Note: We have removed the Friday deadline and will accept submissions beyond that date.
Earlier this week, we checked in with all of the councillors and the Mayor, through their assistants to ask if we could expect a submission from them, on our Perspectives Virtual Panel topic, The Best Place to Raise a Child.
So far, we received a submission from Mayor Bratina, Clr. Merulla and Clr. McHattie. We were advised today that Clr. Ferguson will not be making a submission, due to a busy week he is having this week. We have yet to receive a response from the remaining Clrs from Wards 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 ,14, and 15.
We have provided first notice of this question, May 9th 2012, and thus believe we have provided ample time for submissions. As our city vision statement goes to the very identity we are trying to establish, we respectfully submit that it is in bad form not to receive submissions from the missing councilors and that some priority should have been afforded to this. We continue to invite their submissions and will publish them verbatim.
The Hamiltonian
Teresa and crew. Thanks for taking a position on this. I can't think of a more important topic than the future of our city and what the politicians think is that vision and how to achieve it. I agree that it is 100% in bad form to not reply or to not see it as important enough to get to. I will remember these types of moments and remind myself and others on election day!!
ReplyDeleteSevern
I can't agree. While the goal is laudable, insisting that Councillors dance to the Hamiltonian's tune and timetable is perhaps unfair.
ReplyDeleteIf I got a third party request that entailed something I don't actually have to respond to (even if it is a good thing to do) and had to prioritize it with stuff that is on my plate, or higher priority (and spare me that kids have to be our highest priority - we all know that is important), then I'd likely attend to the must do nows rather than the good to do nows first.
Anon, surely you twist. The Hamiltonian 'invited' councillors to engage its citizens on such an important issue; nowhere can I find anything since May 9 that comes close to your crass interpretation of "insisting that Councillors dance to the Hamiltonian's tune."
DeletePointing out, ten days later, that the invitation is still open is generous, thoughtful and kind. Further insistent snubbing by councillors is just plain rude, telling, and unacceptable for the issue is a huge one. This, surely, is neither the time nor place to be twisting facts, and the truth, whilst speaking of priorities.
Please note:
ReplyDeleteThe Hamiltonian alerted council and the Mayor about this question at the same time our Virtual Panel was alerted. We also sent reminders. We also asked the assistants to confirm whether or not their councillor will be submitting. We only received a reply from Clr. Ferguson's office and we note that The Mayor and Clrs. Merulla and McHattie made time to respond.
As we are a reasonable bunch at The Hamiltonian, we have removed the Friday deadline and will accept submissions at any time beyond that date.
Based on the importance of this question, our assertion that it is in bad form not to respond, remains unchanged.
The Hamiltonian Admin
So they are not jumping at your beck and call?
DeleteI don't think The Hamiltonian expected them to jump. The goal seems to open discussion on a VERY serious matter. What is not said by these councillors is more revealing than what is.
DeleteI really think their behaviour is proving my case.
Term Limits Now
@ The Hamiltonian. My guy Sam Merulla was the FIRST to reply. Even before the mayor. And Merulla is busy cause he actually cares about people. Bravo response from TH. That now eliminates the excuse makers.
ReplyDeleteThe Mayor is the councillor at large. He made the time.
ReplyDeleteHear Hear!!!!
DeleteIt has absolutely nothing to do with timing, it is the forum that is the issue.
ReplyDeleteReally? Howso? - Read my post below.
DeleteSorce
@Teresa et el . I am volunteering to be the B.S. monitor on this topic
DeleteSorce
What is really happening here is that some councillors are afraid of exposing their thoughts on this matter. Likely because it is a very strategic discussion and they are ill equipped to provide a compelling understanding of what it takes to achieve the vision, or they are afraid of the push back, once they reveal their views. There is no excuse not to participate, especially since, according to what has been said, their comments will appear verbatim. And now, they have no deadline.
ReplyDeleteI highly suspect that some of the anons here are excuse makers in the form of agents or more direct.
If you have good thoughts on how to make Hamilton live up to its vision, you have no reason not to join the discussion. As far as I can see, some really smart engaged Hamiltonians have given of their time (unpaid) and have provided some very thoughtful ideas.
Sorce
Bingo.
DeleteI think more than anything else, this situation speaks volumes about the general comfort level that councillors have regarding engagement. Providing a quick quote for The Spec or CHCH or CHML is one thing. Providing something substantive on so heady a subject as the city's proclaimed vision is another thing entirely. And then there's the contrast between the upside and the downside. Given the responses from readers so far, would youwant to jump in and take the risk?
