98 replies to this topic

[Caramia]

It will probably end up being very anti-climactic.
But it is a shame that it isn't being released before the elections.

[Rob Randall]

As you can see it is well after December 9 and the Cuff Report is nowhere in sight. The media is sniffing around this issue so it's only a matter of time before it is made public. The City can't sit on it much longer or it will likely be leaked so it's in their best interest to release the report on their terms.

So we the City manager for two years (albeit recently off) and she is now looking forward to cleaning up the disfunction? Sounds to me like she left to avoid having to deal with the Cuff fallout.

The City Manager's office commissioned the report and I don't think anyone's worried that they will come off in a bad light. I don't think Ballantyne will be surprised or afraid of the findings. Although she won't be here to deal with it anyway.

[Barra]

I too am curious about the Cuff report and have heard the same rumour. I thought some of you might be interested to know about the "CALUCs" process that is used for consultation around re-zonings. This process was developed jointly by all the community associations working with a rep. from the Urban Development Institute and the city's Planning Dept. The intent, as I recall, was to ensure that there is a consistent process so that developers are not faced with differing requirements set by each assoc. The major steps in the process are: 1. a preliminary meeting with the assoc (usually a committee) so that the developer can bounce an idea off the assoc. to see whether they want to run with it. 2. the developer then makes application to the Planning Dept, and the city sends a notification to everyone living in a 100 metre radius of the site, inviting them to the community association meeting where they can hear the presentation and make their views known. (I'm sure that most assoc's, like the JBNA, suggest that the developer meet with the immediate neighbours prior to this). 3. at the community association meeting lots of these neighbours come, with their various points of view. (The last 2 proposals presented to the JBNA were supported by the neighbours and others in attendance. ) 4. the association writes to Council to let them know all the views that were expressed at the meeting. Generally there is not a vote taken at the meeting, and the associations - believe it or not - do not take a position on the proposal. 5. the development is reviewed by the Planning staff who prepare a report for a Committee of the Whole meeting. If Council wants to take it to a public hearing, they vote to take it to that next step. 6. at the public hearing anybody in the neighbourhood or the broader community has a chance to provide their views. Council then decides how they want to vote on it.

At the JBNA we have found this process to be very useful - we see lots of people who would not otherwise come to our meetings, and we invite them to continue to come. It also puts assoc leaders in the same position as Councillors, as they hear various opinions. At the next JBNA meeting, for example, we have a private rental proposal by Norm Isherwood that I (personally) think has a lot of merit, but we are already hearing from immediate neighbours who are concerned about potential loss of privacy with a 4 storey building next door.....

[Rob Randall]

The Mayor has invited the Community Association heads to have a discussion over the recommendations in the Cuff Report March 23.

From the sounds of it the entire report won't be made public.

[mat]

The Mayor has invited the Community Association heads to have a discussion over the recommendations in the Cuff Report March 23.

From the sounds of it the entire report won't be made public.

Not certain if the fact all will not be made public is a 'shame', or 'travesty'. There is potentially allot in this report which would shed light on local administration, and as you have posted within this thread, the publish date has been postponed many times.

As for a previous post on media sniffing around - I have yet to see any article, blog or even a 'twit' about the Cuff report. (but media is another issue)

The meetings for Community Association Heads - is that with a qualification for no post meeting publication?

[Rob Randall]

I doubt they will have a ban on publicizing the info. The fact that we will only be discussing the recommendations tells me the tell-all meat and potatoes of the report will remain within City Hall.

The only time we`ve been told to keep a lid on information was with the Belleville Terminal Task Force findings and that was only for a few hours until it was presented to Council.

[Rob Randall]

The media briefing is immediately after the Community Association briefing.

The Times Colonist refers to the report being made public but the City news release only mentions the recommendations from the report being made public.

[mat]

The media briefing is immediately after the Community Association briefing.

The Times Colonist refers to the report being made public but the City news release only mentions the recommendations from the report being made public.

Guess we will see the 'results'

Rob - would you post here your reactions to the meeting, and whatever press release is provided?

[Rob Randall]

Yes, I will try...although I don`t yet Twitter.

[Rob Randall]

Thank you to the City staffer who noticed this thread and informed me that yes, the full report will be made public tomorrow.

[Mike K.]

Does anyone have access to the report?

[Caramia]

Holy crow!

[amor de cosmos]

rob might be happy to know that somebody checks his blog once in a while

City Hall Re-orgapalooza!
March 13, 2009

A substantial reorganization of City Hall process in response to recommendations found in the Cuff Report has just been made public.

