Wednesday, August 10, 2011

What Was Sent

Today I sent out an email to a long list of recipients. 


It was a proposal for a concerted, across-the-city, ongoing series of 'town hall meetings'. 


It was an invitation to make something happen, something very doable, something that has the potential to create 'real change' in Hamilton on some very basic levels, addressing aspects of life in the city that to me, are in dire need of addressing. 


Here is the email in its entirety:


A Proposal: Out of Necessity, Bolstering Our Future



Hello, All;



Leadership. 

Vision. 

Transparency. 

Accountability.


There's always a fair amount of talk about these notions in media, both in the main-stream and alternative arenas. I believe that part of this has to do with the 'legacy-malaise' that seems to come with all the other fun stuff that being a Hamiltonian gifts us with, part of it has to do with what seem to some to be serial frustrations in the progress of the city towards a better future, and part of this is what I see as an endemic desire to be led
to that better place...and constantly being disappointed when this leadership fails to present itself.


But as anyone who has read my material on my site 'My Stoney Creek' as well as my regular comments on sites such as Raise the Hammer and The Hamiltonian will know, though I fervently believe in visionary leadership (and the fact that *all* communities deserve it) and accountability and transparency, it's the other half of the equation that most concerns and interests me.


The half that has to do with the residents of Hamilton. Its citizens...its voters.


I'm wary of producing a treatise here, so bear with me while I break it all down to something easily digestible: I believe that we need a wholesale shift in how we see our places in local governance. I'm not one who believes in our longstanding construct, the political equivalent of 'handing the new employees the keys to the business, leaving them alone, only to be checked in on every four years.'


I believe in the notion of 'increasing the relationship of engagement between residents and their Councillors and their mayor'.


And so I believe we need to begin a shift in how local governance is executed in Hamilton so that there is more consistent dialogue between Hamiltonians and City Hall. (And not just in times of crisis.) 


That we need to begin re-framing what we expect from our Councillors as we re-frame what we expect from ourselves. (Oh yes, I'm talking changes.)


And that we need to begin to construct a new paradigm wherein we don't have a 40% voter turnout rate, where 60% of these votes cast according to 'name recognition', where so many seem to feel that voting is the only responsibility they have as citizens...while quickly reverting to a default of an abundance of cynicism and a dearth of faith and confidence in the very people they've voted into office.


In order to really effect change, I believe we need to wholly reconsider where participation and involvement in determining aspects of our quality of Life are concerned. Otherwise, it's fairly safe to say that aside from getting lucky with this brilliant candidate or that set of circumstances, we're going to be stuck in this endless loop...which of course begs the question 'How's that working out for you...?'


To this end, my proposal:


'Town Halls Hamilton'


An integrated, co-ordinated, ongoing series of 'open meetings' across the city.


Where each ward would have regular town halls meetings. 


Where town halls featuring the Mayor would be presented across the city. Regularly.


Naturally, the main thrust would be for the residents of each ward to have a chance to engage with their Councillor or with the Mayor.


But a town hall could also be an information session where a particular issue is examined and discussed, sometimes with a special guest, an expert,
etc.


Or it could have a 'seminar' spin to it.


Or it could be a general 'get it off your chest' affair.


The town halls would be promoted and presented by a series of sponsor-organizers the likes of:


-Neighbourhood associations
-Chambers of Commerce
-BIAs
-Raise the Hammer
-The Hamiltonian
-Urbanicity
-CATCH
-HPD
-SkyscraperPage
-Hamilton Civic League
-Open Hamilton
-The Spec
-CHML
-CHCH




Naturally, there would be a website where all of this would be initiated: www.townhallshamilton.ca (Already secured.)


As we live in a social-media age, it only makes sense that we consider the possibility of streaming these events online as well as subsequently posting them as YouTube-type videos. With the addition of message boards and chat-rooms, creating a groundswell of both interest and participation seems like an obtainable goal. Never mind the concomitant news coverage and presence on the sites of the associated organizations and individuals. 

Town halls are only part of what I believe needs to unfold for us to see a substantive, sustained type of change, but they may just be the most critical development.


Canada has a rich history of civic activism and engagement. Establishing new traditions in our own neighbourhoods and communities seems a reasonable way to begin providing what's required from our half of the equation.


