CivicScene's makes a return to the Vancouver Sun this morning.
CivicScene is back with the first oped in a new series beginning in today’s Vancouver Sun.
Critics of the current administration at City Hall tend to frame their grievances on the accusation that the civil service has been politicized. In fact, when I spoke to lone NPA City Councillor Suzanne Anton over the Olympic Games and asked what her biggest objection to Vision Vancouver was, this was her first response.
But let’s for a moment consider the alternative.
A city bureaucracy ruled by a supremely powerful City Manager that believes that decisions can be made without any consideration for elected officials.
Are you aware, for example, that the Mayor and City Council have absolutely no influence on the agenda at City Council meetings? An issue that might have been central to their political platform might be given priority by the electeds, but at the end of the day, they are beholden to the timing of the city bureaucracy.
The Mayor and Council would like to move forward on a motion to reinvigourate the city’s business branding strategy? Sorry, the staff report isn’t ready, and won’t be for three months because they are working on other items. So until then, sit on your hands and wait for a cue from the civil service.
Want an example of a City Manager that had become out of control with power? Well, look no further than the details released in the KPMG report on the handling of the construction of the Olympic Village. Staff changed the criteria of the bidding process for potential developers to favour the third-placed bid – Millenium – and recommend it to Council.
The final report recommending Millennium to Council was written by former Deputy City Manager Jody Andrews, who one week before last year’s election stated “There is absolutely no exposure for the taxpayer. None.” Mr. Andrews resigned from his post two months later.
The culture of a “closed shop” had become so prominent for the City Manager and favoured minions that the city’s former Chief Financial Officer Estelle Lo was asking ridiculous questions as late as last October:
“Do the contracts with Fortress/Millenium stipulate who would finance all the unplanned add’l costs or shortfalls and the City’s role re budget overruns?”
Because she was left in the dark on so many key decisions, and was being unfairly blamed for the financial fiasco, Estelle Lo resigned from her post before the new administration took office.
This is just one example of why I am perfectly comfortable with a City Manager that chooses to incorporate political input into her decision-making. This is unabashedly what current City Manager Penny Ballem is doing.
What a novel concept – a bureaucracy that is hidden from the public, taking direction from a set of individuals who are accountable and must fight for their jobs every three years for that right.
And accordingly, if we do not like their performance, we can voice our displeasure at the ballot box.
So let’s get rid of this utopian view of a civil service unencumbered by politics and acting in the best interests of the city, because that is hogwash.
As a voter, I should be privy to not only the decision-making processes that are occurring within City Hall, but also have the ability to pass judgement on them come election time.
While I don’t like the idea of the bureaucracy running city hall all the way down to the agenda setting, there are arguments for having a buffer between them and elected council.
A fully politicized civil service is the best recipe for short-term thinking by a bunch of installed yes-men. By ensuring some distance between the bureaucracy and elected council, there is the chance to put longer range plans into place that aren’t pulled this way and that by electoral maneuvering.
Incorporate political input? Yes, definitely. But to make them beholden to it to the extent that every 3 years the civil service has to re-gear doesn’t seem good for a city, but is great for politicians.
I found your blog after reading your very insightful article in today’s Vancouver Sun. I’d like to add what I can to the public’s awareness. I was employed, for less than a year, at City Hall around the time that Judy Rogers succeeded Ken Dobbell as City Manager. I anticipated that working there would be a challenge before I was hired but I needed a job and had only one other offer – that was even less attractive (though for entirely different reasons).
I had heard stories about City Hall but was unprepared for what I found. I had worked in many environments before but had never seen such a high proportion of employees so chronically and severely disgruntled. None of them were disgruntled because they were overworked. For many, a major problem was that they had little or nothing productive to do. As a new employee, inserted into a small group of especially unhappy individiuals, my time at City Hall was destined to be short. Frankly, I have no reason to feel any optimism that it will ever change in there.