp followers, believes with Mr. Remmy that it is okay to call Vision elected officials corrupt, in the pocket of developers, etc. Mr. Remmy usually laces this with scatological terms. So my question is: am I prohibited from calling out Mr. Remmy or his camp followers when they engage in over the top scatological references to elected officials, based on nothing more than their fevered imaginations?
Am I prohibited from referring to Mr. Remmy and his camp followers reliance on conspiracy theory and other Roswell school imaginings to explain the real world.
Is it improper to point out when Mr. Remmy says the city government has no mandate based on low voter turnout, that his logic implies that everyone who did not vote agreed with his anti bike lane stance?
I am just trying to figure out your new rules which seem to allow vile comments going one way but not in other directions. It seems to me that if someone is prepared to engage in name calling of elected officials (except where the evidence is clear (Mike Duffy or Pamela Wallin for example)), then they should be able to take name calling directed at them.
So rules please, or are they just ad hoc?
3 Frank Ducote // Jun 4, 2013 at 4:42 pm
Walt, if I may – most of us can recognize the BS and conspiracy theorists and can also resist the need to counter it at every turn, much as we may like to. I actually admire your persistence in trying to refute some of the extreme stuff that is posted, but I fear it is wasted time and energy. Noble as it may be in some ways, nobody’s opinions are being changed one way or the other.
For what its worth, my simple suggestions – not “rules” – to you, GR, his admirers and the others here are to try to:
1) stay on topic
2) provide factual backup for assertions for (extreme) declarations as much as possible,
3) avoid ad hominens and name-calling, and
4) say it once and move on, preferably back to the topic at hand.
I’d love to add another condition but I know it won’t fly: be courageous enough to eliminate anonymity if at all possible.
To the rest of us, we may have to have a little more courage to counter the abuse that elected officials and staff are too-often tarred with, particularly on Fabula’s blog. It certainly does not mean agreeing with the targets of such abuse, just to provide a more balanced and fairer treatment of those who aren’t able to defend themselves here.
Again, saying it once and moving on will help to reduce the endless back and forth that gets so personal and boring.
These are my views only. Madame Bula may have other suggestions for improving online behaviour.
4 waltyss // Jun 4, 2013 at 5:03 pm
Frank @153. Your comments are appreciated, fair and I think I can live with them. Let’ s see if Madame Bula has anything to add.
5 F.H.Leghorn // Jun 4, 2013 at 9:27 pm
@Frank: Really only need 2 rules:
1. Stay on topic.
2. See Rule #1.
The others would be nice, but who will defend the poor maligned, innocent, well-intentioned politicians against those horrible rumours if waltyss is forced to behave?
Nobody has to read postings from waltyss or GR or anyone else. Even idiots can show creativity and a sense of humour. Look at me.
6 Mira // Jun 5, 2013 at 10:39 am
Higgins #148 , I second that!
I always thought of this blog as a place where we could talk about everything (on topic or not). Noisy place. So?
It’s like when you go to a pub and discuss Queen & country, government, politics, car repair tips …
Everybody rants about politicians, bureaucrats, cops and teachers , Japanese cars… but in all cases, these people they are talking about, are NOT in the audience!!!!!!!!!
Then here comes this insufferable drunk, beer in hand, calls us names and tell us to shut it, because he’s a Monarchist or a Visionist or whatever we are not… and he doesn’t like what he hears coming from our table. Do you know what the Pub owner always does?
He kicks the drunk out… 🙂
7 Don D // Jun 5, 2013 at 5:07 pm
@ Waltyss 151
There you go again: “neighbourhood snitches” “camp followers (relying) on conspiracy theory and other Roswell school imaginings”
I wasn’t ratting you out, I was talking to YOU: when you make personal attacks, you don’t do yourself, or your ideas, justice.
When you rise above it, what you write is worth reading.
Whatever way you go, I hope that your posts don’t get deleted.
I am curious what you and others think about what is happening in Turkey.
And no, this is not off-topic. And no, I’m not suggesting that slightly left of centre Mayor Robertson and right of centre, religious Prime Minister Erdogan are political birds of a feather.
But – and this has been much commented on in the media – Erdogan believes that electoral victory is the consummation of democracy, and that it gives him a mandate on all things. To him, all subsequent opposition is therefore undemocratic, to be ignored, dismissed – and if necessary, oppressed.
Watching and listening to Erdogan leaves one with little doubt that his indignation is genuine. You can tell he is thinking “Who ARE these people?”
As different as Robertson’s and Erdogan’s underlying political philosophies might be, they have arrogance, and a very narrow understanding of what democracy is all about, in common.
Incredulous planning guy at SFU: “You mean you would try to block this project over a park?!
Is it a stretch to imagine incredulous Istanbul planer guy: “You mean you would try to block this project over a park?!
8 Glissando Remmy // Jun 5, 2013 at 5:40 pm
Thought of The Day
“Erdogan and Robertson. A bit of a stretch, but I can see the similarities. In their puzzled minds, they are both on the lookout for the truth. Only in both cases their version sounds like this “Truth? The truth is what I say it is!””
