By Pepper Parr
May 14th, 2026
BURLINGTON, ON
Those who pay attention to what Council and City staff do day in and day out will have been interested in the Staff report that outlined how the role of Advisory Committees will be created and how they will operate.
The plan is solid, and the role out has merit.
Burlingtonians will show up for public meetings and take an active part in any discussion – but they have to be given background briefings and decent opportunity to study and prepare. This meeting was one of those one way events: City Treasurer telling an audience what she was going to do.
What isn’t clear, and what needs to be clear is: Will the public be at the table when staff is working on the specifics?
The report isn’t due back until Q1 2027 by which time we will know what the city is going to have in the way of a City Council. Will there be a new Mayor and a Council with some new faces and a different approach to citizen involvement?
Roland Tanner worked hard to bring about changes to the way Advisory Committees are created and what they are permitted to do.
Jim Young, along with Roland Tanner, prepared a detailed proposal on Advisory Committee changes – they didn’t even get a hearing.
There were a number of people who put in a lot of time on pushing for changes: Roland Tanner and Jim Young will tell you that on that occasion they got less then even lip service.
Could it be different this time?
It could be (dare I say should be) different this time?
Reach out to each other. Form ad hoc committees. Don’t wait for the city to invite you – just show up.
One of the issues is always – who chooses the members of the Advisory Committees?
There are those in Burlington who would very much like to see a change and let community groups have the right to determine who holds at least a couple of the seats on any Advisory Committee.
The Indigenous community are said to meet regularly with city staff on developing policy papers: why couldn’t community organizations do the same thing?
One reason is that there really isn’t very much in the way of community organizations in Burlington. Oakville is reported to have more than a handful.
Penny Hersh showed what could be done when EcOb was formed. (Yes, we know Penny didn’t create ECoB but she did use the organization to hold council member debates in every ward of the city.)
All that Burlington has is the (RCO) Roseland Community Organization that holds speaker series events and hosts debates during elections, both provincial and municipal.
There appears to be a change in the electoral wind – too early to tell if it will anything more than a little gust.
Related news article:
Council approves the creation of changes to the Advisory Committee process
I attended a meeting put on by Ward 2 Councilor Lisa Kearns and heard a gentleman suggest to her she should make a part of her election campaign platform. He suggested she should include a commitment to introduce the ability for residents to delegate to council on any matter they like. As I understand it delegations can only be made in regard to items on the agenda.
This gentleman suggested once or twice a month a 2-hour period should be set aside for, I think he called it, an “open mic” opportunity for residents to speak to council directly in regard to any local matter they wish.
If implemented, that would be a wonderful step forward for democracy in the City of Burlington.
Councilor Kearns did not say she would or would not take up the idea.
Penny, I have on three separate occasions tried to be selected to join a specific advisory board. However, I believe because I have as a delegating resident put forward views and positions counter to that of the chairperson. I have never been selected.
The selection process was an interview with three of the committee members (the chair and two others) along with the liaison councilor. A city clerk was in attendance and managed the meeting. Only the members of the committee had a vote. Once the interview committee had made its decision on who was to be selected a recommendation was sent to council and rubber stamped.
The interview committee members are required to provide their scoring charts for each interviewee to the city clerk for record keeping. However, when I requested those scoring charts, one of the three had gone missing. The deciding vote! No consequences!
So it is not council members you should point your finger at but point it at the members of the closed shop advisory committees themselves.
Roseland Community Organization made a deliberate decision a decade ago to incorporate, rather than being a one-time, one-issue group of what I call rateyappers – it was our thinking that the best way to protect our “garden suburb” and sustain our efforts was to INCORPORATE. This meant having an established organization, by-laws, setting a budget and membership requirements, along with an annual budget and meeting.
I know this seems like a lot of bureaucracy but this has sustained Roseland’s participation and leadership on many on issues related to neighbourhood planning, Committee of Adjustment hearings, tree preservation and planning, heritage, along with active involvement in federal, provincial and municipal elections – afterall, democracy is us. Other groups coming forward who wish to sustain their efforts may want to carefully consider how they organize. Don
After the 2018 election City Staff came to myself and Roland Tanner, along with others to be part of a group to help change the way the City Advisory Committees were chosen and functioned.
A consultant was brought in, meetings were attended and a report was prepared to go to Council for approval.
The report was scheduled for a Council Meeting and at the last minute it was deleted from the Agenda never to be seen again. No changes were made.
Here we are in 2026 and once again Council wants changes made to encourage “public engagement”. Don’t drink the Kool-Aid. This is politicking 101 at its best.
As long as Council members vote (in camera) to decide on the acceptance of those citizens that have been interviewed by staff there can never be true public engagement involvement.
If indeed council has to decide who should be on these committees no names should be included in the recommendations. Only 1 staff person should have this information.
By doing this a candidate would be chosen on their abilities not by their name.
How many residents have been unable to join a committee because that person had the audacity to challenge council members?