Gone are the traditional entities like Committee of the Whole, Advisory Planning Commission and other committees like Cycling and Environment along with the traditional portfolio assignments.

In their place will be a series of standing committees and advisory committees that will do a lot of the detail work, freeing up Council to work on larger issues.

The goal is a more holistic approach to referring projects to the public or Council, breaking down those silos. For instance, instead of a cycling committee, there will be a Public Advisory Committee that meets monthly and deals with environment and infrastructure issues. The other new committee is Community Development. The Advisory Design Panel and Heritage Advisory Committee are the only two entities to survive the reorganization.

The four public advisory committees connect with four Standing Committees, each comprised of three councillors. The Mayor and other Councillors are invited to attend for informational purposes as desired as non-voting attendees. The work of these groups flows through an Agenda Committee that decides what to send to Council meetings or Governance & Priorities Committee (the new name for Committee of the Whole)

http://robertrandall...re-orgapalooza/

[Caramia]

I'll be interested to see how the new model works. I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt. I've been looking forward to seeing that report for quite awhile - I hope it is posted soon.

[Rob Randall]

I have the Cuff Report and the recommendations but I haven't had time to digest them.

[Ginger Snap]

The whole report can be found here
http://www.victoria....overnance.shtml

[Caramia]

Thank you Ginger Snap!

[Rob Randall]

Inner workings of city hall getting makeover

Victoria News

Published: March 17, 2009 9:00 PM
Updated: March 17, 2009 9:50 PM
Keith Vass

News staff

A shake-up in how decisions are made at city hall is coming, but the city’s community associations won’t know for weeks where they fit in.

The city unveiled plans Friday for a revamped committee structure.

Community association leaders were surprised to learn their place in the public consultation process is to be the subject of a second report, due in April, said Downtown Residents’ Association chair Robert Randall.

Mayor Dean Fortin said the coming changes, which will reduce the number of public advisory committees and eliminate council’s committee-of-the-whole among other things, would broaden consultation to engage people not taking part in the existing model.

Randall agreed community associations shouldn’t be the “be-all and end-all” of consultation, but argued there should be a balanced place to receive their input. The DRA, he said, was founded to counteract the “inordinate influence” on downtown development being wielded by people who lived outside downtown.

In the new model there should still be “a strong place for the voice of downtown residents in what happens downtown,” Randall said.

The new city governance model, set to be in place by June 30, will parcel out much of the work currently being addressed by all eight councillors and the mayor to four policy area committees, made up of three councillors each. They are planning and land use, community development, corporate services and environment and infrastructure.

Fortin touted the changes, made in response to a study done by consultant George Cuff. The mayor said it would lead to faster decisions and less energy spent on one-off zoning matters.

Public advisory committees will be reduced from 11 to five but are being given a broader mandate and a direct reporting relationship to a council committee.

kvass@vicnews.com

[Rob Randall]

EDITORIAL: Keep residents in the loop

Victoria News

Published: March 16, 2009 5:00 PM
Updated: March 16, 2009 5:11 PM

The City of Victoria’s revamping of its committee structure as a way of improving efficiency and getting more people involved in the process is admirable.

Unfortunately, the majority of city residents aren’t going to pay attention, regardless if work done by all councillors in past will be divvied up into four committees, or the number of public advisory committees shrinks from 11 to five. Heck, most of the city’s eligible voters don’t even vote. But that doesn’t mean they’re not at all interested in what goes on at the corner of Douglas and Pandora streets.

Downtown Residents Association chair Robert Randall is right when he says associations are not the be-all, end-all in terms of consultation, but their input needs to be balanced with that of the general public on issues relating to their neighbourhood.

Some argue that people active in their local association make up a very small percentage of the residents of that neighbourhood and don’t necessarily represent the opinions or values of the whole. The same notion might apply to the relatively few people appointed (after applying) to sit on the public advisory committees.

There is certain truth to that, except a person paying taxes in a municipality deserves just as much opportunity to speak to an issue affecting them as someone with time to volunteer in their community or city.

Luckily, the ability to stand up for five minutes at city hall to support or reject a particular development or decision will be retained by the public. And a separate report is due in April on the role of community associations under the new regime.

The goal must be that mayor and council keep in mind their first job – to fairly represent and serve all residents of the city when making decisions.

As for engaging the population, let’s hope they enlist neighbourhood associations, seen by some residents as operating within a community vacuum, to help with that job.