Don D #156
Excellent comment. As a matter of fact, I am not one of those caught in the Vancouver self flagellation, and I am always interested in what happens across the globe. Turkey. What happens in Istanbul is historic. One huge city that takes its soccer to the extremes. But you know a stubborn, arrogant politician crossed over the threshold when century old enemies unite against you. I am not talking COPE/ NPA against Vision. I am talking Galatasary/ Fenerbache/ Besiktas against Erdogan.
“Is it a stretch to imagine incredulous Istanbul planer guy: “You mean you would try to block this project over a park?!”
No. It is not. You are right on the Lira.
We live in Vancouver and this keeps us busy.
9 Roger Kemble // Jun 6, 2013 at 7:52 am
Don @ #156
“And no, this is not off-topic. ” Oh yes it is!
If Waltyss and Frank want to get it off leave ’em be! (note Frances: let ’em rant or be the blog’s Gauleiter) They reveal how petty hubris will take over even the most innocent!
As for comparing Robertson to Erdogan . . .
http://www.intifada-palestine.com/2013/06/erdogans-attack-on-syria-backfires/
. . . puleeeze!
More relevant, compare E to our flagging fundamentalist prime minister, who believes a bunch of central European Hazarlars are entitled to a plot of real estate they’ve never been to, have no stake in, and wouldn’t recognize the road to Damascus if they had an AA Route Planner in their left hand!
Oooooh’er getting scary ain’t it!
As for Erdogan’s kid and the park, that is just an excuse to exercise deep, deep resentment about a guy, besotted by empire, which invented god sixteen/seventeen centuries ago.
Stay out of the deep waters; you may get your hair wet!
10 Roger Kemble // Jun 6, 2013 at 9:38 am
PS “ . . . our flagging fundamentalist prime minister” who by the way was elected by fraudulent robo-calls.
Hey let’s not pull any punches: lives, many lives, are at stake, while we babble on!
11 Norman // Jun 6, 2013 at 10:37 am
Well, I’ve just had a look at the plan for my neighbourhood. I would emphasize that I heard nothing about the process until I looked at the city website – no flyers, no announcements (none that I saw, anyway). I am very disappointed. The only things that look like actual plans are the rezoning of vast areas to increase density. Six story buildings are described as “modest increases” in height, one side of some one and two family streets are slated for these “modest” buildings, just as an example. The rest – community amenities and the like – are described in terms that make it clear they are hopes and dreams with no concrete plans to make them happen. There are a lot of weasel words like “work to, “review”, “support”, work with”, “explore” and the like. Maybe the plan should be called “enabling development”.
12 Don D // Jun 6, 2013 at 2:21 pm
@ RK#158, 159
You should reread the blog. Broadly, the subject is the relationship between government and citizenry, and more specifically, the relationship between formal electoral democracy and the democratic process as expressed through ongoing consultation, dialogue, and connection. It’s about engagement or lack thereof.
So, is it your position that this is not what’s at issue in Vancouver? Is it your position that this is not what’s at issue in Istanbul?
I went to some pains to acknowledge the differences in political philosophy between Robertson and Erdogan in the hope that it would forestall someone ranging off topic by focusing on that political difference.
I agree that in politics, Harper (whose government I find odious) and Erdogan politics are a closer – far closer – fit than either one of them is to Robertson – but that is beside the point.
(I don’t give a hoot if you and/or waltyss feel a need in the course of debate to engage in irrelevant and mean-spirited personal attacks , but do you really think it makes you sound intellectually superior by finishing up with “Stay out of the deep waters; you may get your hair wet!” I’m embarrassed on your behalf.)
13 Bill McCreery // Jun 6, 2013 at 2:34 pm
Norman, are you talking about Grandview? That plan also calls for 3 story townhouses surrounding the park off Naniamo and 1st. I guess the theory is not to just pile density along noisy, congested and polluted arterials, but also around parks just because they’re parks. Sound logic. I’m sure. In the case of this park it is already very heavily used for a variety of purposes including field sports. So, putting even more density adjacent to the park really is a terrific idea.
It appears Grandview is Norquay II.
Then there is the West End where 70 story towers are being proposed. This is another very logical planning initiative particulary given that access to that penninsela
14 Bill McCreery // Jun 6, 2013 at 2:42 pm
Goofed.
… access to the peninsula is being systematically reduced. Sound planning indeed. I look forward to hearing about all the new planning awards the City will be given as a result of their inspired work.
15 Westender1 // Jun 6, 2013 at 8:35 pm
Norman (#160) it’s important share your opinions however you can. But also to ask questions and try to get clarifications. The “engagement” on these planning processes has involved lots of “sunshine and lollipops” but not many details. A key detail lacking, and that you’ve referenced in your post, is the focus on building height rather than density. (See my previous post – #79) Are the proposed six-storey buildings at a 2.o Floor Space Ratio? Or at 6.0 (which would exceed the original land use designations for the tower areas in Downtown South)? The City needs to provide more clarity on the proposals in all of the plan areas, including Grandview-Woodland.
