Are You Being Provided ALL The Information You Need?
If officials make public only what they want citizens to know, then publicity becomes a sham and accountability meaningless.~- Swedish philosopher, 1982
UPDATE (06 04 25): One more thing we can now add to this long list of communciations 'deficiencies' on the part of the Dsitrict of Lantzville. Unlike every other jurisdiction I am aware of, the District of Lantzville does not require a property owner who is applying for a rezoning to post a visable sign/notice on the affected property prior to a Public Hearing on the application. Since the Local Government Act only requires municipalities to notify the property owners within 60 m (198 ft.) and, since in semi-rural Lantzville many of the properties are 1/2 acre or larger, this means that very few of the persons who may actually be affected will have some form of direct notification. I ask again, in a true democracy, is this good enough?!?
(rest originally posted 05 11 16)
One of the many duties of a group of people who seek to make decisions for others (we call that a democracy) is that they make every effort to keep the people they serve informed about their activities, decisions and upcoming issues.
Consider the following examples of things that have occurred (or not) through the District of Lantzville in the last 6 months or so and let me know if you think we "pass the test":
- only those who speak at a Public Hearing and submit the text of their comments will have them posted on the District's website. If you made only a written submission, someone would have to come down to the office between 8:30-4:30 M-F and ask to see the relevant binder in order to review those comments.
- if a petition and/or form letter is part of the written record of a Public Hearing, these are not summarized in any way and must be viewed by coming down to the office between 8:30-4:30 M-F and asking to see the relevant binder.
- major sections of some Agendas are not uploaded to the District's website based on their upload size. Again, you can get a copy of the whole Agenda if you come down to the office between 8:30-4:30 M-F.
- since the Agendas are scanned documents (images), and therefore, not searchable, I have asked Twyla to split off the actual Agenda portion (usually the first page or two) and provide it in the form in which it was produced (Word document) so at least that can be searched for. Her response, over a year ago was "Your... suggestions will be taken into consideration and I will advise you accordingly". [Update 07 11 09 The Agendas to this date still remain unsearchable for all practical purposes.]
- the maps, arguably the most important part of the document, attached to the various 'draft' Official Community Plans (each of which was an ~ 70 page download), could only be printed out on an 11" x 17" colour printer, viewed on your 17" or 19" monitor (with no hard copy) or viewed by coming down to the office between 8:30-4:30 M-F and asking to be shown the maps on the walls upstairs. Since the maps changed as often as the 'draft' OCP's did, this meant a number of trips to the District office and you would have to take your own notes as to what the maps were 'showing'.
- information regarding a rationale/justification for the densities contained in the OCP was proferred as: "I think we can supply something on that", yet no supporting information was ever provided
- the minutes of Council meetings are now being presented in 'draft' form yet it is unclear who has the 'authority' to change them, therefore I don't understand the purpose of this. I have tried to offer 'corrections' based on my having attended the meeting on more than one occassion, yet have continually been rebuffed.
- during the 'Public Participation' section of the Minutes, a comment that I have made has been omitted in its entirety on more than one occasion and the answers from council to my questions do not appear as part of the Minutes. The minute-taker appears to continue taking minutes during this part (by hand, laptop and, sometimes, assisted by an audio recording device), yet the response from Council is still absent. I have been told that this is at her 'discretion' but I have not been told what policy, if any, guides the minute-taking. What sense does it make to record a question to council but not their response? Does a resident who has a similar question really have to attend a council meeting and ask the question again? And again?
- when questioned about the criteria used for selecting the members of the OCP Steering Committee, I was told that it wasn't just philosophy or geography (clearly not, with 4 original members within a block of each other and 2 members within 4 houses of each other) yet, when I asked for the complete criteria, I was put off yet again. [Update: another criteria, hidden until now, has been provided inadvertently by council in rescinding a motion dealing with the issue of their remuneration - see the 'Discussion' section of the 'Report to Council' in the Agenda for their 07 05 28 meeting (pdf document page #34)]
- one of the responses which is heard too often is "the report is available at the District office" - yep, you got it, 8:30-4:30 M-F
- the Aspengrove rezoning application has variously been referred to in the Agenda as 'Central Island Independent School Society/Glencar Consultants Rezoning Application No. ZA0502'; Rezoning Application No. ZA0502 (Central Island Independent School Society - Aspengrove School)'; Bylaw No. 500.317, 2005 Regional District of Nanaimo Land Use and Subdivision Bylaw No. 500, 1897, Amendment Bylaw No. 500.317, 2005. A person scanning the Agenda for items of interest would have no idea that this last item was, if fact, the Aspengrove Independent School rezoning application for second reading.
