Last Monday was our last council meeting until the middle of August. We've been doing this for several years now - one council meeting in July, and one in August, with an Executive meeting in each month the week before the council meeting.
There are some positives to this. For those who prefer to vacation in the summer, it provides a couple of blocks of time when a three week absence won't result in missing any meetings. It also gives some relief to administrative staff who attend council meetings - they too can take time off, or at least have a shorter than usual day on Mondays when a meeting is cancelled.
But city business still goes on. In fact, for most of our staff, who either work outdoors or manage those who do, this is their busy time, and summer vacations are not something that they can take for granted. Things have changed - just as shopping is now a seven day a week option, vacations are no longer limited to the summer, and perhaps council operations need to recognize that taking it easy during the summer may not be affordable any more. Maybe we need to keep working year-round, even if it means that if you take summer holidays, you may not get that perfect attendance award. But council as a whole may be able to get more done.
Perhaps we need to take the opportunity in summer to focus on the important, but not necessarily urgent, matters. Perhaps getting together to brainstorm solutions for some of our chronic issues might be a good use of our time.
For example, in talking with some of our staff about the focused paving projects that we're doing this year, to try to catch up with the backlog from past years of neglect, they've had some good ideas about how the process could be made more efficient. There are a lot of steps that have to happen from start to finish when repairing a street, but some of the steps, like boulevard repair, may not happen in the same year, or even within a couple of years, as the main work. We should explore the options out there for removing those gaps, and work with staff so that those ideas with the most promise get a trial run, rather than just have things continue to be done the way they've always been done.
Another chronic issue that is probably the one that is raised with me most often, is dealing with boarded up properties. This seems to be more of an issue in the summer, perhaps because that's often when those with nowhere else to live will move into these places, even without the basic utilities of power and running water. You can imagine how unpleasant a place like this would be to have in your neighbourhood, and it's not uncommon for fires to occur in these situations, endangering both the temporary inhabitants and the surrounding homes. We need to find a faster way of getting these properties either back up to code and habitable, or taken down, and I would welcome the opportunity to discuss possible solutions with council and staff.
This council is trying to operate differently from previous councils - working more efficiently, and spending taxpayers' dollars more effectively. Maybe it's time we looked at our meeting schedule, and even at the way we approach our discussions about problems, differently too. I'm not advocating that we forget that it's summer - I enjoy the longer days and the more relaxed feeling that everyone seems to have (and I appreciate not having to wear a suit to council meetings), but I think that, even though it's summer, we still need to continue looking at our problems, and finding solutions. And just as the best ideas often come when you're relaxed, not trying to meet deadlines, maybe we'll come up with solutions for some long-standing problems.
"Summer's lease hath all too short a date." - William Shakespeare
Sunday, July 14, 2013
Sunday, July 7, 2013
Water, Water Everywhere
Along with the mayor, Councillor Miller and the fire chief, I toured Little Red River Park on Friday, and was able to see first-hand the damage that the extra water released into the system has caused. It's surprising how the landscape has been permanently changed, along with the various man-made structures in the park, and there's no doubt that it's going to be quite some time before this favourite spot for hiking, picnics and running is usable again.
In all the various water-logged issues that we've been swamped with this year (deep apologies for the pun), there are some things to be grateful for. The rise in the North Saskatchewan last weekend was much lower than predicted, and personally I thought that being prepared for the worst while hoping for the best was the responsible way to go. We should also be grateful that the province picked up the bills for flood preparation, including taking care of the sand-bagging around the Cosmo Lodge. Costs to the city have been minimal.
The evacuation of Cumberland House, while it proved not to be necessary, was another case of being safe rather than sorry. And a couple of community events for the evacuees that were open to everyone was a nice bonus - we don't have enough opportunities for getting out in the summer within the city - not everyone can head out to the lake on a warm summer evening.
If there's one concern that rises out of the situation not being as bad as was predicted, it's that there might be a sense of complacency the next time there are flood warnings, so people might slack off in their preparations. From what I've learned from the province, they're constantly working to improve their predictive models, using information from what actually happens with increased water flows, so I'm sure that this year's data will be built into their models and the confidence in the predictions will improve.
