Council has done its part: Now it’s up to us
Ron Bolin: April 23, 2012
In a motion at tonight’s FPCOW meeting (Finance and Policy meeting of the Whole, i.e. Council in the guise in which they can do anything they wish except pass bylaws), Council moved to have future FPCOW meetings recorded and placed for viewing on the City’s web site along those of “regular” Council meetings until they are moved to the New City Hall Annex when that building is completed. Ignoring Staff advice, Council voted six to nine to find their duty to inform the public over that of their own comfort with the Mayor and Councillors Johnston and Brennan voting against.
It is ironic that the actions taken in this meeting and the discussion that led to them will not be seen by the public in an official capacity until the minutes of this FPCOW meeting are approved at the next FPCOW meeting on May 7. (They will be available in an unadopted form in the Agenda for the May 7th meeting released on the afternoon of May 3.) This kind of document, coming to us as minutes via 18th century technology, provides only a late, abridged, incomplete, un-nuanced and often flavoured record of what took place. Video recording, an inexpensive 21st century technology allows the public to see how their business is being conducted either immediately or very quickly after the meeting is held and to see a complete record of it.
While I can understand the reticence of some Councillors to expose their actions to a broader segment of the population than is able to make a public meeting at 4:30 in the afternoon, I applaud Councillor Anderson’s motion and the concurrence of Councillors Bestwick, Kipp, Greves, Pattje and McKay in it for bringing public participation in Nanaimo’s public meetings into the 21st century.
Also discussed and decided at the FPCOW meeting of April 23 were the following significant topics:
– the scheduling of “In Camera” Meetings (these seem to be more and more numerous);
– the 2011 Financial Plan Statements;
– 2012-2016 Financial Plan Bylaw;
– the Policy of Giving Preference to local suppliers;
– the Quarterly Report on Direct Award Purchases ($390,000);
– The Quarterly Report on Single Submission Purchases ($64,000).
There was pertinent and informative discussion on these topics which was worthy of being seen and heard by a wider audience than the 5 citizens in attendance at this afternoon meeting.
I have observed that there appear to be two fundamental theories about representative democracy. On the one side there are those who believe that representative democracy is a 365 day per year activity and should reflect true democracy: that those elected as representatives owe it to their constituency to keep them informed and to inform themselves of their wishes. On the other side are those who feel that the only time public involvement is truly required is once every three years when providence and an election chooses those with the right to rule. Both these extremes are, of course, misguided, but watch our politicians at all levels to see where they fall along this continuum.
I take off my hat to those who sided with democracy as an ongoing though sometimes uncomfortable public process.
Posts and Comments on Nanaimo Governance 
While citing the cost and stating she would not be supporting Councillor Johnstone stated “but I do support transparency” guess just not in this vane. Councillor Brennan thinks the Shaw Auditorium itself “constrains more open discussion” and also thought why bother when it would just be the same 150 people who would normally access regular council meetings on the City Website. Mayor Ruttan stated he would not support the motion because the meetings would be moving to the new annex in 8 months and he also would not support such a motion when FPCOW meetings did move to the annex.
At question period, because the motion just dealt with FPCOW at SHAW Auditorium and nothing has yet been set in place for the new annex I asked the following question. I first told council I appreciated their decision and that ; “thinking ahead to when these meetings are moved to the new annex I am wondering that in the event council chooses not to continue with recording of meetings is there any reason a member of the public could not come in and personally record the meetings.” The answer received from city staff was that there was not.
This of course opens it up for future discussion in that if council wants meetings recorded in a so called professional manner they will in all likelihood ensure that the proper equipment is installed in the annex and meetings are posted to the city website. In the event council chooses not to do so then anyone could video the meetings and post them to YouTube if they so choose.
Wonder if we could get NEDCorp behind this as who knows how many hits Nanaimo would get and think of the promotional value:)
I think you are overestimating the interest of the public at large in what goes on at city hall. There are very few of us who take any real active interest. For the most part, watching council either at regular meetings or FPCOW meetings is nothing short of painful.
I think you will find with You Tube there are restrictions as to the length of segment you can put on one ‘clip’. I believe it might be as little as 5 minutes.
I asked for numbers who watched the streaming video and it was pretty low, also Shaw has no way of measuring their audience on regular council night.
I think that if the media reported upon Councill meeting as they should , with impartialy, the populace would find local Governmnet much more interesting.
Short of attending Council meetings just what information does the average ‘Joe’ hear of local politics?
The media put out the required ammount of soundbites to keep up the appearance of “reporting” but that’s as far as it gets..
The media is firmly in the hands of the advertiser.
How do you think we can get the message out?
Jim. So what do you want to say with this? What is your suggestion?
Trailblazer: My Mama used to say that if wishes were horses, beggars would ride. The question is not about what is wrong with the present situation, but with what we can do to change it. The message will only get out if a) if we can somehow convince people to pay attention and b) if there is an accurate record of what is happening by which they can be convinced that the message is legitimate. They may not trust media interpretations of what is happening, but they may believe their eyes. Nobody said that this would be easy.
Ron, If video recording turns the FPCOW meetings into the same, ‘no debate- no discussion’ exercises regular meetings currently are……I don’t really see it as a win. As it is, it is a real challenge to determine IF councilors even have done any ‘home work’ or, as I suspect, prefer to rubber stamp staff recommends.
Will recording help or hinder the process??????
Are you shilling for Councillor Johnston’s argument that recording the meetings will hinder the process? If that is so, should we also stop recording the regular Council meetings? Should we have more in-camera meetings? Maybe we should set all meetings for times at which the public cannot attend. Would they best be held at midnight? Damn that public anyway for obstructing progress.
No, Ron, Not shilling at all,,,,, just stating what I think will happen with THIS council, and that is based on observation……not agreeing at all…… I wish the gallery were full at ALL council meetings and that Councillors engaged in free and lively and open debate about all contentious issues…… but if the cameras turn an FPCOW into a typical council meeting…. well ??????
I personally believe there are far more people paying attention than there used to be, it is the same with letters to the editor. Used to be no one I knew either watched council or read letters to the ed.; now I here about them doings so frequently. Bottom linee is the more that is done to get the info out the greater the liklihood people will pick up on it.
The whole thing about some councillors saying they would have to be more formal or there would be less debate is utter crap. They debate things at length at regular council meetings and as for formality, councillors frequently act like asses during the broadcast meetings that are taped.
Gord; I truly hope more people ARE paying attention, although the last voter turnout wouldn’t support that argument.
As for lively, open debate……. at which meeting did council engage in ANY discussion regards the $844 million financial plan they are giving the nod to after making history by actually going against the recommend of city manager and increased the budget, thanks in part to Councillor Brennan…..
Unfortunately I don’t see voter turnout equating with paying attention except in one way; more and more people are feeling not heard or firmly believe their voice means nothing and as such the choose not to vote.
Didn’t say they have lively open debate on everything, in fact they are quite selective. The whole process is sad really but at least we now have the option for more citizens to see just how sad.