Report to/Rapport au :

Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee

Comité des services organisationnels et du développement économique

and Council/et au Conseil

8 September 2003/ le 8 septembre 2003

Submitted by/Soumis par : Kent Kirkpatrick, General Manager/Directeur général

Corporate Services Department/Services généraux

Contact/Personne-ressource : Pierre Pagé, Director of Secretariat Services and City Clerk/

Directeur/Greffier, services de secrétariat
580-2424 x22408 Pierre.Page@ottawa.ca

Ref N°: ACS2003-CRS-SEC-0016

SUBJECT:	ENCOURAGING AND ADVANCING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION in Ottawa
OBJET :	FAVORISER ET ACCROÎTRE LA PARTICIPATION PUBLIQUE À OTTAWA

REPORT RECOMMENDATION

That the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee recommend Council approve the new Public Participation Policy for the City of Ottawa (attached to the report) and endorse the creation of a Roundtable for Citizen Engagement.

RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT

Que le Comité des services organisationnels et du développement économique recommande au Conseil d’approuver la nouvelle Politique de participation du public pour la Ville d’Ottawa (annexée au rapport) et appuie la création d’une table ronde sur l’intéressement du public.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Assumptions and Analysis:

As a result of amalgamation of twelve area municipalities into one and the creation of the new City of Ottawa in 2001, a coordinated and consistent approach to citizen engagement has been developed to implement a best practise for public participation. The new Public Participation Policy (attached to the report) provides an opportunity to re-examine the way business is carried out to ensure that there is value to the consultation process, to expand the use of best practices for citizen engagement in the City, and to ensure that community feedback is valued and used to further develop and deliver programs, services and policies in the City.

The new public participation policy has been developed over the course of nine months, with extensive community consultation to determine the values and principles, which form the cornerstone of the policy. The new Public Participation Policy makes a commitment to citizens that administrative and policy processes are open and accessible, respectful of the public’s right to be involved, and are responsive to the public’s need for information. Many of the consultation activities undertaken to develop the policy have resulted in innovative and collaborative recommendations by the community, including the creation of a Roundtable on Citizen Engagement, discussed in detail in the report.

A review of international, federal, and other municipal public participation policies, as well as the policies of the former area municipalities, was undertaken to determine what constitutes an effective public participation policy, and what would ensure those affected by decisions were provided an opportunity to provide input in a meaningful way.

Improved public participation enhances interaction with the community, strengthens groups and networks and is an important component of promoting the well being of the community. Appropriate and cost effective methods will be used to inform local community, key stakeholders and interested parties, relevant to the specific circumstances of each consultation topic, to ensure that the City is open and accessible.

The new Public Participation Policy will be one of the few in existence in Canada and will put Ottawa on the map of forward thinking approaches to municipal government, particularly as this policy is based on the expressed views and input of residents and stakeholders in the City.

Six key principles outlined in the Public Participation Policy form the cornerstone for the policy and were expressly identified by the community through extensive consultation on the development of the policy. These principles reflect the views of Ottawa residents on what the foundation for consultation undertaken by the City should be.

The following principles are outlined in detail in the Policy, and reflect the following:

• Inclusive & Authentic – To the greatest extent possible, the City will involve all stakeholders who are potentially affected by an issue in a transparent and equitable way.
• Sharing & Supportive – Involvement of stakeholders in the decision-making process where their input can impact the decision.
• Accountable & Committed – Setting clear objectives and expectations for a public participation initiative and actively listening to the input of citizens, community organizations and Advisory Committees.
• Meaningful & Responsive – Ensuring consultation is meaningful and valid, with clear objectives and expectations with respect to the ability of the public to impact the decision. Ensuring consultation is conducted in a timely manner that is appropriate to the issue and level of public involvement. Ensuring that participants receive appropriate feedback on the impact of their input is key to making public participation meaningful.
• Continuously Improving – Continuously evaluating and measuring the success of the Public Participation Policy and public participation initiatives conducted by the City will form a fundamental part of ensuring public participation is effective and relevant. An annual review of the policy will be undertaken, and evaluation mechanisms for each consultation initiative will be used.
• Facilitating & Building Capacity for a Collaborative Community – Strengthening links between the City and the community on public participation initiatives and building capacity in the community for citizen engagement on issues that affect them through a corporate Public Participation Community of Practice.

Financial Implications:

Due to the existing constrained financial situation at the City, and limited staff and budgetary resources, no additional funds have been identified for the implementation and application of the Public Participation Policy and the Roundtable for Citizen Engagement. An annual review of the implications of the policy implementation should be undertaken in future years.

Public Consultation/Input:

Extensive public consultation has taken place over the development of the Public Participation Policy, to ensure that the Policy is based on the input and viewpoints expressed by residents of Ottawa. The following consultations were conducted over the course of the project:

§ Pre-consultation sampling phone and email survey – February 2003

§ Four community focus groups in different locations throughout the City – April 2003

§ Online Internet Discussion – April to June 2003

§ Random Telephone Survey – April to May 2003

§ Focus group with City staff – May 2003

§ Advisory Committee Workshop – April 2003

§ International Association of Public Participation Conference workshop – May 2003

§ Three Community Forums in different locations throughout the City (with feedback forms, keypad polling and on-line discussion) – May to June 2003

§ Focus Group with Poverty Issues Advisory Committee and low income/marginalized community representatives – June 2003

§ Advisory Committee review of the identified themes and draft public participation principles – June 2003

§ International Association of Facilitators Conference workshop – June 2003

A review of each individual consultation, and a summary of the input and themes identified at that consultation are provided in the report.

RÉSUMÉ

Hypothèses et analyse :

À la suite de la fusion en une de douze municipalités de la région et de la création de la nouvelle Ville d’Ottawa, en 2001, on a adopté une approche coordonnée et cohérente à l’intéressement du public afin de mettre en œuvre les meilleures pratiques en cette matière. La nouvelle Politique de participation du public (annexée au rapport) donne l’occasion de regarder de plus près la façon dont la Ville mène ses affaires pour s’assurer de valoriser le processus de consultation, d’élargir l’utilisation des meilleures pratiques en matière de participation du public sur la scène municipale et de veiller à ce que la rétroaction des citoyens soit appréciée à sa juste valeur et utilisée dans la mise au point et la prestation des programmes, services et politiques de la Ville.

L’élaboration de la nouvelle Politique de participation du public s’est déroulée sur neuf mois dans le cadre de vastes consultations communautaires visant à choisir les valeurs et les principes devant en former la pierre d’angle. En se dotant de ce nouvel outil, la Ville s’engage à ce que les processus administratifs et d’élaboration des politiques soient ouverts, accessibles et respectueux du droit du public de participer et tiennent compte du besoin du public d’être renseigné. De nombreuses activités de consultation organisées en vue de l’élaboration de la Politique ont donné lieu à la formulation, par les citoyens, de recommandations axées sur l’innovation et la collaboration, y compris la mise sur pied d’une Table ronde sur l’intéressement du public, que le rapport aborde plus en détail.

On a procédé à l’étude d’une foule de politiques internationales, fédérales et municipales en matière de participation du public et passé en revue les lignes directrices des anciennes municipalités de la région pour déterminer les critères d’une bonne politique de participation du public et les moyens de s’assurer que les personnes touchées par les décisions auront la possibilité de s’exprimer de façon significative.

Une bonne participation du public améliore les rapports mutuels avec la collectivité, renforce les groupes et les réseaux et constitue un élément important dans la promotion du bien-être communautaire. On utilisera des méthodes appropriées et économiques pour renseigner les collectivités, les intervenants clés et les parties intéressées en fonction des particularités de chacun des sujets de consultation, pour garantir un accès sans entraves aux affaires de la Ville.

Presque unique en son genre au Canada, la nouvelle Politique de participation du public placera Ottawa au rang des villes avant-gardistes dans leur approche des affaires municipales, en particulier puisqu’elle reflète les opinions et tient compte des commentaires des citoyens et des intervenants de la Ville.

Les six grands principes énoncés dans la Politique de participation du public en constituent la pierre angulaire et ont été choisis spécialement par les citoyens à la suite des consultations approfondies. Ces principes reflètent les points de vue des citoyens d’Ottawa au sujet des assises sur lesquelles doit reposer toute consultation entreprise par la Ville.

Les principes suivants sont énoncés dans la Politique et tiennent compte de ce qui suit :

• Inclusion et authenticité – Dans la mesure du possible, la Ville fera participer d’une manière transparente et équitable tous les intervenants susceptibles d’être touchés par un problème.
• Partage et soutien – Participation des intervenants au processus décisionnel lorsqu’elle peut avoir une incidence sur la décision.
• Responsabilité et engagement – Établissement d’attentes et d’objectifs clairs dans les initiatives de participation du public et écoute active des commentaires des citoyens, des organismes communautaires et des comités consultatifs.
• Importance et réceptivité – Veiller à ce que les consultations soient significatives et valables, qu’elles aient des attentes et des objectifs clairs en ce qui concerne la capacité du public d’avoir une influence sur les décisions. Veiller à ce que les consultations soient faites en temps opportun par rapport aux questions en jeu et au degré de participation du public. Le fait de veiller à ce que les participants reçoivent une rétroaction appropriée sur l’impact des commentaires qu’ils ont émis est essentiel pour que la participation du public soit significative.
• En constante amélioration – L’évaluation et la mesure continues du succès de la Politique de participation du public et des initiatives à ce titre menées par la Ville garantiront pour une bonne part l’efficacité et la pertinence de la participation du public. Un examen annuel de la Politique aura lieu, et des mécanismes d’évaluation de chaque initiative de consultation seront utilisés.
• Faciliter les liens et améliorer les capacités pour une communauté de collaboration – Renforcer les liens entre la Ville et la collectivité dans les initiatives de participation du public et améliorer les capacités de participation des citoyens à des sujets qui les touchent grâce à la création d’une Communauté de pratiques dans la participation du public.

