City review seeks more engaged citizens

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 16/03/2021 (2039 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Are you eager for the City of Winnipeg Governance Review Report? I am. A total of $175,000 of our tax money is going to consultants to remake our city governance. We need to get our money’s worth.

After the usual online meetings and survey, an interim report is on the Engage Winnipeg website outlining the review framework.

Resident and community organizations jumped on the opportunity the governance review offered for a written objection to being treated like pesky flies, shooed away by city staff and elected officials. Community groups are advocating for a participatory governance model and structures that are more bottom-up rather than top-down. We offered alternatives to being treated like potholes, avoided, and manoeuvred around.

Participatory governance moves us from autocratic structures, to collaborative, partnership-based models of governance, with power better distributed and shared, where citizens are not only consulted on the decisions that shape our communities and our lives but engaged as leaders. Better governance is essential for healthy communities and a vibrant city. The interlocking challenges we face of climate change, inequity, sexist and racist exclusion, and abuses of power can only be addressed when vast numbers of residents are engaged, and when the city, the business sector, and the community sector work collaboratively.

Healthy communities have engaged citizens. Healthy communities share power.

The community submission has recommendations for improving the Office of Public Engagement methodologies and strategies to ensure public input is meaningful, and actually impacts the decisions that are made about planning, the budget, bylaws, and development. Meaningful public input is made on a timely basis, with adequate notice about opportunities for input. And this big change takes leadership skills, meaning stakeholders work together to resolve differences and find common ground so development decisions reflect agreement on public policy.

The current interim report for the governance review does not address the lack of accountability structures in place to ensure that public policy drives city decisions of the city, rather than deal-making and brokering from powerful private interests. One of the biggest problems with the City of Winnipeg is we spend millions of dollars making policy that is ignored, especially when it comes to the investment through the city budget. We have the lowest property taxes in Canada, more poverty, crumbling infrastructure, a low tax base per urban acre, sewage in the rivers, poor bus service, and people who are homeless freezing to death, not by accident but by design. It is all supported by a governance model and power structure designed to keep the community out.

We must ensure decision-making is more inclusive, and make the city budget process more participatory, egalitarian, and inclusive. The review must ensure accountability tools link the budget to the many plans from OurWinnipeg and Complete Communities, to the parking strategy. Policy enforcement and accountability must come from policy and budget indicators, tracking progress on goals for a healthy city in budget documents and public reports. Most cities have this. Winnipeg does not.

Now, accountability is non-existent. In meetings, commitments are made but followup letters receive no response. Similarly, administration sometimes does follow the direction from council to bring back reports. For example, on fiscal management plans. There must be new levers and tools for accountability. Participatory governance is needed to address the ills of our city government, including erasing silos, and turf protecting, buck-passing and deal-making.

The most obvious governance change is to once again have EPC elected by all of council, not appointed by the mayor, as a majority voting block on council. The current “strong mayor model” was meant to get things done, but is a top-down model leading to a democracy deficit in our city, with non-EPC councillors having no rights.

Reducing the size of city wards would also improve democracy. Winnipeg wards are twice the size of wards in other comparable Canadian cities. Current city councillors have about 43,000 citizens to represent. Councillors often seem overwhelmed and unable to respond to demands, including resident calls. Regina has 22,000 people per ward.

The large wards also contribute to an incumbent advantage, prompting some residents to call for term limits for councillors. Some will argue a larger council is too expensive or inefficient. Yes, democratic deliberation takes time, but the decisions are better and will save money in other ways, including legal costs.

Other cities understand grassroots democracy is essential to making needed changes for a healthy city. Other cities fund community-based Organizations to directly communicate their experience and advice with city officials. These structures for neighbourhood associations, resident advisory committees are essential for participatory governance and healthy communities. Our current city charter eliminated these participatory governance structures. It is time for new resident advisory groups. What I learned from my years as a MLA is, things change for the better when community is at the table.

Marianne Cerilli is an educator, community-development consultant and former MLA. Her community-development work emphasizes all things participatory; governance, planning, budgets, decision making, meetings and research. Mariannecerilli.ca