TOWN OF CANMORE POLICY
EFFECTIVE DATE:
December 4, 2007
ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION:
<>
AMENDED BY RESOLUTION(S):
<>
POLICY TITLE:
Community Engagement and Information
Policy
PURPOSE
The citizens of Canmore have expressed a need through the Mining The Future process to have greater and more
meaningful input in the decision making of the municipality of Canmore. The purpose of this policy is to provide
opportunities for the community to be informed of and be involved in decision making.
POLICY
The Town of Canmore will utilize the Public Input for Municipalities Toolkit as a guideline for Administration as
they create opportunities for the community to be involved in decisions and/or to be informed of decisions that will
effect the Canmore community.
GOALS
1.
The first goal of this policy is to inform and involve the citizens of Canmore in decision making. This
policy is intended to allow for additional opportunities for the community to participate in municipal
decision making based on the practical guide and toolkit offered in “Public Input for Municipalities”
(PIFM) as revised.
2.
The second goal of this policy is to provide appropriate and practical tools for municipal staff to supply the
community with appropriate information and provide community engagement opportunities.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
A community engagement and information process is intended to build trust among the citizens, Council
and municipal staff of the Town of Canmore.
A community engagement and information process requires integrity among the participants.
The wisdom of the community should be respected.
Community input should be requested, respected and responded to wherever possible.
Community input should be obtained and communication information should be provided early in the
process.
Community input will lead to better, more informed decisions.
Community information will lead to a more informed and aware citizenry.
Community input is recommended for decisions where it is deemed that the decision has the potential of
being a collaborative or consultative one.
Council retains its decision making authority.
Communities have a right and a responsibility to be involved in decisions that affect them.
DEFINITIONS
Collaborative decisions are those decisions made by the Town in partnership with members of the community,
other municipalities, communities, organizations or individuals to deliver services or to respond to long-term
challenges. Principles of collaborative decisions:
1.
the municipality has agreed to share the decision process
with those at the table;
2.
what is (and is not) to be decided is made clear to the
participants at the start;
3.
Participants are expected to own the decision and be
Town of
Canmore
prepared to give up control; and,
Council
COLLABORATIVE
4.
A co-investment of time, money and/or product is usually
expected.
Consultative decisions are those decisions made by Council utilizing community input to inform their decision.
Examples of the conditions of this decision type include:
1.
community notification and input required by law.
2.
the decision is known to be of concern to one or more
affected parties.
3.
decision affects society’s moral or emotional expectations.
4.
decision affects the lifestyle or habits of citizens.
5.
people perceive there are risks associated with the
decision.
6.
Council or Administration request community input prior
to making a decision.
2
Directive decisions are those made by a person authorized to do so, and are issued to others simply to inform them
the decision has been made. Examples of this decision type include
1.
Urgent issues where decisions must be made immediately;
for example: fire, floods, other forms of disasters.
2.
A person operating within their authority; for example:
Police or Bylaw Officers carrying out their duties
3.
Routine decisions accepted as part of municipal
operations; for example: snow removal, street cleaning,
street light replacements
4.
The decision is dictated by law; for example: water
treatment plant upgrades.
5.
Decisions have substantial effect only on those who have
already agreed to be affected; for example, employees,
volunteerism, accepting elected office.
Level of input is based on the levels outlined in “Public Input for Municipalities.” Three potential levels of
community input or information may be required:
Level 1.
Person to person contact – PIFM lists client service tools; as examples, for those working at the
front counter or on the phone, or reaching out to specific communities (such as Developers).
Level 2.
Moderate Community Input Process – where the issue and the stakeholders are readily defined,
where previous concern has been expressed, and where there is emotional concern, and/or direct
impact on fees or rates, and/or concern over aesthetics.
Level 3.
Full Community Input Process – where the issue involves a number of diverse stakeholders
includes those criteria listed under 2 above and/or includes concerns about health and safety,
fairness, lifestyle, emotional hot buttons, and property values.