Répercussions financières :

En raison du resserrement de la situation financière de la Ville ainsi que des ressources humaines et budgétaires limitées, des ressources financières supplémentaires n’ont pas été affectées à la mise en œuvre et à l’application de la Politique de participation du public et de la Table ronde sur l’intéressement du public. Il faudrait entreprendre dans les années à venir un examen annuel des incidences de la mise en œuvre de la Politique.

Consultation publique/commentaires :

La mise au point de la Politique de participation du public a donné lieu à de vastes consultations publiques visant à faire en sorte que la Politique tienne compte des commentaires et points de vue des citoyens d’Ottawa. Voici une liste des consultations organisées à cette fin :

§ Sondage par téléphone et courriel avant la tenue des consultations - février 2003

§ Quatre groupes de discussion communautaires tenus à divers endroits dans la Ville - avril 2003

§ Discussion en ligne sur Internet - avril à juin 2003

§ Sondage aléatoire par téléphone - avril à mai 2003

§ Groupe de discussion avec le personnel de la Ville - mai 2003

§ Atelier du comité consultatif - avril 2003

§ Atelier de l’International Association of Public Participation Conference - mai 2003

§ Trois forums communautaires tenus à divers endroits dans la Ville (prévoyant formulaires de rétroaction, sondages par clavier numérique et discussions en ligne) - mai à juin 2003

§ Groupe de discussion avec le Comité consultatif sur la pauvreté ainsi que des représentants des personnes à faible revenu/marginalisées - juin 2003

§ Examen, par le comité consultatif, des thèmes retenus et rédaction de la version provisoire des principes de la participation du public - juin 2003

§ Atelier de l’International Association of Facilitators Conference - juin 2003

Sont inclus dans le rapport un examen de chaque consultation et un résumé des commentaires et thèmes retenus lors de chacune.

BACKGROUND

As a result of amalgamation of twelve area municipalities into one and the creation of the new City of Ottawa in 2001, a coordinated and consistent approach to citizen engagement has been developed to implement a best practise for public participation. Taking into consideration the many corporate initiatives and legislated requirements for the City, a formal Public Participation Policy is necessary, to ensure that the City informs as well as consults with the public on issues that directly affect them.

This report and the associated Public Participation Policy provide an opportunity to re-examine the way business is carried out to ensure that there is value to the consultation process, to expand the use of best practices for citizen engagement in the City, and to ensure that community feedback is valued and used to further develop and deliver programs, services and policies in the City.

The new public participation policy has been developed over the course of nine months, with extensive community consultation to determine the values and principles, which form the cornerstone of the policy. The new Public Participation Policy makes a commitment to citizens that administrative and policy processes are open and accessible, respectful of the public’s right to be involved, and are responsive to the public’s need for information. Many of the consultation activities undertaken to develop the policy have resulted in innovative and collaborative recommendations by the community, including the creation of a Roundtable on Citizen Engagement, discussed in more detail later in the report.

A review of international, federal, and other municipal public participation policies, as well as the policies of some of the former area municipalities, was undertaken to determine what constitutes an effective and comprehensive public participation policy, and what would ensure those affected by decisions were provided an opportunity to provide input in an effective and meaningful manner.

Improved public participation enhances interaction with the community, strengthens groups and networks and is an important component of promoting the well being of the community. The policy sets out the steps the City will take to establish information-sharing partnerships and ensure community involvement in decisions made about services the City provides and the management of community resources. Appropriate and cost effective methods will be used to inform the local community, key stakeholders and interested parties, relevant to the specific circumstances of each consultation topic, to ensure that the City is open and accessible.

DISCUSSION

Local government works most effectively and representatively in an environment of openly shared information and viewpoints. Vital to success is mutual understanding and trust among elected officials, citizens and government. What is unique about the new Public Participation Policy presented in this report is that it is based on the expressed viewpoints of citizens. It represents a shared vision of how to build a more connected, stronger community through public participation.

There are many benefits of a consistent, standardized and meaningful approach to public participation as follows:

§ Reduces costly project delays by responding to problems and concerns before they develop

§ Saves money and time by allowing good projects to move forward

§ Provides an early warning system for public concerns and needs – creates a forum for sharing ideas and concerns

§ Acts as a sounding board for proposed changes and develops a wider range of alternatives

§ Increases two-way communication, which builds trust and fosters relationships

§ Increases credibility for decision-makers and provides a clearer rationale for decisions

§ Allows meaningful citizen input into decision-making

§ Provides a means to better incorporate the public’s values in local government initiatives

§ Builds a stronger foundation for implementation

§ Meets the public’s expectations of an open and transparent local government

§ Facilitates understanding and fosters respect for different perspectives

§ Improves the quality of local democracy

§ Creates a credible channel through which accurate and timely information can be disseminated

§ Helps secure understanding and support for the Corporation’s goals

Benchmarking – A Review of other Public Participation Policies/Programs

Benchmarking: Former Area Municipalities

Many of the former area municipalities had formal and informal practices to solicit input from the public to support decision-making. In some specific areas, provincial legislation governed, and continues to govern, corporate direction with respect to communicating and consulting with the public. Some legislation provides for an extensive public information and consultation process, as outlined in the Planning Act, the Environmental Assessment Act, and the Municipal Act, among other legislation.

The Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton had a formal Public Consultation Policy and associated Public Consultation Staff Guide, which facilitated the public consultation process, and provided guiding principles for facilitating public input into the decision-making process, where it was determined that there was value, or where the consultation process was required. The Region also maintained a comprehensive master contact list of all associations, organizations and groups in the City, and regularly ensured notification and communication of issues to these groups, including sending committee indices to them for information, and advising of public meetings taking place.

The former City of Ottawa maintained a community association contact list, particularly for use in the development approvals process, to ensure that statutory obligations with respect to the Planning Act were met for all involved parties. The former City of Ottawa Public Participation Policy encompassed development issues, as well as other public consultation mechanisms, and included components for notification, consultation and community building. A review conducted in 1989 of the public participation policy indicated that although consultation mechanisms were in place, the municipality did not utilize public consultation in a standardized manner as part of the development of policies, programs or services provided by the City. The standardized and consistent application of the new policy will be a key goal.

The former City of Gloucester also had a formal Public Consultation Policy, similar in nature and application to that of the Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton.

Consistent among the policies in place in the former area municipalities was the fact that departments or branches in each organization produced their specialized versions of a participation policy to suit their respective client group.

Consistencies among the goals of these policies included:

• To establish a partnership/relationship with the public or communities to ensure that they are kept informed of proposed services or programs that will affect them;
• To ensure that the voice of the public is heard;
• To solicit input from the public to help the City in its decision-making process;
• Encourage two-way communication between representatives of the City and members of the public – presenting a cooperative relationship, not adversarial.

The public consultation policies of the former area municipalities also tended to outline key “rules” for participation including a clear purpose, a clearly defined target audience, and an understanding of the role of the participation activity (to brainstorm, to validate work conducted by the City, to be informed “this is what is happening”).

Many of the former policies cited the role of many levels of (municipal) government in the participation process, above and beyond the branch bearing responsibility for a project, participation activities may also involve other City staff, Advisory Committee members and elected officials.

Benchmarking: Other Canadian Municipalities

Research of other municipalities across Canada has indicated that very few cities have developed comprehensive, corporate public participation policies.

The majority of municipalities operate on an as needed basis for the engagement of citizens based on topical or controversial issue identification such as Pesticide Use, Waste Management Plans etc.

In recent years, two municipalities in Canada have dedicated time and resources to the investigation and support of an increase in public participation in municipal affairs. In the last few years, the cities of Vancouver and Calgary have undertaken comprehensive projects, much like the initiative presented in this report, to undertake extensive consultation activities with residents of their municipalities in order to develop comprehensive corporate public participation policies that lay the foundation and principles for consulting with residents on issues that affect them. Both Vancouver and Calgary have also invested resources in the development of comprehensive staff procedures and guides to ensure that public consultation activities are undertaken by staff in a consistent, standardized and truly best practice for citizen engagement. Both the City of Calgary and the City of Vancouver have also established corporate public engagement offices, to ensure a corporate centre of expertise for citizen engagement is resident within the municipality, and to provide one point of contact on consultation initiatives for the municipality.

The City of Montreal has invested considerable resources into the creation of a formal Public Consultation Office, mandated by provincial legislation, to ensure appropriate and meaningful public consultation is undertaken by the City, with a primary focus on development initiatives. Interestingly, the Montreal Public Consultation Office is an autonomous body, and operates at arms length from the municipal structure, with a goal of preserving an unbiased public consultation operation, which is not influenced by other municipal priorities.

The City of Toronto has a formal Advertising Policy, which identifies and outlines the methods by which information is disseminated to the public, however does not have a formal Public Participation policy. Some Toronto city departments, such as Public Works, have formalized procedures to be followed governing public consultation activities related to the mandate of the department.

The Public Participation Policy outlined in this report will be one of the few in existence in Canada and will put Ottawa on the map of forward thinking approaches to municipal government, particularly as this policy is based on the expressed views and input of residents and stakeholders in the City.

Benchmarking: Federal Government

The federal government has a formal Communications Policy, and formal public participation policies administered by a number of federal departments, including Environment Canada and Health Canada, tailored to their individual mandates. The policies outline specific and detailed measures to be undertaken to ensure that information on federal programs, policies and initiatives is communicated to the public, as well as to ensure that individuals and organizations are involved in the development, design and evaluation of public policies, programs, legislation and services, both through the public service channels and via their respective Members of Parliament.

Benchmarking: United States and International

Across the United States, there have been a growing number of initiatives to involve citizens in developing solutions and creating alternatives on issues that directly affect them. As an example, both the U.S. Departments of Energy and Environment have developed formal Public Consultation Policies in recent years, and many U.S. municipalities have also undertaken steps to tap into citizen’s capacity to be involved and contribute to public policy.

The municipalities of Virginia Beach, Virginia, Phoenix, Arizona and Lakewood, Colorado are examples of municipalities in the U.S. that have undertaken initiatives to create opportunities for public dialogue, and to increase accountability and understanding for local government activities.

