Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFCS-13-177 - Procedural Changes to Promote More Effective MeetingsStaff Report I r finance and Corporate Services Department wvwuukitchenerra REPORT TO: Mayor C. Zehr and Members of Council DATE OF MEETING: December 9, 2013 SUBMITTED BY: Christine Tarling, Director, Legislated Services & City Clerk (519) 741 -2200 ext. 7809 PREPARED BY: Colin Goodeve, Manager, Council / Committee Services & Deputy City Clerk (519) 741 -2200 ext. 7278 WARD(S) INVOLVED: All DATE OF REPORT: September 3, 2013 REPORT NO.: FCS -13 -177 SUBJECT: PROCEDURAL CHANGES TO FURTHER ENHANCE MEETING EFFECTIVENESS RECOMMENDATION: That the proposed changes to enhance meeting effectiveness, as outlined in Finance and Corporate Services Department report FCS -13 -177, be approved; and further, That staff be directed to prepare a by -law to amend the City of Kitchener Municipal Code Chapter 25 (Procedure), as necessary, to incorporate the proposed changes. BACKGROUND: At the June 10, 2013 Council meeting direction was given for staff to undertake a review of the City's existing meeting procedures and report back with suggested measures that could be implemented to provide for more effective meeting process. As noted in Figure 1 of Appendix `A', in 2012 a total of 61.25 hours were spent in Council meetings (not including Standing Committees) compared to 44.43 hours in 2011. In 2011, the average Council meeting lasted just under three hours and in 2012 this increased to over four hours. To date, 2013 Council meetings have averaged approximately 3.16 hours. From 2001 to 2011 there were just three instances where a Council meeting went past midnight; however, there were six instances of this in 2012 alone. The survey in Figure 2 indicates that Council meetings in ten comparable municipalities last an average of 2.36 hours, with the average Council composition being 11 members. This report will provide a review of the existing conditions that have been identified as possibly contributing to the length of meetings at the City of Kitchener. Following the description of each scenario, staff have put forward options that may be pursued to enhance meeting efficiency and more importantly to allow for a more effective meeting process. It should be noted that there is no all- encompassing "silver bullet" solution to address this matter. A number of the proposed options are interrelated and as such, a piecemeal approach to their implementation may not result in any noticeable improvement in how meetings function at the City of Kitchener. REPORT: It is often expressed that all levels of government are perceived as taking a considerable amount of time to get things done. At the August 26, 2013 Council Strategy Session, Fred 1 -1 Dean conveyed that the degree of thoroughness given to a matter does not necessarily relate to the amount of time that is spent debating it; but rather, the quality of the discussion that took place. For reference, the Gettysburg Address was only 272 words and was delivered by President Lincoln in a little over two minutes; yet, it is widely considered as being one of the most poignant and influential speeches ever given. The rules of procedure provided for in Municipal Code Chapter 25 (Procedure) as well as the proposals put forward herein are intended for the benefit of Council and the public. Like most things, their degree of success will have a direct correlation to the amount of effort that is applied. Achieving more effective meetings will not only take buy -in from the Mayor and Committee Chairs, but from all members of Council; who should hold each other responsible for ensuring that the agreed upon rules are being followed. Additionally, staff needs to be mindful of the expectations with respect to presentations and the associated impact on the length of meetings. The purpose of using parliamentary procedures, such as those found in Robert's Rules of Order, is to facilitate the conduct of the business in a meeting so that the deliberate will of the majority is achieved, while still protecting members' rights. Additionally, the Municipal Act, 2001 prescribes requirements for municipalities to operate in an accountable and transparent fashion, which is facilitated through rules of procedure. That Act further stipulates that meetings are to be run in an efficient and effective manner. It has been identified that Regional staff are unwilling to attend meetings at the City of Kitchener due to the unpredictable length. This subsequently deprives Council of the benefit of their input and expertise on matters. Furthermore, consultants are usually paid for their time including the time to appear before Council. Delays in when items are being heard means that it is costing the City more to have them attend meetings. Also, it has been observed that some delegations have been disenfranchised, by having to leave a meeting prior to speaking to their item as a result of the meeting going beyond its anticipated timeframe. The following are the main objectives to be achieved through the enactment of specific measures being proposed to improve the effectiveness of meetings at the City of Kitchener: • To facilitate a process whereby agendas are circulated with more lead time to allow for greater review and enable questions for clarification to be asked prior to the meeting (as per Proposal 1). • To enact changes to the reports pending list and the agenda formats to streamline the consideration of reports (as per Proposals 2, 3 and 4). • Adhere to the existing requirement to have written motions to enhance the clarity of what is being debated (as per Proposal 8). • Implement rules to ensure equity of process and consistency with how members of the public and staff interact with Council (as per Proposals 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9). • To enhance the clarity of existing provisions within the City of Kitchener's Municipal Code Chapter 25 (Procedure) (as per Proposal 10). 1. Accelerated Standing Committee Agenda Publication At present, Standing Committee agendas are posted to the City's website between 12:00 - 1:00 p.m. on the Wednesday prior to the scheduled meeting date. This provides approximately five (5) days for Council and the public to review the various reports that comprise each agenda. 