I do have to say that there are some non-responders I'm pretty surprised at. (For others, silence is probably the most prudent tactic.)
Honestly, I don't get it. If some of the clrs do not have a good handle on this, why don't they say- hey, I have learned a lot from the comments of the panel and I need to have MORE of this type of input. Why sit on the sidelines?
DeleteI read each of the panel's submissions and found them all to be worth reading.
MY SC. What do you mean " Given the responses from readers so far, would youwant to jump in and take the risk?
I do have to say that there are some non-responders I'm pretty surprised at. (For others, silence is probably the most prudent tactic.)"
????
Sev
I'm assuming you want a straight answer, so...
Delete1) My take has been that aside from those who are happy just to applaud the trio's participation, the general critique has not been particularly favourable; I don't think anyone has knocked any socks off us, or convinced us that they grasped the task, or understand what living up to the City's motto actually entails.
2) There are a handful of councillors who are far better equipped to respond at a level commensurate with their office than others, and certainly on a par with some of the more informed and eloquent Panelists. I'm surprised they haven't appeared as of yet. (And disappointed.)
3) 'Better to sit silently in corner and have everyone assume you're-' Well, you know the rest.
Thanks MY SC. Makes sense. I agree with #1. I don't know who #2 is, but maybe there are. #3. Humour me..I don't know the rest.
DeleteSevern
'Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.'
DeleteExcellent saying. Thanks. It made me chuckle.
DeleteSevern
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.
DeleteIn this situation, remaining silent makes you seem weak and foolish. My councilor Whitehead must be on vacation.
The shocking irony of this is that the third part of the vision statement is "To be the best place in Canada to engage citizens." Precisely what this dialogue is trying to do. And precisely what they are not doing, other than the 3 who did respond.
ReplyDeleteI think Sorce is right on the money. They are afraid of showing just how little they know about the vision, about how to use it, and about how little they're doing to make it a reality.
Mr. Crawford. I am glad you pointed this out. Sadly ironic. I do really want to hear from the rest and I think we can do that with a good tone.
DeleteSevern
Thanks Graham Crawford. I thought your answer on the panel was essential. It really demonstrates how to take a series of words, and make them action items that are measurable. It was very apparent to me. Maybe I'm the one who's crazy?
DeleteI have to say that every single member of that Virtual Panel had some really good insights. It's a treasure chest for those hunting for treasure. A bag of bones for the short sighted and ego inflated.
Sorce
BTW. I don't think mayor Bratina or the two clrs nailed the question Far from it. Butr I give them kudos for participating and I am assuming they are interested in what the panel and others had to say. You don't have to be perfect. You have to be willing to listen and talk.
ReplyDeleteSevern
I believe McHattie and Merulla answered well. Particularly Merulla. His back to basic govern based on needs and priorities and opportunities increase to become the best place to raise a child is indeed nailing the question. I'm surprised people are questioning that fact.
ReplyDeleteBack to basics isn't part of achieving a vision. A vision is supposed to be ambitious and the way you get at it, assumes that you don't have to take a step backwards. If our ambition is to be back to basics, then we are indeed in trouble.
DeleteBTW. I agree with Merulla 100% but not in this context.
Sorce
I did not say this properly. Back to basics, as a goal, might be an excellent step for a different vision statement. For example, if the vision was "To be seen as responsible government". But even that is is too lax to be a vision statement. It's an expectation not a vision.
DeleteIf Merulla is right, and in part, I agree with him that we do have to get to needs before wants, then we are not prepared for our vision statement.
I go back to, we have a vision statement that council has no ability to lead.
Sorce
Anon...ask a child what their needs, priorities and opportunities are and I bet not one of them will have anything to do with Merulla's non-answer. I've asked plenty in my time and I'll tell you that crossing the street and having safe places to play outside are on the top of their wish list.
DeleteI live very near to what the City calls Hamilton's Jewel, the harbourfront; however, on any given day there can be 0 of 1200 children who live here in the North End that are allowed to either go to the park on their own or play in the park. It's sad that councillors ignore this fact; more of a travesty that my councillor, Farr, has never noticed.
It would be nice to hear from Merulla how many children in his ward actually go to parks, within his ward, on their own to play. I've come to know that children playing in parks, who got there on foot or bike and not by car, are a sure-fire way to tell if a neighbourhood is livable for children, and by extension us, or not.