Through 1999-2001 the City of Virginia Beach undertook a project entitled “Connections for a Lieftime: Building Community Trust and Relationships”, that involved extensive community and stakeholder consultation to develop a new vision for the City, and included priorities for both information sharing and citizen engagement.

Many U.S. cities have also taken steps to build community capacity for engagement and democracy in action by creating citizen institutes to provide residents with the tools and training for increased engagement.

Phoenix has created a Neighbourhood Association Toolkit, to guide local community associations in how to engage their stakeholders and best build capacity and reflect this input back to the City. Lakewood Colorado has developed a Citizens Planning Academy to increase the knowledge base and understanding of residents on local issues, and how to best reflect their views to decision makers, and Virginia Beach has created a local Civic Academy to build community capacity, increase the knowledge base and connect community groups to each other.

Internationally, Australia provides an example of public participation in action in many places. By an act of legislation of the national government, city councils are legally mandated to prepare and adopt practices that include public consultation on their activities. In 1999 Australia underwent a comprehensive reform process geared at developing and ensuring open and accessible local government, with the passage of the Local Government Act, which set out statutory parameters for involving and communicating with the public on issues which affect them. One of the more outstanding examples of the implementation of this legislation involved a campaign entitled “Reflecting Community Values “ which set forth the steps and the guiding principles for the implementation of the legislation. The program called for consultation with a range of stakeholders, an open, accountable and transparent decision-making process, sufficient time for consultation, freely available information, and reflection of the consultation in the final decision-making.

Other international examples cite, not necessarily “theories” of approaches to public participation, but methods that have been used in the municipal setting. As an example, a company called AmericaSpeaks collaborated with the Civic Alliance to Rebuild New York to develop a public approach to rebuilding Manhattan after the September 11 tragedy. Some of their techniques and goals were no different than those outlined in this public participation policy, but were innovative in their achievement of involving 5,000 citizens in a one-day process to develop solutions for the uses of the World Trade Centre site.

There are a myriad of other organizations dedicated to specific methods of involving citizens to create better communities and building capacity for public participation. These include groups using methods such as Citizen Juries to empower communities to make decisions about land use, education and health care in their communities. Methods such as Study Circles have been used to facilitate in depth community interaction and dialogue on comprehensive and complicated issues such as reclamation of contaminated waste sites. All of these methods have at their heart the principle that citizens should have a say in issues that affect their lives, and their voices on community issues should be used to build better places to live.

It should be noted here that public consultation is not a new initiative for the City of Ottawa, and extensive consultation has been conducted on many issues affecting residents since amalgamation, including but not limited to controversial or comprehensive issues such as the Official Plan and associated Master Plans, the No-Smoking By-law, development of pesticide use strategy and by-laws and the Transportation Master Plan. The new Public Participation Policy presented in this report attempts to take the lessons learned from these initiatives and other municipal and international experiences, combined with the expressed views of Ottawa residents and build a best practise for consistent and meaningful public participation for Ottawa.

City of Ottawa Public Participation Policy

Core Values for Public Participation

The values that provide the foundation for the Public Participation Policy have evolved from those developed by the International Association of Public Participation, based on years of research and engagement on what citizens believe about consultation. These values have been amended to reflect the input of Ottawa residents who were consulted through the development of the new policy.

The Public Participation Policy is based on the following core values for Public Participation:

1. The public will be kept informed about issues that affect them.
2. The public should have a say in decisions that affect their lives.
3. The public participation process will:

§ Include the commitment/promise that the public’s contribution can influence the decision;

§ Communicate the interests and consider the needs of participants;

§ Seek out and facilitate the involvement of those potentially affected;

§ Using appropriate feedback mechanisms, communicate to participants how their input affected the decision; and

§ Provide participants with the information necessary to participate in a meaningful way.

Six Key Principles for Public Participation

The six key principles outlined in the Public Participation Policy form the cornerstone for the policy and were expressly identified by the community through extensive consultation on the development of the policy. These principles reflect the views of Ottawa residents on what the foundation for consultation undertaken by the City should be.

The following principles are outlined in detail in the Policy, and reflect the following:

• Inclusive & Authentic – To the greatest extent possible, the City will involve all stakeholders who are potentially affected by an issue in a transparent and equitable way.
• Sharing & Supportive – Involvement of stakeholders in the decision-making process where their input can impact the decision.
• Accountable & Committed – Setting clear objectives and expectations for a public participation initiative and actively listening to the input of citizens, community organizations and Advisory Committees.
• Meaningful & Responsive – Ensuring consultation is meaningful and valid, with clear objectives and expectations with respect to the ability of the public to impact the decision. Ensuring consultation is conducted in a timely manner that is appropriate to the issue and level of public involvement. Ensuring that participants receive appropriate feedback on the impact of their input is key to making public participation meaningful.
• Continuously Improving – Continuously evaluating and measuring the success of the Public Participation Policy and public participation initiatives conducted by the City will form a fundamental part of ensuring public participation is effective and relevant. An annual review of the policy will be undertaken, and evaluation mechanisms for each consultation initiative will be used.

• Facilitating & Building Capacity for a Collaborative Community – Strengthening links between the City and the community on public participation initiatives and building capacity in the community for citizen engagement on issues that affect them through a corporate Public Participation Community of Practice.

Public Participation Spectrum

The Public Participation Spectrum outlined in detail in the attached policy was developed by the International Association of Public Participation and was used throughout the consultation process for the development of the policy. The community input on the spectrum was that it is a useful tool for both the City and citizens in understanding the impact their input can have on a decision, and what the intention of the particular consultation activity will be. The use of the Public Participation Spectrum was wholeheartedly endorsed by consultation participants.

The Spectrum outlines goals, objectives and promises to the public, and makes the expectations and commitment of each public participation process clear to participants and decision makers. It clearly outlines the potential impact on the decision from which the public’s involvement will result.

Application of the Public Participation Policy

The policy applies to all sectors of the Corporation, and for issues within the municipal jurisdiction, and is to be followed in all public participation processes, whether the process is targeted to the general public, specific community organizations, voluntary or private sector stakeholders. The policy will impact all activities undertaken by the City to inform, consult, involve, collaborate and empower residents on issues that affect them. The policy will complement, and be used as a guide for those consultation activities mandated by statutory requirement.

The corporate Public Participation Community of Practice will provide support and advice to staff and the public to help build capacity within the corporation and the community for the implementation of the Public Participation Policy and principles. More information on the Public Participation Community of Practice is provided below.

Citizens will also be encouraged to be informed and knowledgeable of the principles of the Public Participation Policy, Core Values for Public Participation and to understand the Public Participation Spectrum as it relates to the objectives and promises relevant to the public participation process in which they are participating.

Public Participation Community of Practice

In order to implement the Public Participation Policy throughout the Corporation in a standardized, consistent and cost effective manner, a Public Participation Community of Practice will be created. Limited staff resources and budget necessitate that a central group dedicated to public consultation activities and best practices would be difficult to create and maintain, therefore a community or practice to share best practices and lessons learned and build capacity in the corporation for citizen engagement will be created with representatives from all City departments.

A Community of Practice complements existing structures by promoting collaboration, information exchange and sharing of best practices across boundaries of time, distance and organizational hierarchies. Communities of Practice are an investment in an organizations future, and a place where best practices and innovation first emerge and where solutions to shared problems can be identified. They can form the basis for the development of an entire organization based on knowledge and innovation.

By working as a cross-departmental team, the Public Participation Community of Practice will ensure that the Public Participation Policy will be rolled out and implemented by the corporation in a similar manner, based on best practices.

The Public Participation Community of Practice will be responsible for the following:

• Development of a Public Participation guide/toolkit for all staff in the Corporation, in order to provide standardized and consistent tools for citizen engagement based on innovative solutions and best practices.
• Training for their respective departments on the Public Participation guide/toolkit and the policy.
• Continual re-evaluation and improvement of the Public Participation Policy and the guide/toolkit.
• Sharing lessons learned and experiences with other members.
• Serving as a centre of expertise within their branches/departments for fellow staff members on public participation.
• Acting as a link to the community on public participation practices.
• Providing a link between the City and other organizations and agencies focused on best practices for citizen engagement, to further develop and broaden the city’s role for best practices for citizen engagement.

The Community of Practice will be led by the Corporate Services Department, with representatives from the other five City departments, appointed by the respective General Managers.

Canadian Municipal Caucus for Public Participation

In May 2003, the International Association of Public Participation Annual Conference was held in Ottawa, with representatives from around the world. At the conference, participants from the cities of Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary, Halifax and Edmonton were in attendance. Like the City of Ottawa, all of these municipalities have taken great strides in recent years, and continue to develop effective and meaningful citizen engagement strategies and practices. An informal agreement was reached between representatives of each of these municipalities to develop and maintain a network and regular means of contact and information sharing to ensure best practices for public participation grows in each of these areas. As new methods, policies, programs and initiatives are developed in each of these municipalities, they will be shared with the others, in an effort to continuously build capacity for citizen engagement.

Roundtable for Citizen Engagement

Commencing in November 2002, and culminating in June 2003, the City of Ottawa entered into a partnership with representatives of the Ottawa Facilitation Community, in an effort to build and expand community capacity for public participation and citizen engagement. The project was initiated by the Ottawa Facilitation community, as a means of giving back to the community. An outreach project was launched that would culminate in a “lessons learned” workshop which was successfully presented at the International Association of Facilitators Conference held in Ottawa in June 2003. The outreach project and the development of the Public Participation Policy had compatible goals, and aimed to increase community capacity for participation. Twenty-five members of the Ottawa facilitation community volunteered their time and expertise as facilitators and trainers, and the City identified projects, provided in-kind and staff resources and used the lessons learned to provide input into the Public Participation Policy.