1 -2 It is recognized that this timeframe only provides members of Council with a limited amount of time to review the circulated material and prepare for the meeting. This can subsequently lead to a significant amount of time being spent during a meeting with members seeking clarification or requesting additional information from staff. CURRENT DISTRIBUTION TIMEFRAME NOVEMBER S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 8 9 10 12 J�����������JJJJJJJJJJJJ 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 COUNCIL MEETING STANDING COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA AND REPORTS POSTED TO WEBSITE HARD COPIES CIRCULATED TO MEMBERS In addition, this timeframe provides members of the public with approximately five days in which to be notified of a matter and register as a delegation. It is common for persons appearing before Council to indicate that they only just learned of a particular matter. This can result in items having to be deferred to allow time for members of the public to discuss a particular issue with staff. Additionally, this can lead to several last minute delegations signing up to address a Committee just prior to the meeting. Accordingly, an item that was forecasted to be discussed for 30 minutes turns into an hour and a half, which subsequently disrupts the entire day's meeting schedule. Proposal 1) That Standing Committee agendas and reports be published on the City's website ten (10) days prior to the scheduled meeting, with hard copies of the agenda to be circulated no later than six (6) days prior to the meeting; and further, That questions of simple clarification, or where the answer to a question is conveyed in the materials circulated with the agenda, shall be deemed out of order by the Chair. To better facilitate the agenda setting process it is proposed that the final versions of the staff reports should be submitted to Legislated Services staff by no later than 12:00 p.m. 11 days prior to the scheduled Standing Committee meeting. In instances where a statutory or civic holiday falls within this timeframe, reports shall be provided no later than 12 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. PROPOSED DISTRIBUTION TIMEFRAME NOVEMBER S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 W' 9 10 mY11R1111111111 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 COUNCIL MEETING STANDING COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA AND REPORTS POSTED TO WEBSITE HARD COPIES CIRCULATED TO MEMBERS Notwithstanding the proposed accelerated timeframe for the circulation of Standing Committee agendas, it is acknowledged that occasionally, due to emergency situations and /or statutory timelines, it might be necessary for an item to come forward in a more expeditious manner. Such a process is already provided for in Municipal Code Chapter 25.4.4 and is intended to be the exception rather than the norm. When it is necessary to have an addendum agenda, members of Council would only have to read one or two reports, compared to having to review three full agendas as they currently have to in a matter of five (5) days. 1 -3 One of the main justifications for the proposal to accelerate the Standing Committee agenda circulation process relates to difficulties the existing timeframe presents for members of Council to review all of the circulated materials. Under the proposed timeframe members will be afforded twice as much time to seek additional clarification from staff and prepare for a meeting. No changes are being proposed to the timeframe by which Council agendas are distributed. This is resultant to the inherent need to postpone the Council meetings by an additional week if an attempt was made to implement a similar change to those agendas. It is important to note that the proposed change to the Standing Committee distribution timeframe would limit Council's ability to receive rushed follow -up reports at the next subsequent Standing Committee meeting as is currently an accepted practice. 2. Corporate Reports Pending List A listing of all of the reports that are proposed to come forward is maintained by Legislated Services staff and reviewed as part of the agenda setting process. The Corporate Reports Pending List is compiled based on lists developed by the various Departments. While these lists serve as a useful forecast for those items that have been identified to come forward, it is common for certain Committee dates to become overloaded; whereby an excess of 12 hours' worth of items might be proposed for one day. This can subsequently lead to marathon like meeting day which begin at 9:00 a.m. and may not adjourn until after 11:00 p.m.; with several items that were intended to come forward being deferred to other meetings. On the Tuesday prior to the scheduled Standing Committee meeting, the Mayor, Committee Chairs, CAO and DCAO's as well as staff from the Legislated Services Division meet to review the agendas for the upcoming meetings. As a part of this process, the Corporate Reports Pending List is also reviewed as a means of forecasting future meetings. During this meeting the subject matter of the various reports is considered and time is allocated to each item. These decisions are based on past precedent, the amount of public interest as well as the implications of what is being recommended. Proposal 2) That Committee Chairs will ensure that matters are considered within their allotted time, which may include the need to call the question or defer the matter; and further, That when a matter is proposed to be deferred, consideration shall be given to the Corporate Reports Pending List in deciding an appropriate date for deferral. 