By Staff
May17th, 2024
BURLINGTON, ON
The City of Burlington’s updated draft Community Engagement Charter is now ready for review before being finalized.
The team heading up this project report that they have used public feedback on the original Charter to create this draft and that they have engaged with a variety of groups and individuals.
City staff, Members of Council, community groups, local businesses, Council appointed Committees, faith-based groups, youth, newcomers and past members of the Charter Action Team have been involved.
Citizens have an opportunity to review some of the proposed changes or updates based on what we heard before reviewing the draft document.
Public Engagement Opportunities
There will be three in-person public sessions and one online session.
Session 1: Tuesday, June 4, Burlington Seniors’ Centre, 2285 New St. 7 to 9 p.m. register
Session 2: Tuesday, June 11, Tansley Woods Community Centre, 1996 Itabashi Way, 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. register
Session 3: Wednesday, June 12. Online. 7 to 9 p.m. register
Session 4: Wednesday, June 19, Tansley Woods Community Centre, 1996 Itabashi Way, 7 to 9 p.m. All are welcomed; however, this session is in partnership with the Halton Multicultural Council (HMC). HMC will provide translation services for anyone who requests the service. Anyone registering for this session will be asked which language they would prefer. register
Check out the quick poll and tell us what word (Resident, Citizen or Community Member) should be used in the Engagement Charter and Framework.
During the engagement, we heard a lot of great ideas on how to make engagement better in Burlington. Take a quick survey and tell us your top 5 ideas you think the City should consider.
Anne and Dave make an excellent point and one that has been echoed by many of those who delegate or follow the proceedings at City Hall. The problem is not with the Charter but with compliance or, more exactly, an observed commitment to true engagement on the part of those who share ‘the horseshoe table’. First, engagement is interactive. It is not, as Anne and Dave observe, ‘talking heads’ delegations that speak to a panel of generally bored and disinterested faces with few follow-up questions. It demands, or should, the ability of citizens to respectfully pose a limited number of questions of the Councillors – challenge their understanding of the issue at hand and establish their position. But this demands that Council step up and actively participate. It requires knowledge of the issue and the ability to respond. Would this require changes to the meeting protocols and logistics – certainly, but it need neither extend nor clog Council meetings. I have repeatedly heard the argument that allowing true interaction at Council would impair Council’s ability to “get work done”. Politely, this is fatuous nonsense. What it demands is an attitude at Council that is results-driven and that abandons the truly mind-numbing procedural wrangling. It is a Councillor’s first duty to learn and know how Council should conduct its business. This certainly should be true after six years of sitting in the chair– as is the case with the current Council. So, focus on business – abandon the interminable, time consuming questions of the Clerk and the polite ‘oh you first, Alphonse’ scenarios.
However, there is another aspect of how citizen engagement has been misdirected (and I use that term advisedly) under the current Council, particularly by the Head of Council. Last July, the public was advised by the Mayor that they had passed a new procedural guideline or policy that would structure appropriate conduct at Council and City meetings. It was not to open up the doors to the public but, oddly, to protect Council members from abusive behaviour on the part of those appearing before Council. She was quoted (of course in tandem with the proverbial photo) explaining ““We wanted to put in place some formal policies if there ever is another time where we have to ban somebody from City Hall. It has happened in the past; people who have engaged in offensive, abusive, sexist behaviour, harassing behaviour. You know, I like to tell folks we’re elected officials. We’re not punching bags. Our staff are not punching bags, we’re not there for you to beat up on.” And there is now a potential 2 year ban from attendance at City events and sites for those who have demonstrated such abusive behaviour. But the real question is – why was this necessary? Were there really any occasions in which citizen behaviour threatened members of Council or was not subject to simple, common sense, unspectacular control? I can think of none. Uncomfortable situations perhaps; dangerous or threatening absolutely not. But the Mayor’s rather theatrical statement established an automatic expectation and seemed to justify a totally ‘out of bounds’, extreme policy. Indeed, it was classic misdirection – like the guide in the Arizona desert who warns his entourage of the deadly “water snakes” which then become the focus of the tour’s attention rather than the fact that the guide has been quietly leading them in circles for hours.
The problem we have in Burlington is not with the current Engagement Charter that was the brain child of Mulkewich and Boich and the Shape Burlington Committee, it is with compliance. Boich was very verbal about the toxicity that he envisaged in the City’s future, if things did not change . Sincerely hope that we get ample opportunity to review the Charter as it was compared with how it is intended to be and citizens are supported in terms of their ability to have their voices heard on the changes being good or bad.,or will we simply be allowed to speak at the lectern and that is it as is so often is the case.
The longstanding access issues with Civic Square, that went through very similar citizen input sessions in 2018 and 2019 that sees it non-compliant with city 2016 access standards and fall hazards failed brick work, still.Regardless of the 2018 Goldring Council agreeing to dedicate funds to have it all fixed up summer of 2019 it is now on the schedule for 2026 with a multi-million dollar ballooned budget.
As we previously said engagement with citizens is not simply allowing them to speak at the lectern followed by no questions and the repetitive statement “you have made yourself perfectly clear”. It is listening and acting in a manner that shows citizens voices were heard and recorded and improved the decision making process. There has to be a willing leadership attitude for whatever commitments to the Municipal Act requirement of Engagement are put on paper to be be upheld. We clearly do not have that at this time, we don’t even have our Mayor agreeing to give us what the majority of our democratically elected councIl have asked her to return to them and which they handled appropriately for four years!!!