jamiepost.com

I know there’s a few painted utility boxes in Edmonton, but no formal program seems to exist here to encourage replacing the battleship grey or greenish hues with some color. Perhaps something worth considering.

@CalgaryCityNews.com

Applications now open for the painted utility box program

Spring is here – soon flowers will be blooming, birds will be singing and most exciting of all, new utility boxes will be getting painted!

The City of Calgary invites local and area artists to submit proposals to create art on City utility boxes at various locations throughout Calgary.

It’s been pretty well covered by the Journal’s Liane Faulder, and discussed on #yegcc, but it’s knawed at me to the point I feel a need to chip in my 5 cents (no more pennies anymore so it’s been rounded up to a nickel).

The City of Edmonton is currently in process of drafting a Food & Agriculture strategy with the stated goals of:

increasing access to local food in our neighbourhoods
providing opportunities to grow and process food in the city
stimulating and diversifying the local economy
improving the health of residents
reducing our ecological footprint

Furthermore, the attached literature states:

The process to develop a strategy will involve citizens, interested groups and the City itself as together we examine the potential and possibilities of a made-in-Edmonton food and agriculture strategy.

As part of this process, a “Food in the City Conference” has been scheduled for late May and advertised as:

…a celebration of the innovative and groundbreaking work being done in our city to help build a resilient local food system.

Food in the City is an opportunity for Edmontonians to participate in a conversation as we together develop a city-wide food and agriculture strategy.

The conference is a key milestone in the engagement process for a strategy. Participants will be able to learn and engage in conversation about food and agriculture issues, hear about the development of a preliminary draft strategy and play a part in promoting Edmonton as a leader in innovative municipal food and agriculture policy and initiatives.

A milestone in the engagement process of future public policy and an opportunity to learn and engage in conversation about food and agriculture issues.  All this for the low low price of $175 + GST (early bird) or $225 + GST (regular).  Yup, part of the public engagement process for future civic policy comes with an expensive entry fee.

The City’s Communications staffers did offer a reply in the comments of Ms. Faulder’s excellent article on the subject, to quote some of the highlights which caused me the most aggravation:

“The costs of running an actual conference versus a public involvement exercise means the City of Edmonton needs to charge a registration fee. Although the conference does have a public consultation component, the bulk of the conference is educational, where participants can learn about the latest research and best practices on food and agriculture issues. “

“Following the conference there will be further opportunity for anyone to provide feedback on the draft strategy that is presented at the conference. Finally, when a draft strategy is ready to be reviewed by City Council, expected in the fall 2012, citizens will be able to share their views with Council.”

Conducting research, hiring consultants, putting together a draft strategy, guidelines, etc and then heading out on the road to “public involvement” stops is a fairly common process in Edmonton.  It’s something however that tends to turn “public involvment” into more of an exercise in word-smithing and spell checking, rather than the creative policy development process that it should be.  I’ll reference the recently approved Transit Oriented Development Guidelines as an example of this, where several drafts of the document were created, amended and discussed internally, and within a “key stakeholder group”, before the guidelines went on tour.  I sat in on almost all of those meetings, and generally had the distinction of being the only person at the table who wasn’t paid to be there.  Watching it all the way through as a citizen-at-large/community rep, it comes off entirely as a backwards way of conducting business as a public body, or perhaps a free-fall from the top, down.  

“Public Involvement” events for the TOD Guidelines however, were free and included snacks and some fairly nice coffee.  The Food & Ag Strategy will apparently follow along similar lines, however with the added step of first dropping a draft version upon those who can afford the entry fee, before finding it’s way to the general public.  All the other issues, and large discussions about public involvement, aside, it’s a dumb added step and I’ll tell you why.

To go back to the first quote above, from the City’s Com Dept, the costs of a “conference” vs “a public involvement exercise”.  I’ve met with, and attended many sessions and on-going “involvement exercises” facilitated by outside contractors.  None of which I imagine came cheaply.  If you’re to make this claim, then I’m going to approach it with some curiosity as to which costs more; a series of open-houses and Q&A sessions facilitated by a contracted outside entity vs. a two-day city-hosted conference at the Shaw Centre.

Even if these two days at the Shaw comes out ahead as the more costly expenditure, if it has an educational aspect compared to the usual “this what’s happening, what do you think?” event, then why charge to the public to attend.  We are after all, a City of Learners are we not?  A city “that promotes life long learning”?

What could be better than to combine not one but two city initiatives, into an open, and inclusive educational and consultative event? It’s not too late to actually provide Edmontonians with an opportunity to “participate in a conversation as we together develop a city-wide food and agriculture strategy.”