3. Changes to Standing Committee Agendas & Meeting Procedure 2012 Consent Items In 2012, members of Council spent a total of 149.34 Items in # of Items # of hours in Standing Committee meetings with a 2012 Discussed Changes cumulative average of 10.13 hours spent discussing Fcs 22 12 2 items on each meeting day. These figures do not take into account the amount of time spent in special cis 47 28 2 Council or Caucus meetings on those same days. A Psi 1 1 1 snapshot of those meetings shows that a Total 70 41 5 rlicnrnnnr+innn +n Mmni in+ of +ime IAIMC enen+ rlicri iceinn of Total: 59% 7% .,,,, ,...u....N,.,,..,...,w....,,,y Consent Items. Matters that are listed as Consent Items are generally considered not to require debate as they are typically routine in nature and i�AI should be approved by one motion in accordance with the recommendations contained in each staff report. In 2012, there were 70 reports which were listed as Consent Items on the three Standing Committee agendas. Discussion took place on 59% of those items; however, some form of action other than approval (deferral, amendment, etc.) was made to only five (5) reports. At present reports which do not contain any specified recommendation may be listed as Discussion Items on Standing Committee agendas. Even though these matters do not materially move forward the business of the Corporation, there is a tendency to dedicate a considerable amount of time to discussing these items. Proposal 3a) That any reports that are strictly for information shall be placed under that heading on the agenda and shall only be included as a Discussion Item by a majority vote of the Committee. Unless required by legislation, receiving a report for information is not a valid motion as there is no way to vote in the negative, as Council is not able to un- receive a report once it is in front of them. The only exception to this is where there is a statutory obligation to receive something, in which case this should be stipulated in the motion. Consideration should be given during the agenda setting process to ensure that recommendations to receive a report are not being used to inappropriately include the report as a Discussion Item. Any process by which a recorded vote is taken will add time to a meeting, whether that be through the current electronic process or the traditional practice of having members stand until their vote is recorded in the minutes. Only Council has the ability to provide final approval on matters and therefore a recorded vote taken at a Standing Committee meeting carries little to no weight. Given that all Standing Committee meetings are currently being webcasted, a member of the public can refer to the video recording to ascertain how a member voted. Proposal 3b) That recorded votes shall not be permitted at a Standing Committee meeting. 4. Changes to Council Agendas & Meeting Procedure Section 25.5.1 of the City's Municipal Code sets out all of the headings that are to appear on a Council Agenda, the sixth being `Reports of Committees.' At a typical Council meeting when this point on the agenda is reached, the Chair of each Standing Committee will generally recite all of the recommendations contained on a particular report. This can be a fairly lengthy process if there are a number of recommendations. Outside of the established tradition and custom for how these matters are dispensed with, there is no procedural reason for having each Committee dealt with independently. The entire Council agenda is posted online with the webcast, therefore if someone wanted to know what was being recommended by a particular Committee this is available to them as they are watching the meeting. Proposal 4a) That each Standing Committee report included with the Council agenda shall be treated as if it were a list of consent items, whereby one motion will be used to bring all items on the report forward for consideration, but it shall not be read and /or summarized; and further, Notwithstanding the above, any member of Council may request that a particular clause be dealt with separately. 1 -5 The ninth and tenth agenda headings provided for in Section 25.5.1 of the Municipal Code are `Questions' and `Answers.' Under the current practice, this is an opportunity for members of Council to request that staff report back on various matters. At times, this can result in significant work that is required to be carried out by staff to provide a response. Section 25.5.9 currently stipulates that the person to whom a question is directed may answer orally at the same meeting, or may require time to provide a reply, in which case the question may be required to be submitted in written form. It is important to note that in accordance with the Code of Conduct for Members of Council, no one member of Council is permitted to independently direct the actions of staff. Proposal 4b) That Sections 25.5.9 and 25.5.10 of the Procedural By -law shall be repealed and replaced with the following: Any request for a special enquiry will: a. Be in writing; b. Be signed by the member of Council requesting the special enquiry; c. Be received by the Clerk no later than noon of the Wednesday preceding the next regular meeting of Council; d. Be printed in full in the Agenda for that meeting; and, A special enquiry that requires a follow -up by staff shall only proceed if approved by a majority of Council members at the meeting. Upon approval, the request will be forwarded to the Chief Administrative Officer for review and department assignment. The Chief Administrative Officer will report back to Council at its next regular meeting on the department assignment and anticipated return date of the special enquiry. The Chief Administrative Officer or the assigned department will respond to the enquiry, subject to any limitations on disclosure by the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Should the request involve extraordinary staff research time and production costs, Council will be advised. The response to the special enquiry will be distributed to all members of Council. The above proposed process mirrors the one that has been enacted by the Region of Waterloo for handling requests from individual members of Council. Municipal Code Chapter 25.4.18 sets out the process for the termination of Council proceedings. It states that a Council meeting shall end by midnight unless a motion to extend the proceedings is approved by the unanimous consent of members present. While the typical Council meeting starts at 7:00 p.m., it is not uncommon for members of Council to attend Strategy Sessions, Audit Committee and Caucus meetings for several hours leading up to 7:00 p.m. This can result in an extremely long day for Council as well as staff. Proposal 4c) That Section 25.4.18 (Termination of Council Proceedings) of the Procedural By -law be repealed and replaced with the following: 1 -6 `Council shall remain in session until all business on the agenda is disposed of until 11:00 p.m. unless by unanimous consent of the members present a one hour extension is approved with proceedings of Council ending by no later than midnight.' 