The resulting workshop at the International Association of Facilitators Conference in June 2003 was entitled “Engaging Citizens in Public Issue Dialogue… Facilitating Participation Among the Many”. Participants included International Association of Facilitators conference delegates, participants in the Outreach project including Advisory Committee members, and representatives of Ottawa community organizations, associations, business sector and education and health fields.

The workshop reviewed lessons learned by participants of the outreach project (primarily City of Ottawa Advisory Committees) and included the following:

• Build capacity – provide participants with tools to increase effectiveness and ability to engage the public
• Increase clarity on participant roles in the citizen engagement process and the direction they want as a group
• Assist members to accomplish tasks and engage the community on specific projects
• Create a synergy and enthusiasm
• Great learning exchange between facilitators
• Opportunity to give back to the community

A review of the lessons learned from participants created a focus for the June workshop, where participants were asked to provide input into a new vision for citizen engagement that could potentially bring together all sectors of the community (business, education, health, non-governmental organizations, community organizations, government organizations and agencies etc) to build on the outreach project momentum and encourage and advance Ottawa’s capacity for citizen engagement.

Many of the suggestions from workshop participants focused on the theme of building community capacity for engagement:

• Assist businesses and business leaders understand their contribution to the community and the impact that they have and build capacity with possible partnerships
• Facilitate dialogue between different levels of government to increase their effectiveness
• Encourage facilitation between Advisory Committees and City Council

• Increase the effectiveness of public meetings
• Community Centres
• Inter Faith Communities
• Building ties and strengthening links and collaboration between associations including community, interest groups, recreation

Resources/assets were identified that could be used in helping to build community capacity for engagement:

• Business - executives, Chamber of Commerce, business leaders, media, facilitators
• Community - teachers, religious leaders, volunteers, seniors, community associations, athletes, charitable associations
• Government - elected officials, advisory committees, law officials and staff

The consensus at the workshop was that next steps to be taken would include the creation of a Steering Committee, or Roundtable for Citizen Engagement, with representatives from all sectors of society in Ottawa to further expand and encourage capacity for citizen engagement. This Roundtable would set a course for a vision of citizen engagement, and potentially result in an annual future search conference to bring all sectors together to create a public dialogue on democracy and citizen engagement.

A working vision for the initial establishment of the Roundtable will be built on the following foundation:

Ottawa is a model for Democracy in Action having built capacity among and between all citizens. Ottawa advocates for and enhances democracy by engaging all civic partners in an open dialogue with an equal voice. Ottawa is committed to regular community planning events aimed at enhancing the scope and quality of engagement of all citizens.

It is suggested that the Roundtable for Citizen Engagement could be initially created in the late fall of 2003, with all sectors working towards a common goal of a future search conference or community planning event to be held in the fall of 2004. It is likely that the vision and the goal of the Roundtable will evolve as all sectors of the community provide input and work to build this future vision.

The City of Ottawa’s involvement in the development of the Roundtable for Citizen Engagement would include staff and elected representative time, liaison with various community groups, organizations and different sectors and interests in the community, and contribution of in-kind resources such as meeting space.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

As noted, throughout the report, extensive public consultation has taken place over the development of the Public Participation Policy, to ensure that the Policy is based on the input and viewpoints expressed by residents of Ottawa. A review of each individual consultation, and a summary of the input and themes identified at that consultation are noted below. Detailed reports on each consultation activity have been distributed to members of Council, the inter-departmental City staff public participation policy development team, and all participants in a consultation. These reports are also on file with the City Clerk.

Public Consultation:

Pre-consultation sampling and phone and email survey – February 2003

A pre-consultation phone and email survey was conducted in February 2003. The purpose of the preliminary survey was to determine consultation preferences in advance of the main consultations. A random sample of 303 contacts from the City of Ottawa master contact list of community organizations and associations were contacted and asked the following questions:

• When the City is considering consultation, what is the best way to notify you?
• Once you have been notified that a consultation is taking place, what is the best way for you to exchange information or provide input to/with the City?’
• Would you like to be included in the upcoming public consultations relating to the public participation policy development?

The pre-consultation survey determined several clear consultation preferences for community organizations and associations, as noted below. The answers to these questions were tested further in each additional consultation conducted for policy development.

Initiate Contact*	Exchange Information*	Participate in current consultation
80% by e-mail 16% by telephone 24% by letter 2% by newspaper 2% by fax	57% by internet 45% by focus group/workshop 7% by telephone 7% by mail 4% by fax	88% yes 12% no

*Percentage totals more than 100, as several respondents provided more than one method

As the participants were selected via the master contact list, it should be noted that responses reflect the preferences indicated by a community organization or association, rather than an individual preference.

Public Consultation:

Community Focus Groups (April 2003) and Online Internet discussion (April to June 2003)

Four Focus Groups were conducted in various locations in the City – Ottawa Centre, Orléans, Nepean and Manotick. Three hundred community representatives, including both community organizations and associations, Advisory Committee members and the general public were invited to attend a focus group, and provided with a choice of four different times and locations, in order to maximize involvement.

An online Internet discussion was launched in April and invitations to respond were initially sent to approximately 5,000 individuals. As well, the link to the online Internet discussion was distributed at each subsequent consultation, and the questions were also provided in hard copy and distributed at community forums and other consultations for those without access to the Internet.

The online discussion tool was developed by the Institute of Cultural Affairs (ICA) Canada and is a tool used as part of their repertoire of “Technology of Participation” products and services.

The same general questions (with some modification depending on face to face or online discussion) were used for the focus groups and the online discussion.

Questions were broken down into three categories as outlined below.

Demographic:

Are you participating as a community group representative?

In what part of the City do you reside?

What is your age?

Experiential:

What have you liked most in previous consultations?

What have you liked least in previous consultations?

Rational:

For which types of issues or City services do you wish to be consulted?

To what extent do you wish to be consulted?

How would you like to be involved in consultations?

When, during the decision-making process, would you like to be consulted?

What type of information should the City provide as feedback?

How should this information be provided?

How can the City strengthen its links to community groups?

Results are noted below and are broken down by the same categories as the questions were asked. The results include both the focus group and the online discussion answers. The detailed report on each consultation should be referred to for “what was said” and specific comments made by participants. The results noted below reflect the general consultation themes and important issues identified by participants.

Demographic Questions – Resulting Consultation Themes:

• The majority of participants in both the online discussion and the focus groups (approximately 65%) represented community organizations or associations, Advisory Committees or other community based advocacy groups or agencies.

• 15% of participants were from the East end of the City, 29% were from the West end of the City, 15% were from the South end of the City, 29% were from Central Ottawa and 12% of participants were from a rural area.
• Participants in the Focus Groups were generally in their mid to late forties. The on-line survey provided specific results for this question –

<20 = 3%

20-29 = 4%

30-39 = 15%

40-49 = 26%

50-59 = 30%

60-69 = 19%

> 70 = 4%

Experiential Questions – Resulting Consultation Themes:

What have you liked most in previous consultations?

• Participants characterized satisfying consultations as those which involved their Councillor in a meaningful way
• They were involved at a very early stage in the decision-making process and believed they had an opportunity to have an impact on the eventual decision
• They considered consultations that included their Councillor, started at an early stage in the process and where the ultimate decision was not a foregone conclusion as “genuine”
• Well organized, with an appropriate amount of information (i.e. not overwhelming but with enough detail to understand all dimensions of the issue) provided ahead of time
• Enough lead time to research, reflect and gather opinions about the issue
• Received feedback afterwards and were satisfied that their opinions were considered (even if they were not incorporated into the ultimate decision)

What have you liked least in previous consultations?

• Councillors and staff seemed uninterested (going through the motions) or were not prepared to listen or to discuss new information or other approaches
• Decision was evident from the outset
• Not provided with enough background information or time to prepare
• When it was a “take it or leave it” proposition
• Didn’t know if their input was ever considered
• Expectations and limitations of consultation were not made clear from the outset
• Diversity in participants and/or techniques used to gather input were not used (i.e. same participants every time, same type of public meeting)
• Not aware of consultations taking place or important issues did not include consultation at all
• Not involved early in the process – given five minutes to comment on recommendations – too late to make a difference
• A follow-up report on the outcome of the consultation and the final decision should be provided

Rational Questions – Resulting Consultation Themes:

For which types of issues or City services do you wish to be consulted?

§ A wide variety of specific issues and services were identified by participants in response to this question. Predominate issues included development, budget, health, environmental, transit, youth and recreation. An overriding consultation theme for this question related to the desire to be consulted where the issue affects the individual directly, their family, community or quality of life.

§ To some extent, participants noted that they would be more inclined to provide input if the process were easier to access (babysitting services, close to home, during “down times”, if they could provide input electronically).

§ Participation would increase if they could receive advanced information in a concise and timely way.

§ If the process was meaningful and the decision was not already made they would be involved in many issues that affect them.

To what extent do you wish to be consulted? How would you like to be involved?

From both the online discussion and the focus groups, it can be said that most participants wished to be involved in the following ways, broken down by level of the Public Participation Spectrum. (Note: The Public Participation Spectrum forms part of the Public Participation Policy attached to the report).

Inform

-City pages of newspaper or community newspapers

-Email

-City website

-Online newsletters

-City services directory

Consult

-By mail and/or email to get information and provide responses

-Special meetings i.e. Town Hall meetings with the Councillor present – regular community meetings to discuss emerging issues

-Councillor or staff attending regular community group meetings

-Starting frame of reference when decisions have not yet been taken

Involve

-By mail and/or email to get information and provide responses

-Small group discussions, such as focus groups or workshops

-Using existing networks and groups to link to the community and get their input on an issue

Collaborate

-Required when there is a direct or local impact

-Would require administrative and logistical support from the City of Ottawa

-Task Force, working group or Advisory Committee

-Have a community representative sitting on a City (internal) working group

-Partner with local community organizations or business to resolve issues

Empower

-Community groups making decisions about how/when to use their community resources

-Would have to provide adequate resources

-City has to be willing to accept decisions

-Ballots on controversial issues

• An additional question was asked in the on-line discussion concerning alternative means of involving citizens in consultations. It was determined that the use of on-line survey tools and on-line discussions such as that used for the Public Participation Policy were effective means of providing input into important issues in an alternate way than face to face.