I’d like to direct your attention to the March issue of the Rat Creek Press, a non-profit community newspaper serving  neighborhoods in north Edmonton. and their extensive investigation into financial contributions in the 2010 civic election, a startling lack of oversight, transparency and regulation amongst a number of questionable contributions.  It’s the kind of journalism one would expect from the main stream media, but it comes to us from the dedicated staff of a small community paper, and deserves more recognition and accolades than it is ever likely to receive.

Check it out, commit it to memory, and demand much needed and deserved accountability from candidates coming to your door during the upcoming provincial campaign, and next year’s civic election.

In Edmonton, we of course have “urban planners”,  professionals who are difficult to recruit and retain in Alberta, to implement and amend the City’s massive zoning bylaw and collection of civic policies such as the municipal development plan – “The Way We Grow”.  We have Councillors to approve, deny, guide, direct and amend the above.  In the mix are developers, along with a substantial development lobby.  The Edmonton Federation of Community Leagues and its multiple member leagues who lobby and advocate for our communities, quite frequently and strongly, in regards to planning matters, neighborhood revitalization and civic policy development.  Service providers, housing providers, non-profit agencies, community organizations, and civic departments, all of whom expend and exhaust their funds and resources, and deliver services based on how our city is planned, and how our neighborhoods fare.  And of course, there are our school boards, guided by elected officials, and clearly in the case of our Public Board, elected by residents who weren’t just looking for a change from a mode of operation that kept school boards in a state of reaction to changes in Edmonton’s mature communities.  They were looking for an advocate for their communities and neighborhood schools.  Or at least this was my perspective when I chose to cast my vote for a trustee with a strong record as a community volunteer and advocate.

No, there are too many stakeholders, too many passionate individuals and groups involved in the servicing and well-being of our city, and with the ability to affect positive change, to fore-go advocacy and leave “urban planning” to planners alone..  As a community volunteer, I couldn’t be more grateful for a group of trustees who set a direction to break free of the ‘silo mentality’, who gave mature neighborhoods a much needed reprieve with a two-year closure moratorium, and have now helped to highlight urban planning and revitalization as an issue for everyone whose resources, time and efforts make Edmonton a city.  For that, I congratulate the Public School Board for its efforts so far, and the advocacy it’s about to set out on.

I had the opportunity last week to attend both days of the WinterCity Strategy kickoff at City Hall.  The highlight to start was a wonderful talk by VANOC CEO John Furlong.   John’s recollection of ‘enduring’ (i.e. ‘threatening to stab with a pen’) IIHF President Rene Fasel’s desire to see the Canada v. USA gold medal hockey match enter a shootout was entertaining, as was hearing of the challenges faced by the organizing committee in overcoming a seemingly once in a hundred years weather anamoly, which left organizers and workers in a scramble to import snow to the venues.

However, on a night when we were gathered at City Hall to launch a body of work aimed at changing outlooks and attitudes on how Edmonton lives, builds for, and plays in winter, the highlights of the talk were the parallels to the development of a WinterCity strategy, and the emotional and organizational success of Vancouver 2010; the building blocks of public participation and involvement – Developing a vision, mobilizing, and creating opportunities for everyone to get involved and feel a sense of pride and accomplishment.  These are elements the strategy is going to need if it’s to overcome apathy, cold weather, sarcasm, a sedentary winter lifestyle in order to develop public, stakeholder, and political support.

Oslo

Helsinki

Rovaniemi

Kemi

Oulu

For anyone who’s long grumbled about city documents (take a look at the Transit Oriented Development Guidelines as an example) flush with summery images, but little representation of our climate during the other six months of the year, the kick-off had something for you.  Day 2 started off with photos and a presentation from Coun. Henderson and several city staffers who hit the road to several northern European cities.  Sadly though, the presentation was just a taste of the photos taken and experiences collected.  Some of the more interesting aspects of active winter life in the above cities included the active public realm of the Olso Opera House, a soccer field cleared for year-round use, winter tourism in Rovaniemi, temporary outdoor markets and civic snow clearing for pedestrians in Copenhagen, and so on.

Among the talks that followed included a presentation by EEDC on the correlation between quality of life and the economic performance of Edmonton, as well as the opportunity to leverage a winter climate (certainly a far more progressive option than defaulting to viewing it as a constant negative).

The last speaker in the panel was John Furlong who quoted a couple of truths that should definitely be remembered, both for this initiative and any other meant to benefit and involve the public – That to be sustainable, every person needs a role, and that the public should never be underestimated.

For a Canadian case study, Montreal’s Plateau District was used as an example of a vibrant area remaining active year-round.

The work now falls to a core ‘Think Tank’ and subcommittees for urban design, livability, business/tourism, and marketing.  If any of this sounds familiar, the Mayor’s Community Sustainability Task force adopted a similar structure last year.  As this initiative kicks off, that group’s report is scheduled to be released on February 2nd.