HomeMy WebLinkAboutCompass Kitchener - 2007-06-13
COMPASS KITCHENER PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING NOTES
June 13, 2007CITY OF KITCHENER
The Compass Kitchener Committee met on this date, commencing at 4:05 p.m.
Present: Saleh Saleh, Pauline Houston, Pat Doherty, Sarah Marsh, Kim Knowles, Theresa
Mendler, Wynne Hughes, Shelley Adams, Laura Lee Dam, Susan St. John, Dan
Chapman. Roger LeBrun, Norm Damaren, Theron Kramer, Michelle (Quarry), Nicole
(Quarry), Joanne Smith, Mark Hildebrand, Silvia Wright, Berry Vrbanovic,
Sarah Marsh welcomed all that attended the presentation on Participatory Budgeting, brought forth by
the Compass Kitchener Advisory Committee. She introduced and provided a brief background on our
three presenters, Janette Loveys-Smith, Josh Lerner, and Daniel Schugurensky.
Shelley spoke on behalf of Don Bourgeois, who was not able to make the event. She provided a brief
background, explaining that the Plan for a Healthy Kitchener is based on the results of the Who Are
You, Kitchener? survey. Through Compass Kitchener, there has been a large amount of public
participation, and this may be another way to engage the residents.
Dan explained that many different forms of engagement have been tried through the years, and there
are benefits and negatives to all. There is much excitement about Participatory Budgeting and what it
can offer.
The table was circled and everyone introduced themselves and where they were from.
The presentations started with Daniel, then Josh, and ended with Janette. See all presentations
attached.
\\Cokfs1\cao\\\Cokfs1\cao\\\Cokfs1\cao\
General\Compass Kitchener\Compass Kitchener\Participatory Budgeting\Ten Reasons PB kitchener 07.pptGeneral\Compass Kitchener\Compass Kitchener\Participatory Budgeting\PB Kitchener.pptGeneral\Compass
Kitchener\Compass Kitchener\Participatory Budgeting\PB City of Kitchener.ppt
Rather then brainstorming the potential barriers themselves, Guelph found that asking what
?
the barriers are was a much more successful approach to take.
A find balance is found between process and learning as you go, and a little flexibility is
?
essential.
Proper language and lingo was important to ensure reaching all cultures as well as the
?
community as a whole. (Guelph spent $298,000)
Why did Guelph begin working with Participatory Budgeting? Because there was a problem.
?
The process started very simple, with lots of talking, no consultants. Each year it has grown,
and become more sophisticated, they have formed the process and have had the University of
Guelph in to review.
Participation is conditional on reaching as far as possible into the neighbourhood.
?
Neighbourhood Associations would go to their respective neighbourhoods to get information
and opinions and bring forth to the Participatory Budgeting table. Only problem found with this
is that there are some neighbourhoods that do not fall under an association and therefore do
not get a voice at the Participatory Budgeting table. There is also a process in place for these
areas to become a Neighbourhood Association.
The Participatory Budgeting process must be one that is fluid and dynamic.
?
Larger Capital programs or processes are still funded by the corporation, rather then decided
?
at the Participatory Budgeting table.
COMPASS KITCHENER COMMITTEE MINUTES
May 2, 2007CITY OF KITCHENER
- 2 -
Does Participatory Budgeting increase voter turnout? The thought is yes, but unsure for
?
certain. Guelph found that people were more willing to pay their taxes because they had a part
in the process, and also helped to form additional Neighbourhood Associations because
people wanted to have input.
How do you avoid getting more and more regulated? Much of this is bout self awareness.
?
Keep an open dialogue, watch for people who capitalize on conversation, and keep an eye out
for hidden agenda’s. Much of the advertising for participatory budgeting has been very simple,
this way it is understandable by everyone.
Does the City of Guelph have a Grants Program? Yes, Neighbourhood associations cannot
?
participate, it’s only available for Social Services and NGO’s.
Generally, Guelph has experienced middle class neighbourhood understanding lower class
?
neighbourhoods, and area comfortable compensating them. Generally, people who have
greater needs will participate more because they require more assistance. To ensure this,
Gueph implemented a formal criteria allotting more points if the proposed project is in a
neighbrouhood that is great need, or is of a lower class.
There are a few items which need to be decided on when coming to a decision. The first is
?
deciding whether to come to a consensus on spending decisions or if different factors should
be allotted points and dollars spent on items with the most points. If voting is used, do people
raise their hand, or is a secret ballot used?
Demographics – Neighbourhood groups must know their areas, the process is designed to get
?
people who normally wouldn’t get involved, involved. People are more likely to participate if
they actually see changes in their neighbourhood.
The dollars Guelph uses with Participatory Budgeting are separate from the budget for youth
?
and seniors.
It is very important to overcome barriers, this can be done by working with them – providing
?
child care, or transportation to and from the meeting, translation services etc.
How do we start Participatory Budgeting? Through a pilot program or with marginilized areas –
?
those who need the dollars the most.
Meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m.
Next meeting:
July 4th, 2007
Schmalz Room