When, during the decision-making process, would you like to be consulted?

• A summary of consistent messages included that participants wanted to be involved as early in the decision-making process as possible, in particular when the issue is identified.
• Involvement from the point of issue identification through the development of options or alternatives is seen as the most meaningful phase of involvement.
• Involvement through an established structure such as Advisory Committee, community organization or association or working group could be effective.
• Involvement of local Councillors early in the decision-making process is seen as important.
• The nature of decisions that don’t and won’t require consultation and those that are delegated to staff or the community should be clear, and then a structure should be provided to facilitate this happening.

What type of information should the City provide as feedback? How should this information be provided?

• A summary of consultations and a report on the final decision should be provided by email or mail to participants

How can the City strengthen its links to community groups?

• Councillors need to be proactive and interested.
• There needs to be better dialogue between staff and the public, and better access to staff.
• The City should provide assistance and guidelines for establishing community associations.
• There should be regular means of consultation, community meetings.
• Create a community connector group at the City of Ottawa.
• Provide the master contact list to community organizations so they can network.
• Have an annual event to bring together community leaders to discuss key issues, priorities.
• Help community organizations build capacity for engaging their constituents, and building leadership skills so they can help the City consult.

Public Consultation:

Random Telephone Survey – April/May 2003

Earnscliffe was retained by the City of Ottawa to conduct an extensive survey (over 50 questions) on point of service and public participation from April 25-May 10, 2003. Five hundred and fifty Ottawa residents were contacted, selected randomly and representative of the population as a whole. The margin of error was +/- 4.1%. Detailed results and exact percentages per response are outlined in the detailed report, although a brief summary is provided below.

It should be noted that the results of the existing consultation activities undertaken by the City are generally favorable, however work needs to be done to resolve and improve the public participation process where findings are over 15% of respondents replying negatively to a question. The negative responses are generally indicative of a more significant problem with consultation activities in the rural and east ends of the City, which may be attributed to feelings related to amalgamation. The remainder of the findings indicating a need for improvement relate consistently to the results of other consultation initiatives for policy development including a dissatisfaction related to timing, feedback, inclusiveness and a perception that the input provided was not meaningful (did not make a difference).

Awareness/Frequency of Participation

§ One half say they have heard about consultation sessions organized by the City of Ottawa. Almost all heard about them through the media.

§ About 1 in 5 say they have participated in some form of consultation over the past five years.

§ About 15% say they have participated in the last year.

The Experience

§ Most say their experience participating was a positive one.

§ One in five say their experience was negative.

§ Higher negative rates among East and rural residents.

§ Reasons why people indicated their experience was positive: They felt their voice was heard; they felt the process was inclusive; they felt the process was constructive; they felt the process was productive.

§ Reasons why some say their experience was negative – Their input was not reflected in the final results; the format was not inclusive and gave unequal weight to certain groups or was one-sided; the format was too focused on presentations, not enough on participation.

§ Overall, two-thirds say they are more likely participate in the future based on their experience.

§ In the East and rural areas, the majority say their experience makes them less likely to participate in the future.

§ Major reasons for lack of participation relates to lack of time or interest – i.e. don’t have time, the issues aren’t relevant.

§ Secondary issues for not participating include role of interest groups in the process, don’t hear about them until the last minute, time is not convenient etc.

§ There is a hierarchy of subject matter that generated more and less interest in consultation – at the top of the list tended to be practical, near-term matters such as planning, recreation, and parks. At the bottom of the list were budget issues.

§ Weekday evenings are the preferred time to participate

Public Consultation:

Internal Focus Group – May 2003

When the Public Participation Policy project was initiated, a team of approximately 30 representatives from City departments were identified to provide input through the course of the project. The Inter-departmental Public Participation Policy team met every two weeks to review the results of consultations, consultation themes that were emerging, and provide input into policy development, implementation and application.

As team representatives were staff who conduct public participation activities and consultation initiatives as part of their regular duties, a Focus Group was conducted in May 2003, asking participants many of the same questions asked of members of the public in community focus groups.

At this focus group it became clear that City staff have a wealth of experience with different techniques, practises and methods for engaging the public, and are demonstrably interested in and committed to accessing the public’s viewpoint.

Resulting Consultation Themes from the questions are outlined below.

In previous consultations, what has worked best?

• Using a variety of methods to allow all to participate
• Clarifying from the beginning of the consultation what the limitations and expectations are for participants
• Small face to face meetings with one on one interaction – open houses, focus groups, workshops – where the public can ask questions and get answers
• Email and feedback forms

In previous consultations, what has not worked – identify improvements.

• Expectations need to be identified in an open and transparent way
• All participants need to understand their roles
• Choose an approach tailored to the audience – use different techniques and respect diversity etc (language, disability, location)
• Make sure staff and meeting attendees are open minded and unbiased
• Staff need to be informed and connected before consulting

At what stage in the decision-making process have you chosen to conduct public consultation?

• Objectives and expectations need to be clear before consultation is conducted – what are the limitations of decision-making, where will input make an impact
• Roles need to be clarified before consultation is undertaken – example, what is the role of community associations, Advisory Committees
• Need continuous input – after implementation as well to identify improvements
• There are two different types of consultation – policy and services

What type of feedback was given to the public after consultation and how was it provided?

• Generally it was agreed that the type of feedback would differ depending on the type of consultation but that the public should always be informed how they would receive feedback at the same time they are consulted
• It is difficult to provide detailed comments or reports for lengthy consultations; summaries often work better
• Feedback has been provided through a variety of means – email, mail, public displays, e-subscription etc

What type of comments have you received about consultations you have conducted?

• Give participants the opportunity to respond in alternate ways if they can’t attend the meeting
• Provide more time and more information in advance
• Too many consultations are taking place

How have you involved existing networks/organizations in informing, involving and consulting on your projects?

• Depending on the project, staff are generally making use of many types of existing networks including community associations and organizations, BIAs, schools, special interest groups, established networks for communities of interest and umbrella organizations
• It was noted that it also important not to rely exclusively on these networks as the views of the general public may be different

If you could change the existing process, how would you change it?

• There should be monitoring and evaluation of public participation activities to make them consistent and clarify expectations for staff and the public
• Consultations can be too narrow in scope – need to focus on wider issues
• There need to be more strategies and methods for involving the public – the “cookie cutter” approach does not work
• Need more tools for reaching and identifying stakeholders
• There need to be adequate resources for public consultation activities – advertising, translation, facilities
• There needs to be standardized and consistent guidelines for timing, feedback etc so staff and the public know what to expect

Public Consultation:

Advisory Committee Workshop – April 2003

A workshop was conducted with representatives of Advisory Committees on Saturday April 26, 2003 with two objectives: to clarify the role of Advisory Committees, and to provide input into their role in the public participation process. The workshop was created as a result of concerns raised by Advisory Committee members that their role and function in the governance structure, and their relationship to the general public is not always clear. Committee members were invited to attend the one-day session to develop a vision statement to take back to their committees, and to provide input on their place in the public participation process. Twenty-six representatives from twelve of the City’s Advisory Committees attended the workshop.

A detailed report of “what was said” was produced from the workshop, distributed to all participants, and to all Committees with a follow-up invitation that if they would like to work further at a future meeting on clarifying roles or providing input, that staff of the Policy and Projects Office in Secretariat Services would attend a meeting to work with individual committees. The detailed report of what was said is also on file with the City Clerk.

General consultation themes are noted below. It should be noted that the themes represent the input of participant representatives from Advisory Committees at the workshop, but do not necessarily represent a consensus view of the Advisory Committees as a whole.

§ Advisory Committee members identified the need to clearly outline their place and role within the governance structure, relationship to staff and members of Council, and the community. Concern was expressed that their recommendations are not always implemented or acted upon, and that they do not have sufficient resources to implement approved activities.

§ They identified the need to be more proactive in reaching their respective communities of interest and bringing that information back to the Committee.

§ There was a consensus that Advisory Committees can provide valuable input and insight if they are consulted early in the decision-making process. They need to be consulted as part of a standardized process.

§ Committee members need to understand their roles, appropriate codes of conduct, and be committed to the work of the committee.

§ Networking and liaison between the Advisory Committees, and with the community was seen as a priority.

§ Committees need to receive feedback from staff and City Council on how their input was implemented.

§ Committee members should be linked in at a local level – ward Council meetings etc.

It should be noted that Advisory Committee members were invited to provide input for every consultation conducted over the course of the policy development, with the exception of the internal staff focus group. Either individually or as a whole Committee members were asked for their input or invited to attend focus groups, online discussion, the workshop, community forums, complete feedback forms, and a specific session established for Advisory Committee review of the draft principles for the Public Participation Policy. In all, from April to late June, Advisory Committee members were provided with numerous occasions to provide input, as well as many varied means of providing this feedback.

Public Consultation:

International Association of Public Participation Conference Workshop – May 2003

The International Association of Public Participation held its annual conference in Ottawa the third week of May 2003. At this conference, the City of Ottawa hosted a workshop with conference delegates with a goal of engaging expert public participation practitioners from around the world on the themes and direction the City’s public participation policy was taking. City staff and members of Council were also invited to attend the workshop. A detailed report and the results of “what was said” were provided to participants and members of Council and is on file with the City Clerk.

Participants were provided with an overview of the Public Participation Policy development project, and the results and consultation themes that had emerged to date.

Participants were then asked to provide their insight and experience on the following four issues:

§ What kind of model should be used to determine when consultation should be conducted?

§ How do you show that public input has been valued in the process/decision; and how do you demonstrate that public participation has influenced the process/decision making?

§ What are some tried and true examples you have used to strengthen links between your organization and the community?

§ How do you define public participation success and what are tools you use to evaluate it?

Consultation themes are noted below.

What kind of model should be used to determine when consultation should be conducted?