The silver lining of the devastation to Little Red is the chance to rebuild based on what we've learned, so that we're better prepared for next time. For example, the asphalt paths right next to the river that are now gone - maybe we shouldn't be investing money in that sort of infrastructure that's so close to the water. We'll be able to take advantage of new knowledge about structural improvements when replacing or repairing the various crossing structures so that they might be able to better withstand the next flood. Because water being what it is, there will be a next time.
Let's just hope that next time, we're as well-prepared as we were this time.
"Nothing is softer or more flexible that water, yet nothing can resist it." Lao Tzu
In all the various water-logged issues that we've been swamped with this year (deep apologies for the pun), there are some things to be grateful for. The rise in the North Saskatchewan last weekend was much lower than predicted, and personally I thought that being prepared for the worst while hoping for the best was the responsible way to go. We should also be grateful that the province picked up the bills for flood preparation, including taking care of the sand-bagging around the Cosmo Lodge. Costs to the city have been minimal.
The evacuation of Cumberland House, while it proved not to be necessary, was another case of being safe rather than sorry. And a couple of community events for the evacuees that were open to everyone was a nice bonus - we don't have enough opportunities for getting out in the summer within the city - not everyone can head out to the lake on a warm summer evening.
If there's one concern that rises out of the situation not being as bad as was predicted, it's that there might be a sense of complacency the next time there are flood warnings, so people might slack off in their preparations. From what I've learned from the province, they're constantly working to improve their predictive models, using information from what actually happens with increased water flows, so I'm sure that this year's data will be built into their models and the confidence in the predictions will improve.
The silver lining of the devastation to Little Red is the chance to rebuild based on what we've learned, so that we're better prepared for next time. For example, the asphalt paths right next to the river that are now gone - maybe we shouldn't be investing money in that sort of infrastructure that's so close to the water. We'll be able to take advantage of new knowledge about structural improvements when replacing or repairing the various crossing structures so that they might be able to better withstand the next flood. Because water being what it is, there will be a next time.
Let's just hope that next time, we're as well-prepared as we were this time.
"Nothing is softer or more flexible that water, yet nothing can resist it." Lao Tzu
Sunday, June 23, 2013
Lessons I Hope We've Learned from This Year's Budget
Now that the tax notices have been sent, there's been quite a bit of feedback on the impact on both residents and business owners. Most home owners are facing a higher increase due to the flat taxes - the Pineview Terrace levy of $27, the $60 flat tax set a couple of years ago which has an undefined purpose, but which has been used in both previous years to balance the budget, and the new $189 flat tax which is directed to road repair and maintenance. Flat taxes have a greater proportional impact on lesser valued properties - only high value properties will have seen a lower than average increase. In my own case, our property taxes have increased by 19%.
This, of course, pales in comparison to the impact on businesses, particularly small businesses, where flat taxes have the same higher proportional impact as on lower value homes. Unfortunately, administration didn't provide specific examples of what the effect would be, but when I did some rough calculations based on how the $60 flat tax had translated into taxes on businesses from $300 to $3,000, it wasn't difficult to make the assumption that tripling the flat tax was going to hit small businesses pretty hard, and I said this before each budget vote, but to little effect, unfortunately. My motion to remove the $60 flat tax and put it back into the mill rate calculations was also unsuccessful.
As I said in an earlier blog, I don't like flat taxes, but I support the two directed flat taxes because they will be dedicated to set, and necessary, purposes, not used to balance the budget. The road maintenance flat tax was the only option that we could think of to make up for past neglect and misspending. If this tax proves to be more than we need for a year of work, then it can be reduced in the future. And the Pineview Terrace levy will be gone after 2015.
Tax increases are never popular, of course, even when they're necessary, but I hope that, as a council, we've learned from the almost universal negative response that we've received, whether formally, in the press, or in our casual encounters, and that we use this learning in next year's budget process.
