Frances Bula header image 2
← →

Adjust your clocks: Vancouver changes council meeting times

January 16th, 2012 · 16 Comments

The last time Vancouver changed its council schedule was back in the 80s, when Gordon Campbell decided that evening council meetings were a blight, keeping everyone around until beyond midnight.

He moved council meetings to 2 p.m. Tuesdays and introduced a new rule that only allowed speakers at committee meetings (held on Thursdays during the day). There was a lot of carrying on about that, with people saying he was destroying democracy by holding meetings during the day when fewer people could get time off work to observe the proceedings or hang around forever waiting to speak.

Now, a new change. Council meetings will be at 9:30 on Tuesdays. Presumably not the same problem observing, as we can all watch on our electronic gadgets now. Committee meetings (the previous three committees now consolidated to two) will now be held Tuesday afternoons and Wednesday mornings.

This is apparently all being done so that councillors can get to Metro Van meetings, usually held Thursdays and Fridays, without having to miss a city meeting or be hung over from the previous day’s debate festivities. As well, it will allegedly reduce the time senior staff have to spend waiting around at the end of the day to see if they’ll be called on to answer questions.

Any thoughts on whether this will improve or worsen your life?

Categories: City Hall Talk

  • Morry

    who signed the letter on your last post?
    You can’t post another entry without answering that ?

  • Roger Kemble

    Morry @ #1

    “who signed the letter on your last post?”

    http://www.straight.com/article-584201/vancouver/ian-baillie-leaving-vision-vancouver-executive-director

    Clearly I am missing the point. Who care?

    Looking at Ian Baille’s CV he is obviously a political chameleon: he seems to have held positions in every right-wing party in the country. Why would anyone want to diss him, or VV for that matter.

    Alas there seem to be no form, no loyalties nor any perceptive reason to have political parties: other than opportunism.

    Is there a reason
    d’ être     for government any where?

    Click on my name above for one take on government that IMO equally applies here.

  • Frances Bula

    Ian didn’t actually put his name at the end. But it came from his email. I’m not sure what your point is.

  • Bill Lee

    Does Council ever listen to the people no matter what time of the day.
    At least by 2pm they were awake.

  • Westender1

    Does anyone know the logic for this change? Personally, this change impairs (even further) my ability to attend a Council meeting, but I would be interested to hear what rationale was involved adjusting the schedule. (There is no reference on the City’s “Council Meeting Schedule” webpage).
    As an aside, are there any other municipalities in the Lower Mainland that hold “daytime” council meetings?

  • Higgins

    They change things around for the sake of changing things. they look busy and it probably make them feel good about themselves when cashing those salaries on a monthly basis, at taxpayer’s expense. Period.
    Time will tell.
    Future generations might be wiser than us and get rid of these parasites. it’s all for the best you’ll see.

  • boohoo

    Westender,

    FB says why in the post.

  • Julia

    speakers usually present at the committee meetings so I for one hated the morning sessions because the grandstanding was endless and you would sit there for hours and then be told that council needed to break for lunch.

    Perhaps the afternoon meetings will mean there is less waiting around and perhaps council members will be more inclined to listen instead of talk because they want to go home at 5:00

  • Westender1

    Thanks boohoo, I saw the words “apparently” and “allegedly” in Frances’ post, and wondered if there was something from the City (perhaps a report from the City Clerk?) that outlined the pros and cons of this change.

  • Frances Bula

    No note from city clerk or city manager. In fact, I didn’t even notice the time change til a staffer pointed it out to me. Neither did some of the other regulars.

    i do think it will help cut down on the time senior staff have to spend waiting around. But it certainly doesn’t make any of the meetings more accessible to people who still work standard business hours. Used to be two meetings in the afternoons (regular council Tuesday and afternoon committee meeting Thursday), so at least you could contemplate getting there by leaving work a little early. Now, it’s two morning meetings and only one afternoon. Wonder if it will cut down on TV-ready demos and protests that typically would be staged for the 2 pm council meeting Tuesdays.

  • Bill McCreery

    Westender1, please don’t wait up waiting for a ‘staff’ report on the pros and cons of the changes other than working around Metro meetings, which they already were in some fashion or another.

    Thank you for highlighting this Francis. These changes are another Vision Vancouver to do the opposite of what they’ve just promised voters they would do: to move to stifle the democratic processes at City Hall as they did with the staff-media muzzle last summer. There are at least 2 issues here:

    1) Consolidating the committee meetings from 3 to 2, and shortening the times for them from a full day to half a day.

    My cynical side says apparently this allows the Vision Councillors (NPA and Greens were essentially shut out) to attend more Metro meetings at $350 a 4 hour meeting and counting.

    As well, I’m not sure what the net benefits of these changes are because the offered explanations and the defining silence of the public mention of the subject by City Hall falls a bit short of providing a complete understanding of the ‘pros and cons’ as well as an evaluation of the impacts they will have on those the councillors are supposed to be serving and are paying the bills. But, councillor’s public working hours are clearly reduced.

    On the citizen side, the fewer committee-meeting hours available for public review and discussion clearly restricts the amount of time citizens have to critique their elected representatives and the attendant bad press. Based on Vision Vancouver’s performance this past term, there needs to be more time, not less, for this holding to accounting process. 2 vs. 3 also muddies the waters and allows the committee chairs to cut off discussion with the excuse that the allotted meeting time is wasting away. Will the 5 minutes gag time now become 3 or 2 as well? I also understand that Councillor Meggs has decreed that citizens are now only allowed to speak twice on public hearing issues as well, and that includes the aggregate of speaking at public meetings as well as public hearings! Vision will no doubt have staff at these meetings at double time equipped with stopwatches and a specially created phone app to keep track of the seconds ticking by.