5. Presentations A considerable amount of time at Standing Committee and Council meetings is utilized by presentations. It has also been observed that a number of presentations have a tendency to go into a considerable amount of detail the vast majority of which either is, or should have been, provided in the staff report. Proposal 5) That the following are proposed amendments to Section 25.5.4.1 of Chapter 25 of the City's Municipal Code: Any person making a presentation, save and except those related to the City's annual budget deliberation process and Strategy Sessions, but including those by staff members, consultants engaged by the City, or individuals representing any other corporation, organization or committee, shall be permitted to address Council for a maximum of ten (10) minutes; and, • On behalf of the Mayor and /or Committee Chair, the Clerk / Committee Administrator shall keep account of the time expended by an individual on all presentations and at the completion of nine (9) minutes shall advise through an audio and /or visual prompt that their time will expire in approximately one (1) minute; and further, • Council may limit or extend the time allowed for a presentation by a majority vote. It is suggested that in instances where a member of staff and /or consultant wishes to give a presentation this should be noted on their Departmental Reports Pending List. During the agenda setting meeting, consideration would be given to setting a limit on the number of presentations permitted per meeting and /or if a presentation is warranted. Presentations should only be given for matters of a substantive nature or to provide a synopsis of a complex issue. An appropriate guideline for each presenter would be a maximum of 15 slides per presentation with exceptions to be determined during Agenda Setting meetings. Notice would be provided by Legislated Services staff to confirm the decision reached during the Agenda Setting meeting. This procedural change would provide the Chairs of each Standing Committee an opportunity to allocate sufficient time to presentations while moving forward with City business as outlined on the meeting agenda. It is important to note that currently all presentations must be submitted to Legislated Services staff by noon on the business day prior to a meeting to ensure compliance with the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (MFIPPA). 6. Delegations It has been noted from time to time that people who have registered to speak at a Council meeting will leave before their item is considered. This is usually because the meeting is going long into the night and a disproportionate amount of time has been spent on one or two items 1 -7 that were listed earlier on the agenda. This occurred recently at the August 26, 2013 Council meeting, whereby several delegations that were registered to speak to the various traffic calming issues left the meeting prior to being afforded an opportunity to address Council. The more time that is spent discussing the initial items listed on an agenda can potentially disenfranchise persons who have registered to speak to matters that are scheduled to be dealt with at a later point in the meeting. As demonstrated during the two public consultation sessions that were held in April 2013 regarding the City of Kitchener being a host municipality for an Ontario Lottery & Gaming Corporation (OLG) gaming facility, five (5) minutes can be more than an adequate amount of time for a delegation to convey their position on a particular topic of interest. It comes down to a matter of how many people Council wants to feasibly hear from at a given meeting. As noted below, the greater the amount of time that is given per delegation the fewer the number of people that can be heard at a given meeting. Meeting Date # of Avg. Time Per Duration of Meeting Delegations Delegation Meeting Length April 30, 2013 - Special Council 22 5 minutes 6:05 pm - 1 hour Meeting - Casino 7:53 pm 48 minutes April 23, 2013 - Special Council 6:02 pm - 2 hours Meeting — Casino (the first hour was 26 5 minutes 8:50 pm 48 minutes taken by the OLG) March 25, 2013 - Council Meeting - 5 15.2 minutes 7 :00 pm - 5 hours Tier 2 Community Grants 12:25 am 25 minutes January 7, 2013 Public Budget 14 14 minutes 7 :00 pm - 3 hours Meeting 10:17 pm 17 minutes November 27, 2012 Special PSI 15 17 minutes 7 :03 pm - 5 hours Committee Meeting 12:40 am 37 minutes January 9, 2012 Public Budget g 13.33 minutes 7.18 pm 2 hours Meeting m May 26, 2011 Special Council 22 13.5 minutes 6 :05 pm - 4 hours Meeting on the LRT 10:55 pm 50 minutes The number of delegations that register to speak to a matter can significantly affect that amount of time it takes to dispense with that item. Currently, delegations are permitted to register to speak up until just prior to the start of a meeting. Demonstrated in Figure 3 of Appendix `A', the majority of municipalities surveyed do not permit walk -in delegations. As noted previously, some delegations have expressed concerns regarding the limited time that is currently provided to review an agenda prior to a meeting. With the proposal to increase the amount of lead time that agendas are posted to the City's website consideration could be given as to whether Council should continue to accept last minute delegations. It's important to stress that with the proposed changes to the agenda distribution timeframe members of the public will be given twice the amount of time than what they are currently afforded to review agenda materials prior to a Standing Committee meeting. If they were to attend a Standing Committee meeting at the last minute then they could be referred to the next subsequent Council meeting. Persons would still have five (5) business days to register as a delegation for the Council meeting. In addition, knowing in advance that delegations have registered for an item would provide an opportunity to ensure that the appropriate staff are in attendance to respond to any questions that may arise as a result of that delegation. 