Community for the purposes of this policy are those individuals or organizations that reside (either permanently or
non-permanently), operate, and/or own property within the municipal boundaries of Canmore and are interested in
making a positive contribution to the community at large. The community for the purposes of this policy goes
beyond the legislative requirements of those who can vote, for example.
Stakeholders are individuals or communities of common interest who have or may describe an interest in the
decision.
RESPONSIBILITIES
Determining if a community input or information process is required, beyond statutory requirements, shall be
considered at the time of project planning in conjunction with project budgeting and/or scheduling and/or at
Council request. Determinations of the appropriate level of community input or information is the responsibility of
the relevant department manager in conjunction with the project or file manager and based on the particular
circumstances and details of the project.
Council will be informed about all projects that will provide a consultative or collaborative community input
opportunity, and on directive decisions where there is a need to do so.
Whether or not community input will be needed will be determined by the decision type.
ƒ
If the decision is determined to be directive, no community input will be required but community
information may be needed.
ƒ
If the decision is determined to be consultative, community input will be required.
ƒ
Collaborative decision making will require that a Terms of Reference be approved by Council prior to the
process commencing.
3
If it is determined by the department manager that a directive decision requires community information,
Administration will determine the appropriate level of community information needed by utilizing the “Public Input
for Municipalities” toolkit.
Once it is determined by the department manager that the decision to be made is to be a consultative or
collaborative decision, Administration will determine the appropriate level of community input needed by utilizing
the “Public Input for Municipalities” toolkit.
The results of the determination will be presented to Council at time of budget deliberations or as emerging projects
or issues arise between budget periods.
Schedule A should be utilized to help determine which input process is appropriate.
Schedule B should be used to help determine how to design an appropriate process.
VISION ALIGNMENT
The Town of Canmore has made community engagement a strategic priority by supporting the outcomes of the
Mining The Future process. Civic engagement and leadership is one of the 5 guiding principles of the
community’s vision. The intent of this policy is to change the status quo and improve the ways we engage the
community in decision making and provide information about decisions that impact the community. .
ATTACHMENTS
Schedule A, Administration Implementation Procedure Test
Schedule B, Administration Implementation Procedure
REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
Alberta Municipal Affairs, 2006, Public Input for Municipalities Toolkit, Alberta Municipal Affairs
TOWN OF CANMORE
WHERE THERE IS ANY CONFLICT BETWEEN THE POLICIES ADOPTED BY THE TOWN OF CANMORE
AND THE POLICIES SET FORTH IN A COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT ADOPTED BY CUPE LOCAL #37, OR
POLICIES SET FORTH IN A STATUTE OF THE PROVINCIAL OR FEDERALGOVERNMENT, THE
COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT OR THE PROVINCIAL OR FEDERAL STATUTE SHALL SUPERCEDE SUCH
OTHER POLICIES.
T.M. Registered Trade Mark
4
SCHEDULE A
ADMINISTRATION IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE TEST
The following is either directly taken or paraphrased from the referenced Public Input Toolkit and this document
should be referenced at length before beginning an input or information process.
The implementation of any community input should begin by considering the following question:
What is required to ensure that a consultative process will result in a better decision? OR
What is required to ensure that the public is well informed of the impacts of a directive decision?
To frame how to best answer this question the file or project manager will consider the following initial questions:
ƒ
What decision is being asked to be made or has been made?
ƒ
Who are likely to be affected?
ƒ
Do stakeholders have specific perceptions related to this decision?
Based on the following ‘scoring’ of potential perceptions or realities with respect to the decision, thought can be
given as to which of three levels the community input might take. Note that if the score intuitively seems too high
or too low an initial information gathering test to confirm or revise the level of community input might be needed –
see QuickTest below.
5
6
SCHEDULE B
ADMINISTRATION IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE FOR LEVEL 2 and 3 DECISIONS
The following is either directly taken or paraphrased from the referenced Public Input Toolkit and this document
should be referenced at length before beginning an input or information process.
Once the level of community input has been determined, the file or project manager will produce a terms of
reference for the community input. See Schedule B Worksheet 2: Developing a Terms of Reference in the Public
Input Toolkit..