In the end, let me put it this way: we have long been mired in a system where special interests and lobby groups have managed to push forward their agenda, despite the fact that our elected officials work for *us*. Referencing Mayor Bratina's trepidation towards 'advocacy groups', I think it's clear we need to become our own lobby effort in order to secure better leverage in our own futures. After all, we are, in the end, the city's biggest stakeholders. I can assure you that were this town hall effort to unfold as I envision it, the critical mass achieved would allow for something far better than what we currently see before us.


Your feedback is of course, greatly encouraged.

Looking forward to hearing from you,


Adrian/

Monday, August 8, 2011

Actually, I'll tell you how *not* revolutionary they are.


'Town hall meetings' = 'clan gatherings around the communal fire'.

Hardly a new concept.

Sunday, August 7, 2011

Of course, it hasn't escaped me...


...that sites such as Raise the Hammer and The Hamiltonian with their 'call-and-response' articles and editorials that rely so heavily on reader participation via the Comments feature...

...as well as the Comments section on sites such as The Spec...

...are in fact static, limited versions of 'town hall meetings'. 

So it's not like the concept is that revolutionary. 

Saturday, August 6, 2011

Further exchanges...

A continuation of the 'conversation' on The Hamiltonian, as mentioned in my previous post:




Anonymous said...
look, this is the last thing I will say on this, because I think your intentions are good. You giove yourself =too much credit. Out of the box? Obama has been having town hall meetings with Twitter, voter pathy is so ingrained, it is built in to our system - but it does not make it right. Our polticians are REPRESENTING us (or suppossed to be), for a reason. It's because it is know that the working person cannot apply themselves so thoroughly on all the issues that they would be making informed decisions.

Priorities? Lets see, i work 50 hours to make ends meet. i have precvious little time. i can choose to spend time with my three year old or read reams of material on LRT, and only thats the tip of the iceberg, so that i can do my councillor's job that they should do? Come on now! Like I said, i like your intentions but you would be better off getting involved in keeping your councillor accountable. Read the Sc News my friend. there is a lot to correct.

mystoneycreek said...
Anonymous:

Seeing as this subject is the raison d'etre of my blog, this *won't* be the last thing I say on this.

Everything slant you've provided has varying elements of truth attached. So? I get that you feel you wouldn't have time to 'get involved', no matter that what I'm talking about isn't going to cost anyone much...certainly no more than sitting on their fat asses for one or two less tv programmes a week, and the Cheetohs that go along with them...and I get the cynicism you feel about politics in general and I get how you feel that 'making your Councillor more accountable' is a priority (even though you *don't* seem to get that what I'm talking about accomplishes this on more levels than might be comprehended at first glance), and I get how frustrated you feel at the entire ball of wax, and I get how someone even *whispering* about wanting to change something that feels so pointlessly unchangeable might aggravate you all the more...

...but what I don't 'get'...or maybe what I reject totally, is this:

"You giove (sic) yourself =too much credit."

Thank goodness I feel sufficiently strongly enough about everything I'm endeavouring to accomplish that naysayers have less effect on my intentions or my spirit than a gnat would to an elephant.

(Oh, and thanks for providing more illustrations for me to highlight on my blog. Always appreciated.)
The letter-writer typifies an 'average person'. They're living their life. They cannot imagine making time for what I'm suggesting. 

Mostly because diving into 'politics' is not a pleasant prospect. It already brings on images of grief and disappointment. Who'd want to get more involved with that?!?

I know this is a distasteful analogy, but I'll use it anyway, simply because of its effectiveness: someone who is married, working a hard job, raising kids, yadda, yadda, yadda...who has an affair...

...will do anything to make the affair happen. 

ANYTHING. 

My point is that if there's a draw to something, if there's sufficient motivation generated to do something, it gets done. 

My point is that I am not surprised at the cynicism and pre-emptive rejection inherent in the ongoing responses from 'Anonymous'. After all, this is the cultural default. It's half the overall problem. 

But that doesn't mean I have to accept it. 

Battling the Naysayers...

Over at The Hamiltonian, I've been involved in a discussion about LRT, entitled LRT- Yes or No?'

In the end, I've been accused of –essentially– believing in a fantasy, having my head in the clouds, attached to a pie-in-the-sky concept...by 'Anonymous'. (Who seems to be everywhere!) 