    2) Starting Council meetings at 9.30 rather than 2 is even more problematic from the citizen perspective. It’ll no doubt help Vision Vancouver make councillor’s ‘jobs’ into 9 to 5ers.

    But, I don’t understand Frances, how can Council complete their agendas in 3 hours? They’ve been taking 7 to 8 hours. Maybe we’ll see the agendas short scripted as Vision has done with taking the $1 billion budget in 2008 from 249 pages to 6 ½ in 2011. No doubt that’ll do the trick.

    So, we’re going to do the public’s business in 3 hours every two weeks from now on are we? Do you really think Frances that citizens, some at least hopefully are gainfully employed, are going to sit around the water cooler scrumptiously watching Council meetings on company time?

    There is a very serious side to this matter, however. Although I was not successful in getting it part of the NPA platform, but even so, if I’d been elected I intended to propose the very opposite of this blatant abuse of power by Vision Vancouver to further facilitate government by Big Brother. TEAM brought in the evening meetings in 1972 as part of our commitment to Vancouver voters to make City Hall more open, transparent and democratic. As you pointed out Gordon, as Mayor and a firm believer in government by administration, started this current regressive process in the 80s.

    I’m not on Council, but with your indulgence I’ll put forward may proposal anyway. Perhaps it can be a means of comparing what we’re getting as opposed to what might have been. There are many other aspects of this issue, and I’d like to hear what others think of this draconian, backdoor move.

    OPEN AND TRANSPARENT COUNCIL AGENDAS AND MEETINGS:

    Council meetings start at 2, but the afternoon agenda consists only of in-camera and more nuts and bolts business items. Any item of interest to a wider spectrum of the public, or to which the public might wish to speak to at committee must be heard between 5.30 and 10 with an additional hour to 11 by Council vote. This allows citizens to become informed 1st hand, and hear who says what about what and when.

    Committee meetings likewise should be organized on the same principles and with the same timing. If there is not enough time to schedule all meetings in one week then one of the committee meetings can be held the following week. This would have the added benefit of allowing for more media coverage as well.

    You’re right Frances, Gordon changed to timing and agenda structure in the 80s to suit his administrative style of governance. Once more this Vision Vancouver Council is going one step further away from the TEAM principles they say they admire so much and from which they are [NOT] continuing the TEAM legacy. In fact, they are doing here what they’ve consistently done, and that is to do the opposite. During this campaign Vision once again bamboozled voters and the unquestioning media into believing they were going to become suddenly “open and transparent”. Well ladies and gentlemen, here’s your answer with more to come.

    Obviously, mayors with a penchant for governing by administration and by decree do not want to be bothered with the messy bits of an informed and participatory citizenry. Well, I for one do not, cannot and will not accept such arrogant disregard for the democratic process. I hope there are many more Vancouverites who share my concerns and will stand and be heard on this subject.

    I’m curious, why was this not on the agenda for the new Council to discuss? Perhaps one of our newly minted Councillors might like to champion this important issue and bring it to Council with the view to hearing from the public on it.

  • Paul T.

    Personally I really don’t care that council has changed the time of the public meetings. Council meetings, since Vision Vancouver took office, have been nothing but a total sham.

    This is basically the transcript of any council meeting:

    Mayor: What’s next on the agenda, I was too busy reading my blackberry to pay attention.

    Clerk: We have a report from _____insert anything here_____.

    Mayor: Do they have a multimedia presentation? I like multimedia presentations.

    ****Council chamber lights dim as presentation is put on. None of Vision councillors are paying attention, they are too busy tweeting.****

    Mayor: Are there any questions for staff about this report?

    Councillor Deal: Inane question that has nothing to do with the topic.

    Staff: Why what a good question councillor Deal. I’m glad you asked it. *Takes a swig of whiskey before rattling off, what appears to be, a rehearsed response.*

    Councillor Reimer: I second Councillor Deal’s question.

    Mayor: Councillor Reimer, you can’t second a question.

    Councillor Tang: I’M HAPPY TO BE ELECTED!

    Mayor: What was that? I was tweeting about my next DJ set.

    Councillors Carr, Affleck and Ball all shoot themselves in the head, while staff retreat to their offices to drink heavily and study their lines… er reports… for coming council meetings.

  • Victor

    Frances’s comments ignore that those who might wish to speak to Council …often work. Shouldn’t the Council consider the folks in eir schedule?

    “Oh why bother” they seem to say as they thumb their noses at many of us who would like to be engaged in the civic process.

  • Glissando Remmy

    The Thought of The Morning

    “Bill’s thought is better than mine… “Obviously, mayors with a penchant for governing by administration and by decree do not want to be bothered with the messy bits of an informed and participatory citizenry. Well, I for one do not, cannot and will not accept such arrogant disregard for the democratic process.”…”

    Bill #11,
    Don’t bother. Vancouver citizenry have been stupefied, all right! This Vision administration slowly crawled towards total control, and it’s moving ahead as planned. Baby steps, no harm done, bleed the city kindly… now that they have three more years secured. Too bad the Vancouver citizens did not bather to pay attention. Their bad. By the time they’ll wake up it’s going to be too late. The damage sustained by the city is going to be substantial. The crooks will all be retired @ Hollyhock by then, though.

    Peter T.
    Right on. I’ve seen the future… apparently you were there too 🙂 !

    We live in Vancouver and this keeps us busy.

  • Doreen Braverman

    Whatever cuts down on overtime for staff suits me. We need to cut cost at City Hall by at least 2%. Should not be difficult if every budget is examined. In these economic times, costs must be tightly controlled.

  • Westender1

    Neither councillors nor senior staff are paid overtime, so I don’t see this as a cost-saving measure.
    Council meetings are by their very nature “public” so should be scheduled at a time that is convenient for the greatest number of residents.