First, we need to look at the whole budget, including the base budget, at the start of the process. Even this year, only a few things were taken out of the base budget, and that was because they were specific unnecessary expenditures identified by council members. But when you don't see all the details, it's really hard to identify all of the savings that could be made. In some places, zero-based budgeting is the norm, and I'd really like us to start there. That's when every expenditure made by the city is identified, and justified, before being approved. Our administration tends to start with last year's budget, and add to it, rather than looking at current spending and seeing where we could spend less.
I think that an overall personnel review is long overdue. It seems that new positions are often created, but we rarely look at reductions in positions, even when attrition makes it possible to do so without affecting an actual person.
There should be no sacred cows in the budget. Just because we have always done things a certain way, or spent money on certain things, doesn't mean that these things should continue without there being any scrutiny of the need, or the method.
We need for administration to give us a better picture of the impact of proposed tax increases, for both residents and businesses. I think that often, because we're elected by the people who live in our wards, not by the businesses that are located there, we don't worry as much about the effect of our various decisions on the businesses that are necessary for the health of our community. We often talk about the quality of life that the various recreational and artistic facilities provide - a broad spectrum of healthy businesses in a community is even more important to our quality of life.
And, as always, let's not be afraid to ask questions if we're not clear on something, or if something seems too good to be true, like the idea that reassessment wouldn't cause tax increases. Why people thought that if the value of your property went up, your taxes wouldn't also increase, is one of those "if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is" things. Let's ask for definite proof, rather than just hearing what we want to hear.
Every year is a learning experience, but it can only benefit our city if we take and apply what we've learned, rather than hoping that people will forget before the next election.
"What is the difference between a taxidermist and a tax collector? The taxidermist takes only your skin." - Mark Twain
This, of course, pales in comparison to the impact on businesses, particularly small businesses, where flat taxes have the same higher proportional impact as on lower value homes. Unfortunately, administration didn't provide specific examples of what the effect would be, but when I did some rough calculations based on how the $60 flat tax had translated into taxes on businesses from $300 to $3,000, it wasn't difficult to make the assumption that tripling the flat tax was going to hit small businesses pretty hard, and I said this before each budget vote, but to little effect, unfortunately. My motion to remove the $60 flat tax and put it back into the mill rate calculations was also unsuccessful.
As I said in an earlier blog, I don't like flat taxes, but I support the two directed flat taxes because they will be dedicated to set, and necessary, purposes, not used to balance the budget. The road maintenance flat tax was the only option that we could think of to make up for past neglect and misspending. If this tax proves to be more than we need for a year of work, then it can be reduced in the future. And the Pineview Terrace levy will be gone after 2015.
Tax increases are never popular, of course, even when they're necessary, but I hope that, as a council, we've learned from the almost universal negative response that we've received, whether formally, in the press, or in our casual encounters, and that we use this learning in next year's budget process.
First, we need to look at the whole budget, including the base budget, at the start of the process. Even this year, only a few things were taken out of the base budget, and that was because they were specific unnecessary expenditures identified by council members. But when you don't see all the details, it's really hard to identify all of the savings that could be made. In some places, zero-based budgeting is the norm, and I'd really like us to start there. That's when every expenditure made by the city is identified, and justified, before being approved. Our administration tends to start with last year's budget, and add to it, rather than looking at current spending and seeing where we could spend less.
I think that an overall personnel review is long overdue. It seems that new positions are often created, but we rarely look at reductions in positions, even when attrition makes it possible to do so without affecting an actual person.
There should be no sacred cows in the budget. Just because we have always done things a certain way, or spent money on certain things, doesn't mean that these things should continue without there being any scrutiny of the need, or the method.
We need for administration to give us a better picture of the impact of proposed tax increases, for both residents and businesses. I think that often, because we're elected by the people who live in our wards, not by the businesses that are located there, we don't worry as much about the effect of our various decisions on the businesses that are necessary for the health of our community. We often talk about the quality of life that the various recreational and artistic facilities provide - a broad spectrum of healthy businesses in a community is even more important to our quality of life.
