Thirteen of the city’s 15 citizen advisory committees could be merged or eliminated in a bid to improve city governance, according to city officials working on a report expected to be published later this spring.
Rick O’Connor, the city clerk and solicitor, and Leslie Donnelly, the deputy city clerk, have been attending committee meetings to hear from members before publishing their report aimed at streamlining the city’s current advisory committee structure.
The report is expected to provide city council with various recommendations, including using task forces, summits or roundtables instead of the current committee structure, said a staff report published in November 2010. The report will also look at new approaches to improve citizen engagement including using technology such as social media.
Part of the problem, says Donnelly, is that committees are not sticking to their mandates.
“The number of agenda items relating directly to their core function range from about eight per cent to 60 per cent with the average committee spending less than a third of their time on items related to their mandate.”
She says committees often discuss issues, such as hydro or labour negotiations, over which city council has no authority.
Despite this, committee chairs argue they provide city council and staff with free expertise for which it might otherwise have to pay.
“I think we provide good value to the city and we offer expert advice that is free,” says Michael Powell, chair of the roads and cycling advisory committee.
“When you start considering mergers I think you need think about whether the specialization of each committee confers a certain benefit that might be lost when you have a broader focus,” he says.
However, some advisory groups say merging makes sense because the city has not conducted a thorough review of the advisory committee structure since amalgamation.
“I think it would be advantageous to look at the feasibility of merging advisory committees so we can focus our work more comprehensively and work more directly with chairs of the standing committees that we report to,” says Carol Lever, chair of the health and social services advisory committee.
Donnelly says a major area of frustration is that city staff is using advisory committees as a form of public consultation.
However, advisory committees see themselves as citizen experts who should be consulted early on in any policy discussion.
As a result, councillors rarely attend the monthly meetings anymore, she says.
In the past, two councillors would usually attend every meeting.
Directed by city council, O’Connor and Donnelly have asked committees to take a step back and look at what is and is not working for them.
“We are asking [committees] to look at themselves and ask whether this is the best forum to provide advice to council,” Donnelly said during a rural issues advisory committee meeting.
While neither will speculate on which committees are likely to change, by law the accessibility advisory committee will continue to provide advice to city council and staff.
The Ottawa built heritage advisory committee is also likely to survive under the Ontario Heritage Act.
Donnelly says the city spends $428,000 annually to support all 15 advisory committees.