A former supervisor of mine once told me, with a wink, that "if you control the Agenda and you control the minute-taking, you control the decisions"!
Is this really good enough for the residents of Lantzville?!
Hans J. Larsen
Lantzville councillor Candidate
posted by Vigilantz at 2:10 pm
4 Comments:
Mayor Haime,
So good to hear from you again. As you know, campaigning for elected office is a very 'intense' process, with many things which need attending to, especially getting out and meeting the people we seek to represent. So, if I have disappointed you in the time it takes me to get back to you, I apologize.
While I have raised the issue of 'full and complete' information on council business and public access to it with District staff on several occasions, I am not aware that I have yet 'floated' any conspiracy theory having to do with it.
As far as "slandering staff", I believe that if it was something that I have written that you are referring to then it would be called libel, not slander. However, the best defense against either of these charges is the truth. I have simply told visitors to my Blog my experiences with obtaining information through the District office - I don't yet know who is setting policy for them to follow on these issues or making these decisions.
As for the colour Official Community Plan maps, I would simply note that the previous OCP used black and white maps with cross-hatching patterns and they seemed to work fine. I also don't recall publically "having complained about the cost of the OCP".
The committee I served on, along with Denise, which took our Area Director, Ian Savage, months of effort to convince the RDN Board to even allow to go ahead, did recommend connecting to GNWPCC. However, it was far from a unnanimous decision and it came about after a Senior RDN staff member annnounced, out of the blue, that there was really no reason to continue our work. You should also be careful not to confuse the decision of a committee with that of any of its individual members, including its chair.
Anybody who has been at all listening over the past 11 years, knows how I feel about each homeowner spending tens of thousands of dollars just to move our challenge of sewage teatment from 'here to there' by connecting to a primary treatment plant.
You, as Mayor, are the CEO of the District of Lantzville and need to 'own' what the District puts out under its official letterhead. Residents who are interested in what the District thinks about alternatives to the Hammond Bay primary treatment plant (GNWPCC), need only check my blog item on 'Another Point of Clarifcation (Sewage Treatment)' or go to the District office and ask to see the sewer infrastructure grant application (8:30-4:30 M-F).
As for what my volunteer contributions to my community say about my character, I will leave it for the people of Lantzville to be the judge of that.
Mayor Haime,
You just wrote: "Yet when it comes to the Sewer debate you take a Grant application that is part of a council and assume that all items in it are endorsed by me. Makes your statement a bit hypocritical wouldnt you say?"
That would be fine except that, as I wrote in my Blog entry 'A Point of Clarification! (Sewage Treatment):
Under the topic of 'Sewage Treatment', Lantzville's Mayor, Colin Haime says that "It is interesting to note how some people think when you say that you automatically mean connecting to (sic) treatment plant in Nanaimo. I have never said that. Council has never said that" (Colin's Comments #2 - Sept. 6/05).
Now, I really do have to get out campaigning before some of all this 'negativity' begins to rub off on me!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I would think that most people in Lantzville would be more interested in what specific measures Mayor Haime and council, in fulfillment of their "communications" strategic priority and having "respect for the opinions of ALL [the emphasis is council's] of (their) electorate", are going to be implementing and when. He could begin by explaining to the residents why the notification signage requirement section of the RDN Bylaw was removed when the District 'transported' it for their use and when they are going to remedy this situation. While the RDN's size and number requirement for the signage could definitely use improvement ('realtor'-sized signs and only one required if memory serves me correct), at least people who don't have internet access or regularly read the papers would have a chance to see the signage posted on the affected property.
They could also, in respect of your constituents, adopt notification requirements which are more than the minimum required by the Local Government Act and more in keeping with the 'geography' of Lantzville.
BTW, the District's Website [www.lantzville.ca] this morning (May 15/06), contains a notice for a new Public Hearing for Watt Ventures proposal slated for May 29 at 7:00 pm, upstairs in the Lantzville Legion. Here is a perfect opportunity for the District to prove that they mean what they say about communicating with residents being a priority.
Finally, I note that Mayor Haime's own blog, while not yet containing any items, is called "truthinLantzville" - interesting choice, don't you think.
Post a Comment
<< Home