1 Proposal 6a) That a request to appear as a delegation at any Committee or Council meeting should be received by the Clerk by noon on the Wednesday before the meeting to ensure the person is listed on the printed Agenda distributed in advance of the meeting. However, it is recognized that this is not always possible and in these cases, delegations must contact the Clerk's Office before 4:30 p.m. the business day before Council or Committee meetings, in order to be eligible to speak to an item on the agenda; and, That the above provision does not apply to any legislated public hearings, at which delegations are entitled to register at the meeting; and further, That staff will facilitate a process for people to provide a written submission should they attend a meeting and are not afforded an opportunity to register as a delegation. Municipal Code Chapter 25.5.5(d) currently sets out that delegations wishing to present new information to Council subsequent to an earlier presentation to Council and /or a Committee should whenever possible provide that information in writing to the Clerk by no later than 5:00 p.m. on the Wednesday prior to the meeting. The intent of this measure is to reduce the possibility of hearing the same information provided multiple times on the same topic. Accordingly, it is suggested that this provision should be strengthened to require the new information to be provided in advance of the meeting. In recognition that it might be difficult for a delegation to adhere to the existing Wednesday deadline, it is proposed that this timeframe be extended. It is interesting to note that certain municipalities have provisions within their procedural by -laws that prohibit the same person from addressing Council, regardless of the issue, more than once in the span of three months. Proposal 6b) That members of the public who have addressed Council or a Committee on a particular issue will not be permitted to address Council / Standing Committee on that same matter, unless they are providing substantially new information. This new information must be submitted to the Clerk or designate by noon on the business day prior to the meeting at which the subject matter will be considered; and further, Should a member of Council feel that the submitted materials do not represent new information, than this may be raised through a point of order prior to hearing from the delegation; if the point of order is sustained, Council shall move forward without hearing from the delegation. It should be noted that Municipal Code Chapter 25.5.5(f) provides that delegations are not to repeat what has been stated by a previous speaker addressing Council. Accordingly, it is currently within the purview of the Chair to curtail a delegation if they are going over the same information as someone else. 7. Questions to Delegation The following measures are proposed as a means of establishing a greater degree of equity related to the process with which members of Council ask questions of delegations. It has been observed that when called upon by the Chair, the first few members that speak may ask multiple 1 -9 questions of the delegation. Subsequently, as the meeting progresses comments are made by the other members that the questions they had intended to ask have already been covered; or, they may end up asking a question to which the delegation has already provided a response. Proposal 7a) That each councillor be allocated a total of five (5) minutes for their initial two (2) questions, which shall include the amount of time it takes to obtain a response from the delegation; and, That all members of Council shall be given an opportunity to ask at least one (1) question before any member is permitted to ask a third question; and further, That each councillor will be allocated a total of five (5) minutes for their subsequent round of questions, which shall include the amount of time it takes to obtain a response from the delegation Municipal Code Chapter 25.5.5 sets out delegations are permitted to address Council for a maximum of five (5) minutes. Figure 3 on Appendix `A', demonstrates that this timeframe is in keeping with a majority of municipalities that were consulted as a part of this project. These time limits are not only key to ensure that a meeting is run effectively; they are also in place to ensure fairness and equity for public participation. As noted previously, if a meeting is monopolized by the first few delegations, this can disenfranchise those delegations that are registered to speak to matters that are scheduled for later in the meeting. Proposal 7b) That members shall be permitted to ask questions of delegates but shall not make statements nor enter into debate with such persons. Questions to delegations must be limited to the scope of the information that was conveyed by the delegation; and, should not be of a technical nature unless the delegation has been identified as a technical expert on the matter being considered. Proposal 7c) That the Chair may curtail a delegation if any derogatory comments are made about staff or other individuals, for disorderly conduct, or any other breach of conduct and, if the Chair rules that the delegation is concluded, the person or persons appearing shall withdraw. Proposal 7d) That whenever a delegation offers comments or statements that are deemed to be erroneous and unsubstantiated, any member of Council, or City official, may be recognized by the Chair on a Point of Order and when recognized may provide the necessary corrections or clarifications to the comments or statement said by the delegation. 8. Process for Handling Discussion Items To conduct a productive and efficient meeting it is important to have a consistent means by which items are considered. The following is the standard process that most parliamentary bodies utilize to deal with an item on their agenda: Presentation / Discussion Delegation Questions III Motion III & Debate III Voting Typically speaking, most municipal councils will commence each item by hearing from any delegations that may be in attendance with regards to that specific matter. The main purpose 1 -10 as to why those persons attend is to provide information and /or their perspective with respect to an item listed on the agenda. More often than not, those individuals have minimal technical expertise and their knowledge is generally predicated on personal experience. Accordingly, questions to delegations should be limited to the scope of information that they have presented. Unless the delegation is a technical expert, it is unreasonable to expect that they would be capable of providing technical advice. Proposal 8a) That once everyone has been afforded an opportunity to ask questions, no further discussion or debate should occur on the matter until a formal written motion has been brought forward for consideration. It is important to stress that in most cases the written motion would be the one put forward in