§ Meaningful indicators should be developed to determine when consultation takes place – what is impacted (i.e. quality of life) and how do you determine what is a risk to this.

§ Develop specific tools that are not subjective, such as a checklist of impacts.

§ Focus on how to consult rather than on when.

How do you show that public input has been valued in the process/decision; and how do you demonstrate that public participation has influenced the process/decision-making?

§ Carefully construct public participation programs to clearly state the intention and expectation of the consultation, next steps and mechanisms for follow-up.

§ When compiling the consultation input, ensure the information recorded is accurate, that is focuses on what was said and emerging themes, and that it is accessible to participants and decision-makers.

§ Recognize input received in a timely and authentic manner.

§ Public input can be reflected in a number of formats, but should include the following elements: impact of input and why it was or was not incorporated and this information should be accessible to the public.

What are some tried and true examples you have used to strengthen links between your organization and the community?

§ Design public participation programs that are fun, accessible, appropriate to the audience and in partnership with other agencies and stakeholders.

§ Use tools and consultation programs to engage the public, which are accessible, respectful and reach out to marginalized or disaffected communities.

§ Ensure that incentives and feedback mechanisms are incorporated into the public participation program.

§ In order for public consultation to be meaningful, trust needs to be built with the community and be viewed as a continuous dialogue between multiple parties as opposed to a series of isolated programs. This dialogue must be anchored in core values such as authenticity, accessibility, openness, respect and feedback.

How do you define public participation success and what are tools you use to evaluate it?

§ Success was identified as the following:

§ Clear understanding by the public of their role;

§ The process was inclusive, fair and timely;

§ It encouraged a diversity of views and input;

§ Participants felt the process was meaningful;

§ Decision makers were engaged.

§ Some suggested tools included:

§ Surveys;

§ Informal consultation methods (town halls, community meetings etc);

§ Formal follow-up (focus groups, interviews etc.).

§ Success was difficult to define and must be done using a whole set of criteria. Tools to measure this success should be used throughout the scope of a project and after each consultation activity.

Public Consultation:

Community Forums – May to June 2003

Three community forums were held in the City in late May/early June in three locations – Orléans, Kanata and Ottawa Centre. Advertisements were placed on the City website, all community newspapers and distributed to all Advisory Committees, members of Council and through the master contact list. Attendees were provided with information and consultation themes received from the public to date, and via feedback forms asked to provide additional input and views on the input received. Keypad polling technology was also used at each location to provide attendees with the opportunity to “vote” on questions where further clarification on public participation policy development was required. The online discussion was made available in hard copy as well as the link was provided to attendees to provide input online. Detailed results of the three community forums were distributed to all participants and members of Council and are on file with the City Clerk. A summary of consultation themes for the display boards/feedback forms and the keypad polling exercises are noted below. The results of answers for the on-line discussion were combined with other answers in the consultation section above.

What Makes a Consultation Successful?

• Questions or proposals that are put forward are the ones that let those being consulted provide meaningful input, i.e. don’t ask “what we should name the snow dump when the real issue is “should there be a snow dump”
• Provide information in alternate formats and in plain English to facilitate access for people with disabilities and language barriers
• Ensure sufficient background information is provided
• When there is adequate time to make a decision
• Allow business groups to be part of the process

§ Follow up conducted

§ People are informed through a variety of means

When Do I Get Involved and Why?

• If when I participate the consultation tool is well designed (i.e. the questionnaire is clear and asks the right questions or the open forum does not start with 1 hour of speeches)
• Assuming I have heard about the process/event in time

§ Have a phone number answered by people (not a machine) where I can discuss ward or advertised issues of concern to citizens and from there, the contact information given to politician or relevant City bureaucrat who should respond within 48 hrs.

§ I need to feel that my points have been considered, heard and where appropriate, were acted upon.

§ I don’t think the ‘direct impact on me’ is an important reason to get involved. I see the whole country, our society and our community as a whole, and I believe that contributing and getting involved in the process of making a correct decision, wherever it might be in the country is equally important for all the citizens. On the other hand, due to limited time and resources, the priority is with the projects of higher importance, and to ones that I feel I can have a clear understanding in order to make a correct decision.

Core Values of Public Participation

• They help the public determine and articulate their views
• It helps guide the public to focus on the aspects of decisions that are most critical to them

§ As long as time frames allow enough time between steps for some thought and research by the general public. Also to allow more people to participate.

Levels of Participation

• I do not like charts like this, too much information all at once

§ In the old days, City Hall was a closed shop. In recent times, Ottawa has made it possible to have meaningful input into decisions

• More collaboration and empowerment would make for a more vibrant citizenry

§ Recognizing that you need to work along the spectrum i.e. if it is a relatively new and complex issue, then need to start with informing prior to moving along spectrum

How Do I Know What the Impact of My Input Was?

• If only a summary is provided, provide information on how I can obtain more information
• If a report or decision does not seem to reflect a person’s input; that person should have recourse i.e. What possibility is there for a decision to be reconsidered is there an appeal process, is this a draft report that is being revised, etc.

§ Reports (mail or email)

• Follow up meetings/Councillor’s meetings
• Institute a report card or survey to get feedback from the community on how people feel they are being listened to.

How Can the City Strengthen Links with Community?

• Reach out to all groups, which traditionally don’t have opportunities to be involved due to lack of access – language barrier, language interpreters, TTY access, limited literacy skills
• Provide targeted sessions for specific groups, i.e. deaf community
• Have a calendar on the web site with all of the scheduled sessions, not one calendar per project – this will help to see when/if overloading community partners
• Use emails to tell the public about meetings or have an email subscription service with notices
• Develop new ways to recruit the average citizen in public participation

§ Ensure that not only average citizens participate but also representatives of appropriate community groups

• Tying in better with existing networks
• Don’t give up if some participation activities go badly. It will take time to overcome distrust in some areas of the City. People need to see that the City can adapt and try again and that public participation is a serious business and will be taken seriously.
• Tap into Advisory Committees

Public Consultation:

Key Pad Polling Results

In the past 5 years, how many times have you participated in a public session or consultation process organized by the City?

0 (none)	22%
1 time	11%
2 - 3 times	22%
3 - 5 times	6%
5 or other times	39%
Other	0%

If you have participated, how would you describe your experience?

Very positive	7%
Positive	64%
Negative	21%
Very negative	7%
I don't know	0%

Did you feel your position was heard in the process?

Yes	64%
No	21%
I don't know	15%

Did you feel your input was reflected in the results?

Yes	30%
No	53%
I don't know	15%

What is your preferred method of notification for upcoming public participation consultations?

Daily newspapers	0%
Community newspapers	6%
City of Ottawa's website	0%
An email sent to you	50%
Mail	17%
Newsletter	6%
Media - TV or Radio Ads	17%
Through your community organisation	6%
Other	0%

What is your preferred method of public consultation in: Inform

(Note: the next series of questions make use of the Public Participation Spectrum that forms part of the Public Participation Policy).

City of Ottawa's website	6%
Daily newspapers	6%
Community newspapers	12%
Mail out	41%
Flyers	0%
E-mail	35%
Existing City publications (recreational guides, recycling calendar)	0%
Other	0%

What is your preferred method of public consultation in: Consult

Focus groups	11%
Mailed surveys or questionnaires	6%
Public meetings	11%
Open houses	28%
Workshops	6%
Advisory Committees	11%
Through community associations	6%
Through my City Councillor	11%
Other	11%

What is your preferred method of public consultation in: Involve

Focus Groups	18%
Town Hall meetings	35%
On-line dialogue	0%
Internet surveys & polls	0%
Mailed survey & polls	6%
Focused conversations	12%
Committees	24%
Other	6%

What is your preferred method of public consultation in: Collaborate

Advisory committees	6%
Task forces	19%
Community working groups	69%
Annual conferences	6%
Other	0%

What is your preferred method of public consultation in: Empower

Advisory committees	25%
Ballots	31%
Delegated decisions to Community groups	25%
Other	19%

Where in the decision making model would you like to be involved?

Identify issue / need	9%
Develop approach to analysis (work plan)	0%
Preliminary consultation	18%
Information collection	0%
Benchmarking / reference points	0%
Public consultation	9%
Research and analysis	27%
Advisory committee	9%
Public comment i.e. at Standing Committees	9%
Implementation or rejection	20%

Public Consultation:

Focus Group with Poverty Issues Advisory Committee and low income/marginalized community representatives – June 2003

A focus group was held with members of the Poverty Issues Advisory Committee and members of the public contacted through social services, social housing and community resource networks. Invitees were asked to provide their opinions on the development of the public participation policy; in a consultation measure specifically taken to ensure that every effort had been taken to reach traditionally marginalized or underrepresented groups in Ottawa.

Many different social service agencies as well as members of the public attended the focus group. Central, West, South and East ends of the City were well represented, and there was one participant from a rural area.

The detailed report of “what was said” was provided to participants and members of Council, and is on file with the City Clerk.

Consultation themes are identified below.

In previous consultations you have been involved in, what did you like best?

§ Staff were approachable and helpful and took time to answer questions

§ Uncensored participation, genuine dialogue

§ Small group sessions with information sharing

What can be improved?

§ Lack of interest and disrespect at Standing Committee meetings

§ Reach a wider audience

§ Use alternate means of involvement – e-tools

§ Timely distribution of information in advance

§ Advisory Committees need to share information and work together

§ Early involvement in the issues

§ Provide feedback, what was said and what the decision was

Relating to the Public Participation Spectrum provide how you would like to be involved at each level.