And, as always, let's not be afraid to ask questions if we're not clear on something, or if something seems too good to be true, like the idea that reassessment wouldn't cause tax increases. Why people thought that if the value of your property went up, your taxes wouldn't also increase, is one of those "if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is" things. Let's ask for definite proof, rather than just hearing what we want to hear.
Every year is a learning experience, but it can only benefit our city if we take and apply what we've learned, rather than hoping that people will forget before the next election.
"What is the difference between a taxidermist and a tax collector? The taxidermist takes only your skin." - Mark Twain
Sunday, June 16, 2013
Why I Like the Street Fair (Even When the Sun Doesn't Shine)
This past Saturday was the ninth annual street fair. This is an event that I always look forward to, the opportunity to wander up and down Central Avenue, eat outside, enjoy the outdoor entertainment, browse the various displays, and check out what the stores have to offer.
This year I didn't have very high hopes for the event. The heavy rain on Friday, combined with the forecast for more of the same all day Saturday, had participants trying to figure out how they would manage in torrential rain. And when it was raining first thing Saturday morning, I really didn't think that anyone would bother going downtown, but would instead choose to keep dry at home. I admit that would have been my choice.
I was forced to go out though - Andrea is part of Morley Harrison's stock company for his historical vignettes, and she was committed to being part of this year's offering, "The Damned Dam", about the La Colle Falls Dam project. At their rehearsal the evening before, they had decided to perform inside the museum, to avoid any concerns about rain, so we headed there around 10:30. Since I had some time to pass before the 11 a.m. performance, I wandered up the street.
It wasn't raining at this point, and I was pleasantly surprised at the number of people on Central. Certainly not as many as would have been there had it been a sunny day, but far more than I expected to see. While the first block, where the Co-op used to be, was a dead zone, further up many of the stores had decided to participate, often putting up tents to shelter merchandise, there were plenty of food vendors, and Memorial Square, in front of City Hall, was full of kids and parents taking advantage of games and face-painting. The steps of City Hall were being used as a stage, an excellent opportunity for some young dancers to perform to an appreciative audience. I ran into so many people that wanted to talk that I was late getting back to the museum, and missed part of the play.
After Andrea changed out of her play attire, we wandered up and down, checking things out and chatting with people. Many people were carrying umbrellas, just in case, but it was obvious that a little rain wasn't going to stop them from enjoying the opportunity to do something different. I think that the street fair meets a need in the community - it's a place that people can bring their kids, and know that there will be things for them to do that don't cost anything. For adults, you're bound to run into people that you know, and catch up on things. It's a chance to slow down, see the downtown in a different light, and perhaps see some of its potential as a gathering place.
I think that there's still a lot that could be tried. If there was an Open Doors type of event, in which buildings like City Hall, the Forest Centre, and the downtown churches are open for tours, that would give people a place to duck into in the case of bad weather. Putting the historical play inside the museum turned out to have a couple of unexpected benefits - the performers were much more easily heard than is the case when they're outdoors, competing with music and conversation, and the museum had many people who came for the three performances of the play, but then stuck around to check out the displays. These kind of potential synergies need to be explored more fully.
The rain may have dampened things, and limited some of the usual events, but those who came out enjoyed themselves, had the chance to socialize, and maybe learned something new. Not a bad way to spend a Saturday.
"Everybody needs some time to rejuvenate, refresh, recharge and begin again." - Ravathi Sankarun
This year I didn't have very high hopes for the event. The heavy rain on Friday, combined with the forecast for more of the same all day Saturday, had participants trying to figure out how they would manage in torrential rain. And when it was raining first thing Saturday morning, I really didn't think that anyone would bother going downtown, but would instead choose to keep dry at home. I admit that would have been my choice.
I was forced to go out though - Andrea is part of Morley Harrison's stock company for his historical vignettes, and she was committed to being part of this year's offering, "The Damned Dam", about the La Colle Falls Dam project. At their rehearsal the evening before, they had decided to perform inside the museum, to avoid any concerns about rain, so we headed there around 10:30. Since I had some time to pass before the 11 a.m. performance, I wandered up the street.