a staff report. Debate must then be germane to the motion and the Chair should ensure that it does not stray into areas that have little to no relevancy to the subject being discussed. Requiring that a motion must be on the floor prior to discussing an item provides direction for that discussion. It also helps to ensure that the meeting does not get off track and that debate is restricted to only those matters that materially move forward the business of the Corporation. Municipal Code Chapter 25.6.10 stipulates that no member of Council is permitted to speak more than once to a motion except to explain a material part of the member's speech that may have been misconstrued, but shall not introduce any new matter. Essentially what this means is that no member is permitted to make comments twice on the same motion unless it is to clarify an area of misunderstanding. To build upon this, of the various municipalities that were examined as a part of this project, staff observed that a number of procedural by -laws place a time limit of no more than five (5) minutes for each member to speak to a particular motion. Proposal 8b) That no member, without leave of the Council, will speak to the same motion, or in reply, for longer than five (5) minutes. 9. Delegations Wishing to Appear before Council It is common for Legislated Services staff to receive requests from delegations to appear before Council on matters that may not seem to be within the City's jurisdiction and /or not listed on the meeting agenda. Municipal Code Chapter 25.7.5 specifies that a motion which requires the exercise of a power by Council which is not within its jurisdiction is out of order. Therefore, if Council is to act on a matter brought before it by a delegation it needs to be within Council's purview for it to be considered. At present, Municipal Code Chapter 25.5.5(b) sets out a process where in emergency situations Council may by an affirmative vote of a majority of members agree to hear a delegation on a matter that is not listed on the meeting agenda. Proposal 9a) That where an item is not on a current meeting agenda but is intended to come forward at a later date, staff shall refer the person to the appropriate meeting; thereby ensuring that the appropriate staff will be in attendance and supporting materials are circulated for Council's consideration. Proposal 9b) That where a person wishes to speak to an issue that is within the jurisdiction of Council but the item does not appear on a meeting agenda, consideration of that request will be referred to the next available agenda setting meeting for scheduling by the Committee Chairs. 1 -11 Proposal 9c) That where a person wishes to register as a delegation and the matter is not on a meeting agenda and it is questionable as to whether it falls within the City's jurisdiction, the matter shall be referred to the next available agenda setting meeting for consideration by the Committee Chairs. Proposal 9d) That when it is deemed inappropriate through the agenda setting process that a delegation address Council and /or a Committee, the Clerk shall so notify the delegation and Council with a supporting explanation. It should be noted that nothing in the above proposal would preclude a member from bringing forward a notice of motion to enable Council to consider a matter. 10. Motions Municipal Code Chapter 25.7.6(c) prescribes that all motions are to be in writing. Adhering to this provision would add clarity for members of Council as well as the public with respect to what is being voted on. In most cases the written motion would be the one put forward in a staff report. When possible, members shall endeavour to draft their motions in advance of each meeting and the pre- drafted motion should be circulated to the Chair and Legislated Services staff. This applies to motions that are not reflected in a notice of motion or conveyed in a staff report. Staff will investigate solutions to facilitate the displaying of these motions in an expeditious manner during the meeting. Proposal 10a) That in keeping with the requirements already provided for in Municipal Code Chapter 25.7.6(c), all motions, except questions of privilege or purely procedural motions shall be made in writing and must be seconded before they are voted on. After a motion is received by the Chair, it is deemed to be in the possession of Council, but may be withdrawn by the mover at any time before decision or amendment, with the approval of Council. Currently, Municipal Code Chapter 25.7.8 provides that a motion to amend must be in writing and indicates that if the amendment has been withdrawn or voted on and lost, another amendment may be substituted to the main motion but not to an amendment. This provision outlines that amendments can only be withdrawn or voted on and therefore it implies that all amendments must be voted on; which is in keeping with the provisions of Robert's Rules of Order. The term `friendly amendment' is often used to describe an amendment offered by someone who is in sympathy with the purpose of the main motion in the belief that the amendment will either improve the statement or effect of the main motion. However, this can at times cause confusion as to what is being considered. Standard parliamentary procedure dictates that once a motion is made it belongs to the governing body and can only be amended based on the will of a majority of members. While it is acknowledged that voting on all amendments may decrease efficiency, it should add clarity to the proceedings and better align the City's practices with Municipal Code Chapter 25.7.8. Proposal 10b) That the City discontinue the practice of employing `friendly amendments' in instances where the proposed amendment represents a substantive change or would add a further clause(s) to the main motion. 1 -12 ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN: The proposed procedural changes aimed at promoting more effective meetings align with the following areas of the City's Strategic Plan: Community Priorities: Quality of Life, Leadership and Community Engagement and Diversity. Effective and Efficient Government Priorities: Organizational Governance and Communications, Marketing & Customer Service. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial implications associated with this report. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — A copy of this report was published via the City's website with the agenda in advance of Council's consideration of it. CONCLUSION: Should the proposals put forward in this Report be approved, staff recommends that they be implemented expeditiously. It is suggested that the accelerated Standing Committee agenda publication could commence as of the February 3, 2014 meetings. However, a number of the proposals will necessitate amendments to the City's Procedural By -law; and as such, there may be a slight delay before they are incorporated into the City's Municipal Code. Section 238(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001 prescribes that every municipality shall pass a procedural by -law for governing the calling, place and proceedings of meetings. While the Act stipulates the general content that must be included in that by -law, for the most part, the actual rules of procedure are left up to each individual council to determine. Kitchener Municipal Code Chapter 25 (Procedure) came into force in September 1993 and can be considered a living document, which has been amended approximately nine times over the last 20 years. For the most part, the proposed changes are an amalgamation of procedures that are being utilized by municipalities across the province. Through an examination of other procedural by- laws it was identified that there is no single solution to enhance meeting effectiveness; rather, a multi - pronged approach, as recommended herein, would most likely foster a greater chance for success. A number of the proposed options are interrelated; as such, a piecemeal approach to their implementation may not yield any noticeable improvements to how meetings function at the City of Kitchener. If approved, the proposals could be utilized for as long as Council deems them to be useful. If the measures are found to be ineffective, Council can revert back to the existing procedures or incorporate new changes into the Procedural By -law. It is important to note that there is no foreseeable cost to the City associated with implementing the proposals, even on a trial basis. ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Dan Chapman, Deputy CAO - Finance & Corporate Services Department Attached: Appendix `A' - Detailed Meeting Statistics Appendix `B' - Consolidated list of all of proposals contained in Report FCS -13 -177 1 -13 APPENDIX `A' Figure 2 Avg Council No. Mtg Time Members Barrie 2:08 Figure 1 Brampton 1:56 11 Burlington 1:19 7 Guelph 2:48 13 Hamilton 2:38 16 c4 m LM CL Ln 2:55 12 Vaughan 2:11 9 Wate rl oo 2:53 8 Windsor 2:51 11 fn Z wi Z. sw y CL CL w ... a C4 Mi CS 00 CL CL CL yrymi� 0.o CL 6 fw Iµ O'N co 0 ,W a !; Q. rn 0 in � v4J i r-1 I w� 8 in ti 0 "1 (TI 1,4 aid a M w.n I o �I 011 L f"II ey) fn, 1 4 Q w. „. „. „ ... ........... ...... „.„.„.. ..... .,,...,....� M'"M1 4rb"9i T-4 � slw 0 N UA APPENDIX `A' Figure 2 Avg Council No. Mtg Time Members Barrie 2:08 11 Brampton 1:56 11 Burlington 1:19 7 Guelph 2:48 13 Hamilton 2:38 16 London 4:17 15 Mississauga 2:55 12 Vaughan 2:11 9 Wate rl oo 2:53 8 Windsor 2:51 11 Overall Avg. 2:36 11 ' � t l Figure 3 1 -15 TIME LIMITAT TIME LIMITAT WALK -INS MUNICIPALITY COMMITTEE COUNCIL PERMITTED Barrie 10 mins 10 mins No Brampton 5 mins 5 mins No No, except for Burlington 5 mins 5 mins Planning meetings Yes at Committee, Cambridge 5 mins 5 mins Discretion of Chair at Council 5 mins, 10 mins Guelph 5 mins No for Planning Halton Region 10 mins 5 mins No No delegations Hamilton 5 mins No at Council Kitchener 5 mins 5 mins Yes No delegations London 5 mins No at Council Mississauga 5 mins 5 mins No Oakville 10 mins 10 mins Not at Council Peel Region 10 mins 5 mins No No delegations Vaughan 5 mins Yes at Council After agenda Waterloo (City) 10 mins 10 mins deadline, 5 mins Waterloo Region 10 mins 5 mins Yes Windsor 1 5 mins 5 mins No 1 -15 APPENDIX `B' The following is a consolidated list of all of the proposals contained in Report FCS -13 -177: Proposal 1) That Standing Committee agendas and reports be published on the City's website ten (10) days prior to the scheduled meeting, with hard copies of the agenda to be circulated no later than six (6) days prior to the meeting; and further, That questions of simple clarification, or where the answer to a question is conveyed in the materials circulated with the agenda, shall be deemed out of order by the Chair. Proposal 2) That Committee Chairs will ensure that matters are considered within their allotted time, which may include the need to call the question or defer the matter; and further, That when a matter is proposed to be deferred, consideration shall be given to the Corporate Reports Pending List in deciding an appropriate date for deferral. Proposal 3a) That any reports that are strictly for information shall be placed under that heading on the agenda and shall only be included as a Discussion Item by a majority vote of the Committee. Proposal 3b) That recorded votes shall not be permitted at a Standing Committee meeting. Proposal 4a) That each Standing Committee report included with the Council agenda shall be treated as if it were a list of consent items, whereby one motion will be used to bring all items on the report forward for consideration, but it shall not be read and /or summarized; and further, Notwithstanding the above, any member of Council may request that a particular clause be dealt with separately. Proposal 4b) That Sections 25.5.9 and 25.5.10 of the Procedural By -law shall be repealed and replaced with the following: Any request for a special enquiry will: a. Be in writing, b. Be signed by the member of Council requesting the special enquiry, c. Be received by the Clerk no later than noon of the Wednesday preceding the next regular meeting of Council, d. Be printed in full in the Agenda for that meeting, A special enquiry that requires a follow -up by staff shall only proceed if approved by a majority of Council members at the meeting. 