Merulla's response was more of the same we always hear Sam tooting, but he didn't answer the question.
Where is my Councillor (Whitehead) ? Does he take this mater seriously?
ReplyDeleteI am not holding my breath, but is the Ward 10 councilor going to say anything?
ReplyDeleteOccupy Ward 10
@ Sorce:A vision statement is sometimes called a picture of your organization in the future but it’s so much more than that. Your vision statement is your inspiration, the framework for all your strategic planning.
ReplyDeleteA vision statement may apply to an entire organization or to a single division of that organization. Whether for all or part of an organization, the vision statement answers the question, "Where do we want to go?"
What you are doing when creating a vision statement is articulating your dreams and hopes for your city. It reminds you of what you are trying to build.
While a vision statement doesn't tell you how you're going to get there, it does set the direction for your planning.
Merulla articulated his vision based on this premise. Therefore his answer is excellent.
Thanks,
Colin
I agree with your description of a vision statement to a large degree, but not your conclusion. It does not match up.
DeleteSorce
@sorce I'm new to this blog but I would hope logic would prevail in discussions and my conclusion is logical. Read the question and MErulla's answer it is excellent.
ReplyDeleteSorry. i will only waste so much time on this
DeleteSorce
Ward 11 is MIA. Figures. Next
ReplyDeleteInteresting that Partridge, Whitehead, and Ferguson all wrote submissions to The Hamiltonian on why their motion to muzzle citizens who go to the media before the Integrity Commissioner submits his report was a good, if misunderstood, idea.
ReplyDeleteToo bad they can't find the time to write as much about the vision of the city of Hamilton, what it means to them, and how they plan on helping all of us achieve it. Too bad.
The councillors are proving to be a finicky, and very selective, crew whose complete lack of leadership at the helm of this VisionShip is most evident. Deeply disappointing.
ReplyDeleteOne might have thought that all of them were aware of, understood and agreed with the City's vision the day they signed-on to run for council in 2010 but now I have grave doubts. Of course, if one did not comprehend the vision from the get-go there has been plenty of time to think about it and clearly, pointedly, throw us a few bones about it.
'Tis hard to think of any successful corporation whose leaders refuse to act/articulate to defend their co's vision/mission; however, I can think of many unsuccessful ones whose leaders forgot what their mission was and took the co down with them.
An embarrassing mess thus far. Speaking of Farr, where the heck is he?
Now that the CBC and The Hamilton Spectator have seen the importance of this dialogue and what The Hamiltonian offers, the councillors won't be able to hide locally, or maybe even nationally.
ReplyDeleteBut I still don't understand it. A VERY GOOD question was asked. Councillors have been invited and allowed to post whatever they want and it will be posted entirely- not cut back to sound bites. As fgar as I can tell 95% if not more of the comments have been very well expressed.
So, the key question now is why can't our council defend their vision or explain what they have been doing to achieve it? And even if they have not being doing much about it, they can signal their intent now.
I don't get how the leaders of the corporation of the city of Hamilton, can just go MIA. ??????
Severn
Here is the post from CBC :
ReplyDeleteThe Hamiltonian
Our friends at the Hamiltonian have been hosting a conversation on the question of where is the best place to raise a child. Several members of city council have weighed in, more are expected to join that conversation. You can find it here:
http://www.thehamiltonian.net/
Canada is now watching....Will Councillors engage?
I wrote " Canada is now watching. Will Councillors engage. The rest, is from the CBC.
DeleteNot that this isn't a good question, but what is making it the question of the moment, exactly? This seems like very old news to me.... although it possibly goes to the question of why, according to the 2011 Census, there are fewer families/children living in Hamilton than perhaps any other time in history? That being said, it seems typical of most of the western world at this stage of evolution. Maybe the whole "best place to raise a child" was a poorly chose directive?
ReplyDeleteWe have citizen engagement. It isn't perfecy and it isn't uniform, but it's there. It does exist the majority of Hamiltonians appear to be happy with the way things are. For the remainder, there are always ways of increasing your civic enagement. Don't waste time sulking that Santa Claus never wrote you back.
ReplyDeleteHamiltonians dont suffer fools gladly. Tom Jackson can shake all the hands he wants or kiss a hundred babies. He wont get my vote.
ReplyDeleteDissed