And on Canada Day, too: Stepping back a little...

(Reprinted from last autumn, right here at MSC)

The Bay Observer.

The Hamiltonian.

Raise the Hammer.

During the month of June, beginning with the Bay Observer and ending with Ryan's publication last night, spotlights (searchlights?) were aimed at the Hamilton Waterfront Trust.

In fact, I'll break that down a little:

The Bay Observer began asking questions about possible fiduciary improprieties concerning the HWT. The Hamiltonian linked to this coverage, and then began asking questions of all named participants. This quickly became a series, with lots of reader comments. Finally, there was an exchange with Ward 4 Councillor Sam Merulla on Friday night (while he was at a Ti-Cat game), and this was blogged about by Ryan late last night.

Councillor Merulla's tack...one of ripe (if entertainingly cheeky) dismissiveness...was summed up in this bit:

"Let me tell you what it is going to be! Stop breaking our balls until you have media credentials to request what you are requesting. Until then please feel free to ask council for permission to be a delegation to present your case so we can conscientiously serve our constituents globally." 

Oy-friggin'-vey. 

OK.

So Councillor Merulla has a tendency to get a little- Well, rambunctiously reckless when he's Tweeting or having a 'discussion' on Facebook. One exchange in particular comes to mind from earlier this year on Laura Babcock's wall. I believe his wrasslin' partner was former councillor Bill Kelly. At the very least, the exchange was 'cringe-worthy'.

Here's the thing: I've observed Councillor in Council Chambers. I've been to his Community Meetings. We've had a brief email exchange, and greeted each other at City Hall. (Admittedly, only one of us knew who the other was.)

I have been consistent in my regard for councillors: I'll leave the muckraking to others, the visual lacerations (a James Street North variation of the sports occurrence known as 'posterizing') and the other assorted mechanisms of criticism and derision. So I'm not going to get into all 'that' here and now. (Save for two observations: One, Councillor is The Iterationmeister. If he spent some time with a communications advisor, he would up his all-round effectiveness not just by degree, but fold-factors. The second is that in combination with the former, his online 'dalliances' are proof-positive that he needs to be far more 'judicious' in how he participates electronically. 'nuff said.)

But my concerns in all this aren't primarily about Councillor Merulla being dismissive towards The Hamiltonian...although he was, again in a cheekily helpful way, when he said "I just asked 10 Ward 4 residents whether they knew about" The Hamiltonian". The answer 0 of 10. Therefore help me help you to be a true representative of Hamiltonians. Call me. We need to talk"...although this does tie into what most bothers me. 

In addition to it being about this HWT situation, an issue that seems fated to become just as much an issue for Council as 'Peggygate' was for the mayor –and doncha think it's kindasorta ironic that Council got so riled when Mayor Bratina questioned the goings-on at the HWT, and now it's this powderkeg whose fuse is waiting to be lit?– to me it's also about how councillors see a) 'new media', b) their roles in local governance and c) communication in general. 

It seems to me that over time, councillors generally morph towards a state of being 'turf-protective', of being patronizing, and most of all, forgetting the bottom-line truth of their service at 71 Main Street West: they're the 'employees', the residents are the 'employers'. 


The first problem with this notion/analogy is that people generally don't want the responsibilities of being 'the boss'. Let's face it: if it were ten owners of a business doing the hiring, six of them wouldn't show up for the meeting to make the decision, and of them, most would be basing their decision on 'name recognition'. Most Hamiltonians who vote  are sufficiently cynical and detached from the process as to not want to be bothered by anything attached to governance. They cast their ballots...and then want to be left alone for the ensuing four years. 


And councillors run with this dynamic. 


I was fascinated on many levels to watch the GIC meeting from this past Monday, but for the sake of this post, I'll just note the general undertone of 'Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!' As much as this may offend some of them, I felt there were moments of condescension, of dismissiveness, of patronization...no matter how congenially the exchanges were framed. At times you'd think these people were high court judges. 


Especially when you contrast this with how poorly so many navigate 'discussion' outside of Council Chambers. (Although there were enough interludes when the motion for boundary review was being 'debated' to remind me of the stark limitations of- Well, of more than a handful of our elected officials.) 




Which brings me to the crux(es) of the matter. 


a)  'New media'. There's a strange, almost comedic dichotomy unfolding. On the one hand, councillors such as Merulla love the Internet and all it provides. It's a buttress for the front-and-centeredness that so many of them need to feel. ('Attention-hounds'?) But at the same time, they do not really know what to do with or how to handle 'new media'. It's not the same as dealing with The Spec or CHML or CHCH or even the CBC. With The Hamiltonian and Raise the Hammer, because they're not 'accredited', because the usual channels aren't necessarily trotted down, it would appear that some councillors just haven't quite gotten comfortable with having to answer questions directed at them by a 'blog' ("My daughter has a blog!!!"). At least not to the point where they grant them the same cred. Which leads to...


b) 'Roles in local governance'. Councillors have long seen themselves as the protectors of their constituents. And it's long been a patriarchal, patronizing, often arrogance-fuelled role. "I hear your thoughts, but please; run along and let me do my job." Again, there's a dichotomy: there's dismissiveness on the one hand, but on the other, the realities of not wanting to upset anyone who resultantly might not vote for them come re-election time. Despite regularly envisioning a better paradigm, I don't think we're anywhere close to having authentic dialogue, commiseration and collaboration about our local governance. Too many of the traditional expectations on both sides remain. 


And yet the world is changing, the access that people have to critical information is changing, how they process this information is changing... In the end, this changes the councillor's role. It's just that this hasn't really been brought to the fore yet. Here's the thing: they're not going to be pushing for it. (Just like with ward boundary reform or much of anything that would alter their world.) And we don't currently have sufficient numbers of 'aware-and-energized' to push for things to change. In the meantime, councillors will continue to trip up, to interpret situations badly, and to generally infuriate and inspire more cynicism. Finally...


c) 'Communication' A much higher level is required from councillors on all fronts. And this brings into play both the previous points. What I've seen with the HWT issue proves this. Some of the more uncomfortable moments can be chalked up to habitual recalcitrance that the office tends to imbue; the 'kiss the ring' syndrome. ("And you don't have medial credentials?!? Pah.") But the majority seems attributable to people not having gotten the memo about deportment and presentation and general behaviour needing to adapt to the changing times, vis a vis accessible information, what can be done with it and how it impacts the realities of Life. It's not the same stage as 'before'. So it's folly to expect that the same performance is going to satisfy or even pass muster. 


I see growing pains ahead. Some awkward moments, some flared tempers. But I'm reminded of that old commercial on television, where the mechanic is talking about preventative maintenance, about doing oil changes and the sort: "You can pay me now... Or you can pay me later."






M Adrian Brassington