16 jenables // Jun 7, 2013 at 5:55 pm
honestly, I have the emerging land use map for Grandview, mine actually has tears all over it. it looks like my building will be required to have commercial at grade (it’s a walk up), two of my best friend’s buildings are within five minutes of the skytrain, one of them is zoned with a c (proposed, of course…) oddly, she didn’t hear about the open house and she’s almost certain the building owners didn’t either. I will be meeting with her later so she can copy the draft and map. I have never been so disgusted in my life. Hundreds, if not thousands of people will be displaced from a neighborhood that houses a number of low income people who aren’t in the system only because they have affordable rent ALREADY. I made a typo on my text to her, saying my tent is very reasonable..
17 Norman // Jun 8, 2013 at 9:24 am
When I moved here, this was a declining neighbourhood. We had a crack house literally on this street. Over the years, the neighbours have worked to make it a better place to live, getting rid of the dealers who used to think they owned the corner, and generally making this a safer and more friendly place. Now I feel like it has all been for nothing. If this goes ahead, I’ll move to another municipality where I might have a voice. Block busting used to be the province of developers; now the city does it for them.
18 gman // Jun 8, 2013 at 2:32 pm
I wonder if Cicero was talking about Vision ?
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.”
― Marcus Tullius Cicero
19 Frank Ducote // Jun 9, 2013 at 11:37 am
One does not have to be a Visionista to find that quote despicable. It is a true wonder that anybody runs for public office with this kind of anonymous slander to throw out into the blogosphere.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
20 gman // Jun 9, 2013 at 3:04 pm
I don’t think so Frank,ask anyone who went to any of these public meetings out of concern for their neighborhood and see what they have to say Frank.What they find is they are presented with false choices and a number of change agents in the crowd who are quick to ridicule them if they so much as ask a question,its like a page right out of the Rand corporations playbook. Vision has shown nothing but contempt for these people and I cannot think of one instance that they didn’t go ahead with the agenda no matter what the citizens have to say.
“For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. ”
I equate this with buzz words like the greenest city and your favorite sustainable,after all Frank who doesn’t want to be green or sustainable it sounds so warm and fuzzy and caring ,the kind of rhetoric we dare not even question.
The thing is Frank is that neighborhood after neighborhood are waking up to the fact that they have no control over their neighborhood or even their homes anymore. Its all about another buzz word,density….density…density.The developers love it and are willing to support the party that makes their dreams come true no matter who they might be.It also instills a sense of fear in the people that the only other choice is mass homelessness.
Then Frank you wonder why anybody would run for office? Well Frank its painfully obvious to me that it has more to do with funding than a quote.As long as we maintain this ” At Large” voting system and not some kind of ward system we will never see a successful run by an independent or any other upstart party born directly from individual neighborhoods.You see Frank they don’t have the funding from developers and even worse foreign donations to run a city wide campaign.
Frank you know what I know and who is behind it but wont speak to it Frank because you’re fully on board with the agenda and prefer to refer to it as some kind of conspiracy theory.
Now ask me again Frank who should be ashamed.
21 gman // Jun 9, 2013 at 3:21 pm
Frank I see we won another meaningless feelgood award from the WWF and ICLEI….aint it grand.
http://www.icleicanada.org/news/item/68-vancouver-wins-ehcc
22 gman // Jun 9, 2013 at 3:22 pm
And something more current that people should pay attention to.
http://www.icleicanada.org/news/item/92-iclei-canada-at-resilient-cities-2013-recap
23 gman // Jun 9, 2013 at 3:41 pm
And then there is this quote from the UN habitat conference 76. This is where it all started.
““Land…cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore contributes to social injustice.” -From the report from the 1976 UN’s Habitat I Conference.”
And some more interesting information on this subject can be found here.
http://nwri.org/the-iclei-connection/
24 Bill // Jun 9, 2013 at 5:25 pm
@gman #172
It is regrettable that property rights were not enshrined in the Charter of Rights.
25 gman // Jun 9, 2013 at 6:28 pm
Bill#173,
That is an excellent point Bill.People think they have some kind of power over their property but they don’t,the powers that be can throw you into the street any time they want.And this isn’t a question about eminent domain where it may necessitate the widening of a road or the right of way of transit that may or may not be acceptable depending on what side of the road you live on.This has to do with mass rezoning of neighborhoods and moving everyone into a concrete box whether they like it or not and the destruction of generational wealth.
http://publications.gc.ca/collections/Collection/CH37-4-3-2002E.pdf
26 brilliant // Jun 9, 2013 at 7:15 pm
@Frank Ducote 168-why get your knickers in a twist over a quote from the classics? Gman is bang on. Robertson green tongue speaks soothing words of sustainability while ripping apart neighbourhoods.
27 brilliant // Jun 10, 2013 at 1:24 pm
And thank heavens the city has done such a great job communicating an important civic priority like today’s Meatless Monday. Though Witless Wednesday would be more apt for the Visionistas.
28 gman // Jun 12, 2013 at 5:03 pm
brilliant
First they told me cow farts were heating up the planet to the point of destruction,so I started eating cows as fast as I could,you know to save the planet and all that.Now this……I’m so confused!!