It wasn't raining at this point, and I was pleasantly surprised at the number of people on Central. Certainly not as many as would have been there had it been a sunny day, but far more than I expected to see. While the first block, where the Co-op used to be, was a dead zone, further up many of the stores had decided to participate, often putting up tents to shelter merchandise, there were plenty of food vendors, and Memorial Square, in front of City Hall, was full of kids and parents taking advantage of games and face-painting. The steps of City Hall were being used as a stage, an excellent opportunity for some young dancers to perform to an appreciative audience. I ran into so many people that wanted to talk that I was late getting back to the museum, and missed part of the play.
After Andrea changed out of her play attire, we wandered up and down, checking things out and chatting with people. Many people were carrying umbrellas, just in case, but it was obvious that a little rain wasn't going to stop them from enjoying the opportunity to do something different. I think that the street fair meets a need in the community - it's a place that people can bring their kids, and know that there will be things for them to do that don't cost anything. For adults, you're bound to run into people that you know, and catch up on things. It's a chance to slow down, see the downtown in a different light, and perhaps see some of its potential as a gathering place.
I think that there's still a lot that could be tried. If there was an Open Doors type of event, in which buildings like City Hall, the Forest Centre, and the downtown churches are open for tours, that would give people a place to duck into in the case of bad weather. Putting the historical play inside the museum turned out to have a couple of unexpected benefits - the performers were much more easily heard than is the case when they're outdoors, competing with music and conversation, and the museum had many people who came for the three performances of the play, but then stuck around to check out the displays. These kind of potential synergies need to be explored more fully.
The rain may have dampened things, and limited some of the usual events, but those who came out enjoyed themselves, had the chance to socialize, and maybe learned something new. Not a bad way to spend a Saturday.
"Everybody needs some time to rejuvenate, refresh, recharge and begin again." - Ravathi Sankarun
Sunday, June 9, 2013
Some FCM Reflections
I've just returned from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) annual general meeting, which was held this year in Vancouver. As we often do, Andrea and I went out a few days early for a bit of a vacation before the work began. Just my luck, those were the rainy days, but even in the rain, Vancouver gave us lots to see and do. It's a great city that has put a great deal of thought into keeping its development balanced with maintaining accessible green space in a very livable and vibrant downtown.
There has been some questioning in the media about the value of FCM for members of council. It is definitely not, as one letter to the editor of the paper said, a "paid vacation". I think that people often don't consider that there is no school that one can attend to learn how to be a member of city council. Our education might best be termed as self-directed learning. I've found that one of the best ways of doing that is by talking to others about their experiences, and the best venue that I've found for that is FCM. The six members of council who attended FCM spent long days and evenings taking advantage of as many educational opportunities as possible.
There are four different types of learning opportunities at FCM. There are the formal working sessions, which feature presentations on various issues, and you can select the ones most appropriate for your circumstances. For example, this year a particularly timely one for Prince Albert was on the location of cell phone tower locations, which offered solutions that have worked in other communities.
There is an enormous trade show, which has new products and ideas ranging from new voting systems to waste disposal options. It's a good place to get ideas which can then be passed along to administration for further assessment, to see how such ideas could work for Prince Albert. I saw a couple of things that might be useful for the Rotary Trail. One was using LED for public lighting - this could be an inexpensive and environmentally friendly option for providing lighting along the trail. The other was a self-cleaning public washroom, one of which is already being used in downtown Vancouver - the lack of public washroom facilities has been cited as one of the drawbacks to using the Rotary Trail.
There are study tours which offer the chance to see solutions that are actually being tried. I took one tour that focused on housing solutions for those who are difficult to house. In Vancouver, the provincial government has actually taken the lead on this problem, and owns housing that is utilized for this purpose, and the city has staff that are dedicated to implementing the solution. I think that partnerships like these are those most likely to succeed with problems like housing that stem from a range of root causes.