You know what? That's fine with me. I don't mind having people with extraordinarily narrow vision (actually, it's not 'extraordinary' It's quite normal; most people don't give a good-Goddamn about local politics, and this person is serving a valuable purpose in reminding me of this truth) making these kinds of declarations. 



Because I realize that what I'm proposing is a wholesale shift of perception and context on the parts of the residents of The Amalgamated City of Hamilton, that it's a bit much to imagine, especially when it appears at first glance that I'm asking EVERYONE to spend HOURS each week doing their civic duty. 



I'm not. 

I'm looking at providing far more tools than are currently available for civic engagement and as a result of those tools being used initially by those who are inclined to want to participate in their local governance...and as a result of the inevitable shift taking place...wherein people are empowered and begin thinking of their roles in their neighbourhoods, their communities and their city differently, the general attitude towards local governance...'vote every four years, complain privately along the way, then vote again'...turns towards something far more participatory...as well as being something far more collaborative. 

A goal for 2014?

50% voter turnout (up from 40%)
40% voting according to 'name recognition' (down from 60%)

Both of these as a result of having:

6 town hall meetings per year in each ward
6 town hall meetings per year across the city for the city, featuring the Mayor

'Pie-in-the-sky'? 
Maybe. 
But seriously; what's the alternative?
The default setting for whiners and moaners is 'Vote the bums out!' and get a new crop in. 
Resulting in what, exactly?
If we continue to promote what amounts to a closed system, one where information is begrudgingly piecemealed out to citizens, where there isn't genuine participation and involvement on the parts of the residents, where there's hardly more than a moiety of authentic engagement between the people of Hamilton and its paid leaders...
...then nothing changes.

To me, to hang your hopes on one, or even a handful of 'super candidates', shining stars who have an entirely different approach to the log-jam, blinkered one that Hamilton's 'legacy malaise' has promulgated for decades, that is 'pie-in-the-sky' thinking. 

That is 'unrealistic'. 

To believe that this arrangement is going to somehow take us to a better place is, to me, a 'pipedream'. 


Here's a parsed version of the Comments section of The Hamiltonian article:







Anonymous said...
My Stoney Creek wrote " I don't trust the average person to care enough to make the effort to educate themselves about LRT even to the degree they might in choosing their next holiday destination"

Absolutely right and that's why politicians are unaccountable. if your in Stoney Creek, youll see that in ward 10 and, as used to be the case in ward 11 too
mystoneycreek said...
"Absolutely right and that's why politicians are unaccountable. if your in Stoney Creek, youll see that in ward 10 and, as used to be the case in ward 11 too"

Actually, I wasn't referring to politicians at all. I'm referring to residents.

They're the ones who vote in the Councillors, remember? And they're the ones who vote in incumbents, right? Such as in Ward 10? So to turn things around, who's really 'unaccountable' here?

If you want 'accountable' politicians, here's my visceral reaction: get more involved. Be accountable. Change the 'hands-off' construct we currently have in local governance. 'Increase the relationship of engagement between residents and their City Council'. Specifically, press for regular town hall meetings. If our Councillors are constantly acting in isolation, and people are apathetic, what would you expect to be the result? Let's increase the dialogue, the discourse. Let's have a better form of democracy unfolding, shall we?
Anonymous said...
My Stoney Creek said "If you want 'accountable' politicians, here's my visceral reaction: get more involved. Be accountable."

I have to agree with you there. But we know that there will always be people who don't have the time to get as involved as you want them to be. People have jobs, worries, children etc. They are counting on good people to do their jobs abd thats why Councilors have to make themselves accountable.
mystoneycreek said...
Anonymous:

It's not a question of how involved *I* want them to be. The idea of "I'll vote every four years and leave it to people I will pretty much end up moaning (and worse) about" is atrocious. Unacceptable in a country where its citizens are blessed with so much.

It's a question of priorities. Do people want good governance, do they want to feel cynicism or faith towards their City Council? If so, then the paradigm we've constructed...based on apathy...has to change.

Don't look for salvation from any particular Councillor. Especially if you invoke a 'hands-off' policy throughout their term. (And I'm not talking about contact that involves the Councillor serving as 'trouble-shooter', which is not what they should be spending their time doing.) That is an absurd approach. The answer lies with all of us.

