Open and transparent government: Council candidate Suzanne Senger takes the test

How much openness and transparency do the candidates for Gibsons mayor and council support? The Coast Clarion asked them.

Opportunity for public input at council meetings in Gibsons has been lacking and many people feel they have not been listened to at public hearings. The Coast Clarion sent a 10-question questionnaire to all 10 candidates for mayor and council to find out how they view openness, fairness and engagement with the public. These are Suzanne Senger’s answers.

1) Do you support more opportunities for public inquiries during council meetings?

Yes: two opportunities. I have participated in council meetings consistently since 2007. From 2007- 2011, the council chamber was an open and respectful place for community participation. When Wayne Rowe was elected as mayor, that began to change. The public was no longer encouraged to engage; opportunities for inquiries were tightened up and controlled. In his second term the council procedure bylaw was changed. The additional inquiry opportunity at the beginning of business was removed. The second inquiry section was moved to the end of the meeting when all issues had been deliberated and voted on. This effectively quashed all opportunities for the public to contribute to the discussion and robbed the council from the opportunity to hear any feedback or consider ideas before making decisions.

2) Do you support public inquiries about topics not on the agenda of council meetings?

Yes. Council should not attempt to micromanage citizens’ concerns and issues. We should listen and embrace input and feedback.

3) Should public inquiries, and the answers provided, be included in the minutes of council meetings?

Yes. We should keep track of public inquiries by noting who asks questions and the nature of the questions asked, the concerns and ideas expressed. We should also keep track of any direction of council to staff to follow up on these questions/concerns.

4) Do you think an opportunity for public input before every vote at council meetings is a good idea?

No. Not all votes require public input. There is a lot of mundane work to do at the council table. I think we need to be logical and realistic about this. We need to engage the public well in advance of voting on issues, and stop relying solely on public hearings as opportunities for the public to express their views on difficult issues.

5) Should the minutes of council meetings include entire discussions and matters raised, including the names of the speakers?

Yes and no. Instead of using staff time and resources to transcribe audio recordings of meetings, we should simply post the audio recordings on the Town of Gibson website. That way the public can freely access the verbatim conversation at will, and no one will be able to dispute what was said or done.

6) Do you think council members and the mayor should have a set time every week for members of the public to approach them on a personal basis?

Yes, and I will.

7) In your opinion, does council need to vote unanimously?

No. The only way to get unanimous votes on council is to elect a slate of people who agree to act in unison. But councils are not meant to only represent one voice, as happened with the last council in Gibsons. We elect a council of five people because councils are meant to represent the community – and the community is diverse. There is a broad array of perspectives and opinions in all communities and they all deserve to be represented and heard.

8) What is your view on public hearings? If a majority of the speakers express a certain opinion, what should council do?

Public hearings are meant to be the last chance for citizens to voice views on a final proposal. But public hearings by themselves are not adequate consultation. I feel strongly that we need to engage citizens sooner and more fully in conversation around proposed projects. We need to listen and integrate feedback. We need to let proponents know that we expect them to respect our community planning and public feedback. Council’s job is to represent the electorate, not pet projects and elite interest groups. I firmly believe that it is our responsibility to weigh all perspectives and make fact-based decisions in the best interest of the whole community.

9) What is your view on providing town documents to the public when asked? Which categories should not be released, if any?

The BC Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA) is clear about what the local government must and must not disclose to the public. The town should respect the wording and intent of the act and always disclose appropriate public records. The town should stop intentionally misinterpreting FIPPA and making excuses about why it does not disclose public records. It should stop wasting town staff and the public’s time and money forcing citizens to file FOI requests and complaints to the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner to access records the citizens have a right to. The mayor and council should let the town staff clearly know that we are committed to transparency and openness. We should engage respectfully with citizens and help them access information, without having to file expensive and time-consuming FOI requests.

10) In your view, what are the best methods for council to achieve meaningful consultation with the public?

I think we need a multi-pronged approach.

Re-instate standing committees of council with informed/expert advisors. These include planning, finance, infrastructure services, and seniors and youth committees.

Reverse the changes made by the last council to the council procedures bylaw and ensure citizens have authentic opportunities to participate at council meetings.

Develop a framework for meaningful consultation (not just ticking boxes!) which would be used by the town, proponents and the public. A policy like this would invariably grow and change in good ways as we learn and grow as a community. It would encourage respectful engagement, dialogue and community building.