Inform

-Community newspapers (articles, ads) and they are free to the public

-Community calendar on Internet or television

-Word of mouth, communication networks

-Use plain language and be respectful of your audience

-Develop a City education program – what the City does, why your input makes a difference

-Make information accessible (disabled, youth, different languages)

Consult

-By mail with a postage paid envelope

-On the radio

-Use community facilities where people gather – community resource centers, libraries etc

-Email

-Consultations should be combined

-Newsletters with feedback

Involve

-Provide information on the impact of being involved so people know they can make a difference, what the effect is

-Feedback forms

-Email

-Attend community organization meetings

-Educate and inform people on issues first and then involve

Collaborate

-Use agencies, shelter, groups that already exist and attend their meetings and develop partnerships

-Needs to be a sense of trust to work together

-Be careful not to consult with the same people every time

-Phone calls or over the phone interviews

-Provide feedback on “what was said”

-Provide incentives to participate

Empower

-Work with groups e.g. voting at Shepherds of Good Hope

-Referendums on important issues

-On-line voting

-Have decision makers present

-People’s Parliament

-Change mindset that decisions are made at City Hall – i.e. Porto Allegre – put the decisions in the hands of those affected

-Vermont Town Hall – entire community involved, community decides on issues

Public Consultation:

Advisory Committee review of Public Participation Project and Principles – June 2003

Two separate sessions were held on June 16, 2003 to ensure that members of Advisory Committee members were able to provide input on the draft principles developed as a result of the other consultations. Attendees at the meetings had suggestions relating specifically to effective implementation and application, as well as concerns about their role in the consultation process. As noted above, Advisory Committee members, either individually or Committees as a whole, were invited to participate in all of the other planned consultations, with the exception of the Internal City staff focus group and the International Association of Public Participation Conference workshop.

Public Consultation:

Other Comments Received

A number of other comments were received by members of the public, either via email, phone or mail. These opinions were valuable, and often brought a different perspective to the consultation themes developing.

Public Consultation:

Distribution of draft Public Participation Policy

As a consistent theme through all of the consultations in developing the policy was one of feedback, the draft Public Participation Policy was distributed during the month of August to members of Council and participants who took part in consultations over the course of the project, so they were kept informed and could identify where their input had made a difference. In addition, after each consultation was conducted, all participants were provided with a summary of “what was said” and were asked to provide revisions if their comments were not accurately reflected.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Due to the existing constrained financial situation at the City, and limited staff and budgetary resources, no additional funds have been requested for the implementation and application of the Public Participation Policy, corporate Public Participation Community of Practice and the Roundtable for Citizen Engagement.

Development of the Public Participation Toolkit to provide standardized and consistent application of the policy across the corporation is estimated to cost $25,000 for production and printing and will be absorbed within existing budgets. Since the Public Participation Community of Practice will be responsible for staff training on the Public Participation Policy and related toolkit, no incremental training expenditures are anticipated.

The implementation of a Public Participation Policy implies further expenditures that have not been specifically enumerated in this report to inform and communicate with the public on various issues. The communication process likely will entail costs such as the following:

1) Advertising;

2) Document production & postage for mailings;

3) Website maintenance;

4) Meetings costs – room rentals, rental, set-up and operation of audio-visual equipment, and hospitality;

5) Production of information in formats suitable for the disabled and in other languages; and

6) Staging of annual Community Planning Event/Conference.

To the extent that public participation in the City’s decision-making process is already actively solicited, costs related to public participation may be incorporated in existing City budgets and do not constitute incremental costs to the City. If related costs are incremental to the existing budget, the implementation of the policy may result in budget pressures.

The City of Ottawa’s involvement in the creation of the Roundtable for Citizen Engagement is not expected to require out-of-pocket expenditures.

An annual review of the implications of the policy implementation and associated initiatives should be undertaken to determine impacts in future years.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Document 1 - Public Participation Policy

Reports on each of the consultations undertaken in the development of the Public Participation Policy have been distributed separately to citizen participants in policy development, members of Council and applicable City staff. The copies are also on file with the City Clerk.

DISPOSITION

Secretariat Services Branch in the Corporate Services Department will act as the lead and liaison between all City departments in the implementation of the Public Participation Policy, corporate Public Participation Community of Practice and creation of the Roundtable for Citizen Engagement, as outlined in the report.

Policy Statement

The City of Ottawa is committed to informing and actively involving citizens, community organizations and Advisory Committees on issues that affect them, to the greatest extent possible. The City of Ottawa recognizes that decisions can be enhanced by engaging citizens, and is committed to a Public Participation process that is inclusive and authentic, meaningful and accountable, and that is an integrated part of the Corporate decision-making process. The Public Participation Policy will respect the spirit and provision of the Bilingualism Policy as it applies to communicating with the public in both official languages, as outlined in the Key Principles for Public Participation.

Purpose

The benefits and rationale for a consistent, standardized and meaningful Public Participation Policy include:

• Reduces costly project delays by responding to problems and concerns before they develop
• Saves money and time by allowing good projects to move forward
• Provides an early warning system for public concerns and needs – creates a forum for sharing ideas and concerns
• Acts as a sounding board for proposed changes and develops a wider range of alternatives
• Increases two-way communication, which builds trust and fosters relationships
• Increases credibility for decision-makers and provides a clearer rationale for decisions
• Allows meaningful citizen input into decision making
• Provides a means to better incorporate the public’s values in local government initiatives
• Builds a stronger foundation for implementation
• Meets the public’s expectations of an open and transparent local government
• Develops a wider range of alternatives
• Facilitates understanding and fosters respect for different perspectives
• Improves the quality of democracy
• Creates a credible channel through which accurate and timely information can be disseminated
• Helps secure understanding and support for the Corporation’s goals

The main objective of the Public Participation Policy is to ensure that a two way communication process exists to involve citizens and community organizations on issues that affect them and shall reflect the following six key principles:

Inclusive & Authentic – To the greatest extent possible, the City will involve all stakeholders who are potentially affected by an issue in a transparent and equitable way.

Sharing & Supportive – Involvement of stakeholders in the decision-making process where their input can impact the decision.

Accountable & Committed – Setting clear objectives and expectations for a public participation initiative and actively listening to the input of citizens, community organizations and Advisory Committees.

Meaningful & Responsive – Ensuring consultation is meaningful and valid, with clear objectives and expectations with respect to the ability of the public to impact the decision. Ensuring consultation is conducted in a timely manner that is appropriate to the issue and level of public involvement. Ensuring that participants receive appropriate feedback on the impact of their input is key to making public participation meaningful.

Continuously Improving - Continuously evaluating and measuring the success of the Public Participation Policy and public participation initiatives conducted by the City will form a fundamental part of ensuring public participation is effective and relevant. An annual review of the policy will be undertaken, and evaluation mechanisms for each consultation initiative will be used.

Facilitating & Building Capacity for a Collaborative Community – Strengthening links between the City and the community on public participation initiatives and building capacity in the community for citizen engagement on issues that affect them through a Corporate Public Participation Community of Practise.

Application

The policy applies to all sectors of the Corporation, and for issues within the municipal jurisdiction, and should be followed in all public participation processes, whether the process is targeted to the general public, specific community organizations, voluntary or private sector stakeholders. The policy will impact all activities undertaken by the City to inform, consult, involve, collaborate and empower residents on issues that affect them. The policy shall complement, and be used as a guide, for those consultation activities mandated by statutory requirements.

The Corporate Public Participation Community of Practise will provide support and advice to staff and the public to help build capacity within the Corporation and the community for implementation of the Public Participation Policy and principles.

The policy will be applied with flexibility and/or may be waived in emergency or urgent situations, issues relating to labour relations or negotiations, issues related to protection of privacy or freedom of information, specific directions from Council or those outlined under legislation where adequate time for public participation is not possible due to unforeseen circumstances.

Citizens will be encouraged to be informed and knowledgeable of the principles of the Public Participation Policy, Core Values for Public Participation and to understand the Public Participation Spectrum as it relates to the objectives and promises relevant to the public participation process in which they are participating.

Policy Description / Implementation

The Public Participation Policy is based on the following core values for Public Participation:

1. The public will be kept informed about issues that affect them.

2. The public should have a say in decisions that affect their lives.

3. The public participation process will:

o Include the promise/commitment that the public’s contribution can influence the decision;

o Communicate the interests and consider the needs of participants;

o Seek out and facilitate the involvement of those potentially affected;

o Using appropriate feedback mechanisms, communicate to participants how their input affected the decision; and

o Provide participants with the information necessary to participate in a meaningful way.

The six key principles of Public Participation form the framework on which the Public Participation Policy is founded:

Inclusive & Authentic

• To the greatest extent possible, the City will involve all stakeholders, or a representative number of stakeholders, who are potentially affected by an issue in a transparent and equitable way, and to the greatest extent possible be responsive to issues of equity and accommodation that may potentially impact involvement including language, gender, culture, race, disability and geography.
• Unequal access to information or inaccurate assumptions about the knowledge base of participants can negatively impact a Public Participation exercise – ensuring the participation of the broadest possible range of individuals who have an interest in or who may be affected by the decision is crucial. To the greatest extent possible, providing an opportunity for citizens who may be affected, and ensuring that the process is designed so that participants are able to participate effectively is required.
• A Consultation Assessment Model will be used when each issue, need, project or program is identified to determine those issues that require consultation, and where in the process the public should become involved, and the potential impact of the public on the decision. Public participation strategies should be designed when the issue is identified, early in the process, and be flexible enough to accommodate changing priorities or emerging issues.

Sharing & Supportive

• Involvement of stakeholders in the decision-making process where their input can impact the decision.
• Effective and appropriate public participation processes build public trust, increases involvement of the public on issues that affect them, and can result in enhanced decisions by the Corporation.
• Involvement and support of decision makers in the participation process, and the potential impact of the public on the decision should be clear and transparent at the outset of the process.
• Provide participants with the information they need to be involved in an informed way.

Accountable & Committed

• Setting clear objectives and expectations for a public participation initiative and actively listening to the input of citizens.
• Using the Public Participation Spectrum as a tool for developing participation strategies and processes to ensure that expectations and goals of each individual process is clear to all involved.
• Participation programs should be open and accessible and recognize the value of opinions and expertise offered by the public.
• Through implementation of the Public Participation Policy, adequate resources should be available to carry out the public participation process and staff should be trained appropriately to conduct the consultation initiative.
• Feedback mechanisms to participants should be timely and clear so they can see the results of their input. As well, feedback should be provided to decision makers for them to make informed and effective decisions.

