Why not clarity on portfolios before the bylaw passed?

You have to wonder why the rush.

Mayor Jeff Leal told councillors that it is time for a change as to how their various portfolios (areas of responsibility) should be determined. After all, he said, the current system has been in place since 1985.

The mayor was right about one thing. It is undoubtedly time for at least a review. He was wrong about the system being in place only since 1985. It was already there when he and I were first elected to council that year. It was in place when my predecessor, Bob Barker, was elected mayor in 1981 and likely when his predecessor, Cam Wasson, was elected mayor in 1977. A review of how council handles municipal responsibilities added since then and the city’s growing budget is unarguably timely.

The proposal the mayor and senior staff made in a bylaw realigning the role of members of council to the comparatively new structure of commissioners may well be a good one. But councillors had a right to have the bylaw’s implications fully explained and their new responsibilities outlined before passing it. They should also have been consulted to see how they felt about their updated assignments.

That didn’t happen. They were, as Coun. Keith Riel complained at council last Monday night, being asked “to buy a pig in a poke.” Which council did when it passed the new bylaw by a vote of 7-4.

Not to pass the bylaw would show “a lack of confidence in the mayor and our professional staff,” maintained Coun. Gary Baldwin. He and five others voted against Riel’s motion to defer the matter until council had more information regarding its implications. To want clarification on exactly what you are voting for shows no lack of confidence in anyone. To ask for information on such things as the future of the diversity, climate change and advisory committees surely demonstrates that you are taking your job seriously.

Six members of the public asked the same question, particularly regarding climate change, in articulate and probing presentations urging council to defer their decision.

Not to worry, the concerned citizens and councillors were told by the mayor and the legislative services commissioner David Potts, who drafted the bylaw. All will become clear in subsequent reports to council.

But why not clarity before the bylaw passed?

Why didn’t Coun. Alex Bierk receive a response from anyone at all when he emailed the mayor, CAO and commissioners on Feb. 21, the day after the bylaw was approved in general committee, “I’m reviewing my upcoming schedule. How will mtgs related to Transit, Heritage, Planning, and Environment etc. change under the new bylaw?” Did anyone actually know?

Several councillors were deeply involved with the responsibilities they were assigned at the beginning of this term, including Joy Lachica with climate change, Lesley Parnell with planning, and Riel with transit. What happens now to that involvement?

Potts, also the city solicitor, said that there will be confidential information he can share with councillors under the new bylaw that he couldn’t share with them before. Not even in caucus?

Change works best when those affected understand and buy into it. It is clear that there is a lack of clarity among members of council as to what exactly the new structure will mean.

To quote the Brazilian author, Paulo Coelho, “Change. But start slowly because direction is more important than speed.”