And finally, there are the informal learning opportunities that come from networking with councillors from cities and towns across Canada. All that we really have in common is our jobs as members of council, and that's what we talk about. It's a chance to pick people's brains about what they have done about perennial problems like crime, downtown areas, recreational developments, managing growth, or disappearing industries. For example, I had a good conversation with the mayor of Oliver, BC, whose town was devastated when the local mine closed, but which has been revitalized by the growth of the wine industry.
If we don't take advantage of the opportunities to learn how other communities do things, we'll miss the chance to learn from both their mistakes and their successes. We'll keep on doing things the way we've always done them, because we won't have learned about recent innovations. Part of doing the job well is learning how to do the job smarter and better, and conferences like FCM are a good investment in that, both for members of council, and for the city as a whole.
"The great aim of education is not knowledge, but action." - Herbert Spencer
There has been some questioning in the media about the value of FCM for members of council. It is definitely not, as one letter to the editor of the paper said, a "paid vacation". I think that people often don't consider that there is no school that one can attend to learn how to be a member of city council. Our education might best be termed as self-directed learning. I've found that one of the best ways of doing that is by talking to others about their experiences, and the best venue that I've found for that is FCM. The six members of council who attended FCM spent long days and evenings taking advantage of as many educational opportunities as possible.
There are four different types of learning opportunities at FCM. There are the formal working sessions, which feature presentations on various issues, and you can select the ones most appropriate for your circumstances. For example, this year a particularly timely one for Prince Albert was on the location of cell phone tower locations, which offered solutions that have worked in other communities.
There is an enormous trade show, which has new products and ideas ranging from new voting systems to waste disposal options. It's a good place to get ideas which can then be passed along to administration for further assessment, to see how such ideas could work for Prince Albert. I saw a couple of things that might be useful for the Rotary Trail. One was using LED for public lighting - this could be an inexpensive and environmentally friendly option for providing lighting along the trail. The other was a self-cleaning public washroom, one of which is already being used in downtown Vancouver - the lack of public washroom facilities has been cited as one of the drawbacks to using the Rotary Trail.
There are study tours which offer the chance to see solutions that are actually being tried. I took one tour that focused on housing solutions for those who are difficult to house. In Vancouver, the provincial government has actually taken the lead on this problem, and owns housing that is utilized for this purpose, and the city has staff that are dedicated to implementing the solution. I think that partnerships like these are those most likely to succeed with problems like housing that stem from a range of root causes.
And finally, there are the informal learning opportunities that come from networking with councillors from cities and towns across Canada. All that we really have in common is our jobs as members of council, and that's what we talk about. It's a chance to pick people's brains about what they have done about perennial problems like crime, downtown areas, recreational developments, managing growth, or disappearing industries. For example, I had a good conversation with the mayor of Oliver, BC, whose town was devastated when the local mine closed, but which has been revitalized by the growth of the wine industry.
If we don't take advantage of the opportunities to learn how other communities do things, we'll miss the chance to learn from both their mistakes and their successes. We'll keep on doing things the way we've always done them, because we won't have learned about recent innovations. Part of doing the job well is learning how to do the job smarter and better, and conferences like FCM are a good investment in that, both for members of council, and for the city as a whole.
"The great aim of education is not knowledge, but action." - Herbert Spencer
Sunday, May 19, 2013
Some Thoughts on the Proposed GPS Policy
There's been quite a bit of media coverage over the last couple of weeks about a policy brought forward by administration to set guidelines for the use of various technical devices that are available in city-owned property - cell phones, radios, vehicles, water meter reading devices, for example. Mostly, it speaks to the use of GPS (Global Positioning Systems) that are in such things, and how the city could use this GPS availability to track the location of city employees.
I voted against this proposal for a number of reasons. While the main reason for the policy was suggested to be for improved safety, this seems to be a bit of a stretch. Employees rarely work alone, and never in remote locations. As well, I think that it's a fair assumption that work schedules and locations are known by supervisors, managers and co-workers - if there's a problem, finding where the worker is will be the least of the problem. And a GPS won't be able to tell when there's a problem.