Meaningful & Responsive

• Ensuring consultation is meaningful and valid, with clear objectives and expectations on the ability of the public to impact the decision, and conducted in a timely way and in a manner appropriate to the issue and level of public involvement.
• Public participation programs should be designed when the issue or need is identified and be conducted throughout the process for projects with multiple consultations.
• Citizens, community organizations and Advisory Committees require adequate time to consider, consult others, and respond to consultation within time frames which strike a reasonable balance between the City’s needs or circumstances to achieve the end result, and the need for participants to be involved in a meaningful way. Public participation is most effective where the issues and timeframes permit the early inclusion of the public in the process.
• Involvement of Advisory Committees and community organizations as a means of building community consensus should be considered.
• Tools and techniques for public participation that respond to the identified needs of affected stakeholders should be used. These should be flexible and include alternate formats and various techniques such as face-to-face meetings, mail, and electronic consultation.
• Depending on the identified issue, Public Participation processes can be most effective when applied to the entire policy, program or project cycle from Issue or Need identification through to final decision and in some cases, implementation. This includes policy, specific project, program and service issues.

Continuously Improving

• Continuously evaluating and measuring the success of the Public Participation Policy and public participation initiatives conducted by the City will be required.
• For a multitude of reasons, effective and successful consultations do not always lead to agreement or consensus. A more realistic measure of success is whether or not the consultation identified and included those affected by the decision, and to what extent they participated. All consultations lead to a better understanding of the positions and opinions of those involved, but consultations should not be used to lobby or advocate participants to accept or adopt a predetermined point of view. Involvement of Advisory Committees and community organizations as a means of building community consensus should be considered.
• An annual report and evaluation of the Public Participation Policy and implementation should be conducted to ensure flexibility and responsiveness as well as to identify improvements. This review will be conducted by the Corporate Public Participation Community of Practise.
• An evaluation framework for each public participation program should be built into the individual participation strategy.

Facilitating & Building Capacity for a Collaborative Community

• Strengthening links between the City and the community on public participation initiatives and building capacity in the community for citizen engagement on issues that affect them will be conducted through the Corporate Public Participation Community of Practise. Building and maintaining strong, positive and cooperative relationships between the City and the community to increase the potential for engagement and result in improved decision-making.
• Capacity should be built among staff and in the community to implement and utilize the Public Participation policy and principles, and a corporate “community of practise” for citizen engagement should be developed to ensure capacity within the Corporation.
• Tools, training and public participation advice/direction will be provided to staff for policy implementation.
• The community’s leadership base for collaboration and engagement should be expanded, including but not limited to, sharing of the master contact list, annual priority setting meetings with geographic communities and communities of interest, and tools for establishing community associations and organizations. Supporting sustainability and rejuvenation for existing community organizations should be considered when undertaking consultation and community development initiatives.

Public Participation Spectrum

Public Participation programs and initiatives conducted by the City of Ottawa shall follow the goals, objectives and promises to the public, as outlined in the Public Participation Spectrum, and shall make the expectations and promises of each public participation process clear to participants, and outline the potential impact on the decision from which their involvement will result. The Consultation Model and Public Participation checklists will be used by Corporate staff to determine the appropriate level of involvement and potential impact on the decision for a particular issue.

Inform	Consult	Involve	Collaborate	Empower
Goal: To provide the public with balanced and objective information to assist them in understanding the problems, alternatives and/or solutions.	Goal: To obtain public feedback on analysis, alternatives and/or decisions.	Goal: To work directly with the public throughout the process to ensure that public issues and concerns are consistently understood and considered.	Goal: To partner with the public in each of the aspect of the decision including the development of alternatives and the identification of the preferred solution.	Goal: To place final decision-making in the hands of the public.
promise to the Public: We will keep you informed.	promise to the Public: We will keep you informed, listen to and acknowledge concerns and provide feedback on how public input influenced the decision.	promise to the Public: We will work with you to ensure that your concerns and issues are directly reflected in the alternatives developed and provide feedback on how public input influenced the decision.	promise to the Public: We will look to you for direct advice and innovation in formulating solutions and incorporate your advice and recommendations into the decisions to the maximum extent possible.	promise to the Public: We will implement what you decide.

Source – IAP2, International Association for Public Participation

Definitions

For the purpose of this policy, the following definitions apply.

Advisory Committee - A body of a fixed number of citizens appointed by City Council to provide advice to City Council and its Committees on specifically mandated issues.

Citizen - Any persons residing within the boundaries of the City of Ottawa.

Collaborate – To work together, a partnership. To facilitate consensus.

Community of Practise – A group, whose members regularly engage in sharing and learning, based on their common interests. Communities of Practice complement existing structures by promoting collaboration, information exchange, and sharing of best practices across boundaries of time, distance, and organizational hierarchies.

Community Organization – A group of individuals gathered together in a formal body for a specific purpose or issue, a community of interest.

Consult – to seek advice or information.

Consultation- A process designed to seek the views of citizens, community organizations, Advisory Committees or the public at large, on issues that effect them directly or in which they have a significant interest. The process of collecting and analyzing public input and feedback.

Empower – to invest with power, to authorize.

Engagement - Refers to the process which seeks to encourage deliberation, reflection or learning on issues at preliminary stages of a process, with a more specific focus on values and principles that will frame the way an issue is considered. Citizen engagement differs qualitatively from consultation as it emphasizes in-depth deliberation and dialogue, focuses on common ground, requires a greater time commitment and works to build citizen capacity.

Evaluation – Ongoing tools and methods used to assess and improve the process as it moves forward.

Feedback - The sharing of the input and information received on the results of a public participation process with those involved or those who have an interest in the outcome.

Inform – to impart information and promote public awareness.

Input - Information or comments (verbal or written) provided on an issue.

Involve – To engage as participants or to include – to foster meaningful dialogue.

Principle - The foundation or fundamental values which guide actions and directions to be taken.

Stakeholder - Any individual, group of individuals, elected representative or organization with a specific stake or interest in the outcome of a decision.

Public - Any individual, group of individuals, or organization within the boundaries of the City of Ottawa who are not part of the decision-making body.

Public Participation - Any two-way communication process that informs and involves the public in problem solving or decision-making and that uses public input to make better decisions. Public participation has several dimensions including inform, consult, involve, collaborate and empower, as outlined in the Public Participation Spectrum.

Public Participation Spectrum - A tool for public participation that helps to identify and select the appropriate level of public participation, including goals, objectives, expectations and potential impact on the decision.

Value - Principles or standards that determine what is valuable or important.

Responsibilities

City Manager and General Managers

It is the responsibility of the City Manager and General Managers to:

· Provide a supportive work environment that encourages the use of effective and consistent public participation within the Corporation

· Ensure this policy is available to all staff

· Support for public participation initiatives, training and tools for staff

· Support an effective systems review including a review of internal policies and practices, to determine whether the tools and guidelines are being followed

· Support and communicate the City policy and display a commitment to an accountable and committed process for public engagement.

Directors

Directors are responsible for:

· Fostering a supportive environment that encourages the six principles of public participation; inclusive and authentic, sharing and supportive, accountable and committed, meaningful and responsive, ensuring continuous improvement, facilitating and building capacity for a collaborative community

· Understanding and supporting the policy, and ensuring that the policy and procedures are communicated to employees and are followed

· Ensure that the appropriate tools and guidelines are communicated to staff and appropriate training is provided

Managers and Immediate Supervisors

Managers and immediate Supervisors are responsible for:

• Ensuring that the policy guidelines and public participation tools are being used by staff in a consistent manner for delivery of public participation relating to the Policy
• Evaluating the process in order to ensure it complies with the Policy and complements statutory requirements
• Encouraging staff to consult with the Public Participation Community of Practise in design, development and delivery of public participation activities
• Ensuring that staff have access to training and the work tools needed in order to provide effective and meaningful consultations
• Identifying consultation activities of operating departments and communicating these to the Public Participation Community of Practise to create a comprehensive list in order to monitor duplication or possible pooling of resources

Corporate Public Participation Community of Practise

The Corporate Public Participation Community of Practise will provide support and advice to City staff, Council and the public to help build capacity within the Corporation and in the community for implementation of the Public Participation Policy principles and tools.

The Public Participation Community of Practise is responsible for:

o Development of public participation tools to implement the Public Participation Policy across the Corporation.

o Coordinating and linking engagement activities, standards and practices across the Corporation

o Providing advice to operational departments on public participation process design and providing Corporate, and in some cases community, training and orientation

o Ensuring that tools are available to assist operational departments and project managers in determining the level of public involvement and the need for engagement on a particular issue prior to embarking on a consultation

o In conjunction with the Communications and Marketing Branch, monitoring and coordinating public participation activities across the Corporation to ensure there is minimal duplication, and coordinating efforts to ensure that citizens and community organizations are not regularly required to respond to several requests for participation during the same time period, through a corporate Calendar of Events

o Providing advice to operational departments on techniques (methods for engaging the public) to ensure consistent approaches are used, and that these approaches match the issue and level of public involvement

o Serving as a point of contact for the community on consultation activities

o Pursuing e-democracy initiatives and technology to provide and develop alternate means of involving the public

o Continuous review and improvement of the Public Participation Policy and programs.

Employees

Employees are responsible for:

o Adhering to the Public Participation Policy for all public consultations that are undertaken

o Researching and representing the views and needs of those people who do not involve themselves in a public participation process

o Liaising with community groups and keep the channels of communication open for discussions

o Working knowledge of the tools and policies of public participation

o Being respectful and open to ideas and comments from the public

o Ensuring that alternative formats of documents are available upon request

o Supporting the inclusion of marginalized groups in public participation

Contact

Enquiries should be directed to:

Program Manager, Policy and Projects

Secretariat Services Branch

Corporate Services Department

City of Ottawa

Tel: (613) 580-2424 Ext. 21779