Yes, there will always be people who 'don't have the time'. Surely to God that can't be almost *everyone*...?
Anonymous said...
"Don't look for salvation from any particular Councillor" You can say that again. Do you ever read the Stoney Creek News out there? Read it and follow the "activity" of Ward 10 and the4 association with developers/ Thats your first hint. People have busy lives and the vision of engagemnt is a pipe dream. who has time to gather all the info on all the topics- even the major one? Thats your councillors job to represent the best interests of the community and city. Noone has time to get THAT involved. Seriously! They should wake up though and see the smoke and mirrors. Don't you see that?
mystoneycreek said...
"Thats your councillors job to represent the best interests of the community and city."

The problem is that this notion is a flawed concept. The notion that we-the-employers hire these 'employees' and then hand them the keys and say 'We'll check back in in four years' is ridiculous. And it's especially ridiculous with how the world's changed. Access to information alone has meant that the landscape is shifting. The previous design...what you're clinging to *despite* having an easily-identifiable enmity towards the Councillor in Ward 10...hasn't ever really worked that well, and as things continue to shift, will be all the more antiquated with each passing year.

As for the 'nobody has time!' response... I'm sorry, but this reminds me of those who have kids but have no time to parent. (That wasn't an apology for the comment, by the way.) People make time for what they feel is important. If people felt that being involved, being engaged was important, just part of their value system, this discussion becomes moot.

Besides; you're looking at the prospect of what I'm talking about while using the current circumstances as a reference. That's a flawed lens. I'm talking about a much different paradigm being created.

And the great thing is that what we'd be working towards would be a much better way of local governance, providing less headaches and generally, a better quality of Life.

At least that's what *I'm* interested in working towards.
Anonymous said...
My Stoney Creek, you're unrealistic. To make good decisions, you have to know many facts and a lot of information that changes quickly. Noone is gonna be able to keep up with that and still do their jobs. Pipedreams.
mystoneycreek said...
"Pipedreams"

Yeah. How silly am I to want to make things better?

Because things have never gotten better by people thinking outside the box, striving for something that someone else has deemed 'unrealistic', have they?

Friday, August 5, 2011

Sure, I'll expound...

In this post, I presented possibilities of generating better levels of understanding about local issues. Such as LRT. As I promised I'd take a closer look, here I am. Taking a closer look. 

1) Personal civic awareness blogs. This is where it all starts. Someone writing about what's going on in their world, on their street, in their neighbourhood, in their community...in their city. Courtesy of the likes of the Jellys, the Gauthiers, even Mark Allan Whittle. 

2) Community civic activism blogs. Raise the Hammer. The Hamiltonian. CATCH. SkyscraperPage. Neighbourhood Association blogs. Anywhere that offers the opportunity for people to 'gather' and get better informed, exchange ideas (and insults), expand their horizons. 

3) Councillor blogs/web sites. Unfortunately, even the best of our local Councillors don't get it. It seems as if weariness quickly sets in and sites aren't updated, posts are left up well past their use-by dates, and general indifference rules the day. Even worse, of course, are those Councillors who don't even have a site. 

4) Video explorations of the city. Hamiltonians are woefully unaware/ignorant of their city, its history, why it is the way it is and what might be required to effect the changes necessary. This shouldn't be surprising in a municipality where less than 40% of eligible voters exercise their franchise, and 60% of these vote according to 'name recognition'. It's long been my belief that an online video resource could help in this cause. Something I've envisioned as a hybrid TED lectures/The Toronto Star's Christopher Hume's vignettes idea. It would deal with local hIt's not a cure-all, but I believe it has a part to play in the overall effort.

5) Salons and seminars. These are the organic progressions of the conversations traditionally had in cafés and on piazzas. Salons are the more informal of the two, a chance for discussions to take place amongst a small group of people, where there may not even be an agenda, and it's more a simple exchange of concerns, of ideas, where problems and dilemmas can be examined in a low-key setting. Sponsored evenings where a topic is actually discussed between people. Ideas are thrown around. Maybe a guest from a neighbourhood association attends. Maybe a former candidate from an election. Maybe someone from City Hall staff. And from different parts of the city in different parts of the city. These could be co-hosted/co-sponsored by say, the Hamilton Public Library. Seminars are structured sessions where actual subjects are 'taught'. Primers. Because so many Hamiltonians are sorely lacking the background information required to properly appreciate the full context of our challenges. Part of this could be a series of connected evenings: 'An Evening With...' focusing on one aspect of urban life, with special guests, a riff on 'The Actors' Studio', where an interview and question period with the audience unfolds. This could also be done in webinar form. 