I was also concerned that the staff proposing this couldn't tell us of another municipality where this is in place, suggesting that either it isn't a good idea, or that full research on the idea hadn't taken place. I'm a firm believer in gathering all the information that's out there before submitting a proposal, and that groundwork hasn't yet been done. The concerns raised by the privacy commissioner the day after our meeting also seem to indicate that the proposal had missed a fairly important piece of research.
Although the proposal focused on the need for safety, many of the comments and questions since have focused on the potential of using this technology for monitoring where outside workers are, and when, and for checking on such things as length of coffee breaks. I totally disagree with this. We pay supervisors and managers good salaries, part of which are for doing the actual work of supervising and managing employees, and I believe that far better results occur from face-to-face discussions of expectations and issues of non-performance, than from electronic surveillance.
There's also an inequity here of how we treat inside and outside workers. As far as I know, we do not monitor inside employees, who may well spend time talking to co-workers, on inappropriate web-sites, or updating their Facebook pages when they should be working. Perhaps we're less concerned because the public is unlikely to see these behaviours and complain, but if we're going to set up a system for monitoring, we'd better be sure that we're treating all employees the same.
The proposed policy has been sent back for further development and consultation, particularly with the unions. Hopefully, before it shows up before us again, the research has been done to answer everyone's questions.
" There will come a time when it isn't 'They're spying on me through my phone' any more. Eventually it will be 'My phone is spying on me'." - Philip K. Dick
I voted against this proposal for a number of reasons. While the main reason for the policy was suggested to be for improved safety, this seems to be a bit of a stretch. Employees rarely work alone, and never in remote locations. As well, I think that it's a fair assumption that work schedules and locations are known by supervisors, managers and co-workers - if there's a problem, finding where the worker is will be the least of the problem. And a GPS won't be able to tell when there's a problem.
I was also concerned that the staff proposing this couldn't tell us of another municipality where this is in place, suggesting that either it isn't a good idea, or that full research on the idea hadn't taken place. I'm a firm believer in gathering all the information that's out there before submitting a proposal, and that groundwork hasn't yet been done. The concerns raised by the privacy commissioner the day after our meeting also seem to indicate that the proposal had missed a fairly important piece of research.
Although the proposal focused on the need for safety, many of the comments and questions since have focused on the potential of using this technology for monitoring where outside workers are, and when, and for checking on such things as length of coffee breaks. I totally disagree with this. We pay supervisors and managers good salaries, part of which are for doing the actual work of supervising and managing employees, and I believe that far better results occur from face-to-face discussions of expectations and issues of non-performance, than from electronic surveillance.
There's also an inequity here of how we treat inside and outside workers. As far as I know, we do not monitor inside employees, who may well spend time talking to co-workers, on inappropriate web-sites, or updating their Facebook pages when they should be working. Perhaps we're less concerned because the public is unlikely to see these behaviours and complain, but if we're going to set up a system for monitoring, we'd better be sure that we're treating all employees the same.
The proposed policy has been sent back for further development and consultation, particularly with the unions. Hopefully, before it shows up before us again, the research has been done to answer everyone's questions.
" There will come a time when it isn't 'They're spying on me through my phone' any more. Eventually it will be 'My phone is spying on me'." - Philip K. Dick
Sunday, May 12, 2013
Assessing the Risks of Change
Any time council proposes doing things differently, we're guaranteed to get emails or phone calls from residents or other interested parties about how we shouldn't make changes, because the change will cost more. The most recent example is our decision to move to monthly water billing in January 2014, rather than the current quarterly billing. The immediate reaction from some has been that our costs for the actual billing will now be triple, and certainly, for paper billing, mailing a bill every month rather than quarterly will cost three times as much.
Any time change happens, there is a cost involved. What has to be part of the decision-making process, is an assessment of what benefits are associated with the change, and whether those benefits outweigh the costs. In the case of monthly water billing, I think that the benefits of making it easier for residents to pay water bills, the reduced risk of delinquency of payment because we'll know monthly if if someone isn't paying, and the reduced risk of a leak going unnoticed are all big benefits that have to be part of the analysis.