1 -16 Upon approval, the request will be forwarded to the Chief Administrative Officer for review and department assignment. The Chief Administrative Officer will report back to Council at its next regular meeting on the department assignment and anticipated return date of the special enquiry. The Chief Administrative Officer or the assigned department will respond to the enquiry, subject to any limitations on disclosure by the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Should the request involve extraordinary staff research time and production costs, Council will be advised. The response to the special enquiry will be distributed to all members of Council. Proposal 4c) That the following is proposed to replace Section 25.4.18 (Termination of Council Proceedings): `Council shall remain in session until all business on the agenda is disposed of until 11:00 p.m. unless by unanimous consent of the members present a one hour extension is approved with proceedings of Council ending by no later than midnight.' Proposal 5) That the following are proposed amendments to Section 25.5.4.1 of Chapter 25 of the City's Municipal Code: Any person making a presentation, save and except those related to the City's annual budget deliberation process and Strategy Sessions, but including those by staff members, consultants engaged by the City, or individuals representing any other corporation, organization or committee, shall be permitted to address Council for a maximum of ten (10) minutes; and, • On behalf of the Mayor and /or Committee Chair, the Clerk / Committee Administrator shall keep account of the time expended by an individual on all presentations and at the completion of nine (9) minutes shall advise through an audio and /or visual prompt that their time will expire in approximately one (1) minute; and further, • Council may limit or extend the time allowed for a presentation by a majority vote. Proposal 6a) That a request to appear as a delegation at any Committee or Council meeting should be received by the Clerk by noon on the Wednesday before the meeting to ensure the person is listed on the printed Agenda distributed in advance of the meeting. However, it is recognized that this is not always possible and in these cases, delegations must contact the Clerk's Office before 4:30 p.m. the business day before Council or Committee meetings, in order to be eligible to speak to an item on the agenda; and, 1 -17 That the above provision does not apply to any legislated public hearings, at which delegations are entitled to register at the meeting; and further, That staff will facilitate a process for people to provide a written submission should they attend a meeting and are not afforded an opportunity to register as a delegation. Proposal 6b) That members of the public who have addressed Council or a Standing Committee on a particular issue will not be permitted to address Council / Standing Committee on that same matter, unless they are providing substantially new information. This new information must be submitted to the Clerk or designate by noon on the business day preceding the meeting at which the subject matter will be considered; and further, Should a member of Council feel that the submitted materials do not represent new information, than this may be raised through a point of order prior to hearing from the delegation; if the point of order is sustained, Council shall move forward without hearing from the delegation. Proposal 7a) That each councillor be allocated a total of five (5) minutes for their initial two (2) questions, which shall include the amount of time it takes to obtain a response from the delegation; and, That all members of Council shall be given an opportunity to ask at least one (1) question before any member is permitted to ask a third question; and further, That each councillor will be allocated a total of five (5) minutes for their subsequent round of questions, which shall include the amount of time it takes to obtain a response from the delegation Proposal 7b) That members shall be permitted to ask questions of delegates but shall not make statements nor enter into debate with such persons. Questions to delegations must be limited to the scope of the information that was conveyed by the delegation; and, should not be of a technical nature unless the delegation has been identified as a technical expert on the matter being considered. Proposal 7c) That the Chair may curtail a delegation if any derogatory comments are made about staff or other individuals, for disorderly conduct, or any other breach of conduct and, if the Chair rules that the delegation is concluded, the person or persons appearing shall withdraw. Proposal 7d) That whenever a delegation, offers comments or statements that are deemed to be erroneous and unsubstantiated, any member of Council, or City official, may be recognized by the Chair on a Point of Order and when recognized may provide the necessary corrections or clarifications to the comments or statement said by the delegation. 1 -18 Proposal 8a) That once everyone has been afforded an opportunity to ask questions, no further discussion or debate should occur on the matter until a formal written motion has been brought forward for consideration. Proposal 8b) That no member, without leave of the Council, will speak to the same motion, or in reply, for longer than five (5) minutes. Proposal 9a) That where an item is not on a current meeting agenda but is intended to come forward at a later date, staff shall refer the person to the appropriate meeting; thereby ensuring that the appropriate staff are in attendance and supporting materials have been circulated for Council's consideration. Proposal 9b) That where a person wishes to speak to an issue that is within the jurisdiction of Council but does not appear on a meeting agenda, consideration of that request will be referred to the next available agenda setting meeting for scheduling by the Committee Chairs. Proposal 9c) That where a person wishes to register as a delegation and the matter is not on a meeting agenda and it is questionable as to whether it falls within the City's jurisdiction, this matter shall be referred to the next available agenda setting meeting for consideration by the Committee Chairs. Proposal 9d) That when it is deemed inappropriate through the agenda setting process that a delegation address Council, the Clerk shall so notify the delegation and Council with a supporting explanation. Proposal 10a) That in keeping with the requirements already provided for in Municipal Code Chapter 25.7.6(c), all motions, except questions of privilege or purely procedural motions shall be made in writing and must be seconded before they are voted on. Proposal 10b) That the City discontinue the practice of employing friendly amendments in instances where the proposed amendment represents a substantive change or would add a further clause(s) to the main motion. 1 -19