KEY 1. Start early with a plan:
7
KEY 2. Teamwork and Planning is required:
8
Scheduling Community Input
Set the target date to take the report to Council and plan backwards from that date; take holidays and other
activities into account.
Determine the number of community meetings required (allow 1 to 3 weeks for meetings)
Preparation of materials, notification, logistics, consultants (allow 3 to 10 weeks)
Planning of the community input (allow 2 to 8 weeks)
KEY 3. Communication Materials
The file or project manager will coordinate the production of communication materials in conjunction with the team
and by utilizing the Toolkit. The communication materials should consider the following questions:
What does the receiver want to know?
What misconceptions might interfere with our conversation?
The communication materials should be ‘open’ to a variety of options, make the scope of the discussions obvious,
9
keep the materials simple, and include illustrations. Tailor the information to the audience, which means that it
might be necessary to have more than one version of the materials: one set of materials for those whose interest is
casual and another set for those who are vested stakeholders.
KEY 4. Information Formats and Publications
Provide Information material in one or more of the following formats: website, colour brochure, displays,
PowerPoint / slideshow, or newsletter or leaflet. Review the Toolkit for the advantages of each.
One or more of the following methods could do for the distribution of the information: person-to-person, leadership
networks, direct correspondence, presentations at regularly scheduled meetings, bulk mail, news release, displays,
signs and bulletins, and community notice in the media. Review the Toolkit for the advantages of each.
KEY 5. Make community meeting enjoyable and effective
Keep presentations short (maximum 10 minutes) with critical facts only, allow the community to ask questions to
gain greater depth, encourage the community to interact with each other and the presenters. Some engagement
methods are better than others are - review the Toolkit for a description of the alternatives.
Support community discussion by way of having an agenda, a facilitator, keep a record of contacts and the advice
received, supply expert advice when needed, ensure a convenient, comfortable, suitable location, ensure meetings
are efficient, well organized, and allow for sufficient discussion.
Determining and presenting the options with respect to the purpose of the consultation should be done by
considering the current situation, and to developing a set of criteria (principles of interest) to measure the options
by. The stakeholders should agree to a set of criteria prior to comparing the options. Present the options side by
side for comparison purposes, and measure each against the predetermined criteria.
KEY 6. Choosing and Implementing the Best Approach
The choice of method is in part dependent on the level of community input determined.
Level one (less than 10 people): the choices could consider personal meetings, one on one with you usually visiting
them; storefront meetings, over the counter meetings with one or a few people at a time; informal doorway
meetings held in someone’s house or business with no formal agenda. Depends on your ability to give people your
attention, provide credible information in a friendly manner and your ability to follow the principles outlined in the
policy.
Level two or three (more than 10 people): determine first whether the process should be an open community
participation process or an invited participation process is appropriate. This should be determined while recognizing
that an open community process may be the next step after an invited participation process.
Open Community Participation Choices could include open house meetings, town hall meetings, or workshops. The
advantages of each are outlined in the Toolkit.
Invited Community Participation choices could include focus groups, round-table meetings, and advisory
committee. The advantages of each are outlined in the Toolkit.
It is recommended that the community be asked to evaluate the meeting/workshops: Was the information provided
easy to understand. Did the meeting provide an opportunity to learn more about the proposal(s)? Were people’s
suggestions or concerns raised at the meeting? Do people have any suggestions for future meetings like this?
The role of the media can be of great assistance with respect to gaining community input: Review the Toolkit,
and/or work with the Communication Coordinator for the Town of Canmore with respect to working with the
media.
10
KEY 7. Stakeholder Relationships
There are a number of skills and behaviors, which will improve the process and result in positive stakeholder
relationships. Review the Toolkit for tips and approaches; in addition utilize a facilitator as part of the team to build
positive stakeholder relationships.
KEY 8. Follow-Through, and Evaluation
After the input is received there are a number of tasks to be performed – see Toolkit.
Once the decision has been made by Council an opportunity exists to continue to build trust. Any members of the
community involved directly in the community input process will be informed of the results of the process, what
decision was made and how the community input informed Council’s decision.
11