We also need to see if there are ways of lessening the increased billing cost. I'm not sure if administration has investigated the option of electronic billing, as provincial utilities now have available, but I think that's something that we should look into. I also think that we need to figure out a way of encouraging more people to submit their meter readings electronically - what sort of incentives might increase the proportion of residents who voluntarily do this for us, reducing the need, and the cost, of having city employees read all the meters.
Now, those are just some simple examples of the sort of analysis that needs to be done any time we propose change. Too often, I think that change is proposed because there is new technology available, and we want to try it out. As an example, our move to I-pads a couple of years ago for meeting agendas and emails has not been totally smooth, and there's still a fair amount of paper that has to be put together related to meetings. Emails sometimes disappear before they've been read, and I know that some councillors are concerned about email being accessible to administration, losing a sense of confidentiality that we had when we each had our own email on our own systems. But none of these issues was discussed fully before the change was implemented.
We need to have as much information as possible, and we need to discuss openly all the pros and cons about any changes that we're thinking about. It's just as important to think of all the potential problems ahead of time, and how we can resolve or avoid them, as it is to think of all the wonderful things that will happen with a change. And each councillor needs to honestly look at both sides of the issue, no matter which way they lean, to ensure that these discussions happen.
Very few things in life, or at council, are purely black or white. Weighing the costs and benefits takes time, but it also allows us to find the appropriate shade of grey that we can defend, and explain to our constituents. I've found that most people, when you give them the complete picture, and the steps that were taken in making the decision, are appreciative of the effort that was taken. They might have made a different decision, but most will also respect the fact that our job, as members of council, is to make those decisions to the best of our ability. And then we move on to the next decision.
"If you are not willing to risk the unusual, you will have to settle for the ordinary." - Jim Rohn
Any time change happens, there is a cost involved. What has to be part of the decision-making process, is an assessment of what benefits are associated with the change, and whether those benefits outweigh the costs. In the case of monthly water billing, I think that the benefits of making it easier for residents to pay water bills, the reduced risk of delinquency of payment because we'll know monthly if if someone isn't paying, and the reduced risk of a leak going unnoticed are all big benefits that have to be part of the analysis.
We also need to see if there are ways of lessening the increased billing cost. I'm not sure if administration has investigated the option of electronic billing, as provincial utilities now have available, but I think that's something that we should look into. I also think that we need to figure out a way of encouraging more people to submit their meter readings electronically - what sort of incentives might increase the proportion of residents who voluntarily do this for us, reducing the need, and the cost, of having city employees read all the meters.
Now, those are just some simple examples of the sort of analysis that needs to be done any time we propose change. Too often, I think that change is proposed because there is new technology available, and we want to try it out. As an example, our move to I-pads a couple of years ago for meeting agendas and emails has not been totally smooth, and there's still a fair amount of paper that has to be put together related to meetings. Emails sometimes disappear before they've been read, and I know that some councillors are concerned about email being accessible to administration, losing a sense of confidentiality that we had when we each had our own email on our own systems. But none of these issues was discussed fully before the change was implemented.
We need to have as much information as possible, and we need to discuss openly all the pros and cons about any changes that we're thinking about. It's just as important to think of all the potential problems ahead of time, and how we can resolve or avoid them, as it is to think of all the wonderful things that will happen with a change. And each councillor needs to honestly look at both sides of the issue, no matter which way they lean, to ensure that these discussions happen.
Very few things in life, or at council, are purely black or white. Weighing the costs and benefits takes time, but it also allows us to find the appropriate shade of grey that we can defend, and explain to our constituents. I've found that most people, when you give them the complete picture, and the steps that were taken in making the decision, are appreciative of the effort that was taken. They might have made a different decision, but most will also respect the fact that our job, as members of council, is to make those decisions to the best of our ability. And then we move on to the next decision.
"If you are not willing to risk the unusual, you will have to settle for the ordinary." - Jim Rohn
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)