6) Town hall meetings. Even though we have no real tradition of them in the area...at least not that I'm aware of...they're such a foundational aspect of democracy that I'm kinda stunned they've not been part of our experiences. And yet, I'm not surprised at all. Few politicians do well in an arena such as a town hall meeting. And there's so much 'at risk' in this modern world. A slip-up, a badly-crafted answer and who knows where it'll end. So? Tough. We need this kind of contact with our leaders. We need to be in the same room with them on a regular basis. We need to be breathing the same air, taking part in the same conversations. Now, I'm not saying that things will go smoothly at first. Or even for the first while. Few of us are good at engaging like this, few of us have experience asking questions, searching out answers, being patient, being gracious. So it means that it'll be a learning experience for all. 

I see Councillors doing town hall meetings in their wards. I see the Mayor doing them across the city. And I see all this happening regularly. Oh, and to add a 'thoroughly modern touch': I see these events being streamed live, online, as well as being available afterwards for viewing. 

(A brief aside: I see massive resistance from our elected officials over this. "We don't have the time!" Probably not. Not as things are currently designed. But that's not a good enough reason not to change things. What it all really means is redefining both their jobs...and ours.)



Allow me to step up onto my soapbox for a minute. 

Democracy isn't just about voting. (Thank God; we currently average about a 40% turnout rate at election time, and it's generally acknowledged that 60% of the votes cast are done so according to 'name recognition' That means that on a local level, our 'democracy' certifiably sucks.) And freedom isn't earned and honoured just by fighting for it, it's also done so by acts of engagement in regular day-to-day living. It's a shame we've created a society where our local governance is seasoned with so much cynicism, with so much distrust. (When we have a popular CHML broadcaster calling for everyone to 'vote for anyone but the incumbents!', then you know we've come to a very, very bad place indeed.) 

I know that there will always be a chunk of the populace who will never be very involved. But I still see it being possible to get 75% of our electorate out to vote. I still see it being possible to have these people voting according to informed decisions, the result of qualified opinions. And I see people regarding their governance in an entirely different way. If we can change the landscape. 

If we can 'increase the relationship of engagement between residents and their Councillors.'

Regarding that 'relationship of engagement'...


I'm –regularly– asked 'OK, Bub; what exactly are you proposing in terms of getting people more involved, in 'increasing the relationship of engagement between residents and their Councillors in local governance'? Give me some examples!'

Here then, is a framework of one aspect of what I'm talking about. A kindasorta 'hierarchy' culled from a recent correspondence dealing with have a sufficiently-informed populace that could reasonably participate in referendums such as one for LRT:

How can we move forward unless the general level of understanding increases?

If it increases on the level of the residents, then the Councillors would be 'forced' to increase theirs, and then our discourse level improves...

To this end, there are tiers. 

-Anyone who blogs about their neighbourhood, their community, their city, is the first tier. 

-Raise the Hammer, The Hamiltonian, et al have provided the second. The dissemination of non-Main Stream Media information via articles and editorials that further expand the scope of understanding, as well as providing a forum for discussion. 

-The third tier is massively-more-engaging-than-they-currently-are Councillor sites. Ones that are updated regularly. 

-The fourth would be a video-segments element such as the proposed TED/Christopher Hume-esque 'This is Your Hamilton' series. Explorations of the city on myriad levels, providing sorely-absent historical insight and social context, and in doing so, stimulating perspective. 

-The fifth is salons and seminars. Opportunities for a deeper exchange of ideas, concepts...while actually learning about those aspects of modern urban realities that affect Hamilton and Hamiltonians. 

-The sixth is town hall meetings. We don't have a tradition of these in Hamilton, but they can be an extraordinary tool for civic engagement on so many levels. I believe they have the potential to be truly city-changing. 



I'll take a closer look at all of these in an upcoming post.