As many people concerned with parks and parkland disposition know, about three years ago city council set up a hand-picked group to address issues such as park definitions, parkland disposition (use) and licenses and leases of said land. The group was given the title of parks and recreation master plan steering committee. It was composed of a city-selected group of individuals. This group met over the time period and reported its findings to city council. The word “steering” would, by definition, imply direction or deciding a pathway for issues to be resolved. There were some definite points of impasse and there were some issues that seemed to bear resolution. I was privileged to have attended many of these meetings as an observer with a few instances of participation.
When this group concluded its findings list and presented it to the city, it was somewhat glossed over by our mayor as “some lessons learned and that much more public collaboration needed to happen.” Somewhat of a “mea culpa” on behalf of council. Too little too late, some might say as the pre-election buzzwords three-plus years ago were: openness, fiscal responsibility, accountability and truth were bantered about.
Recently, council has made overtures as to setting up a parks advisory committee. My question here is, why? It would imply that the steering committee’s input was not really what council wanted to hear. Maybe by setting up an advisory committee, they will be more successful the second time around.
To better understand this perhaps a definition of purpose for both groups is in order.
What is the role of the advisory committee? By definition, “An advisory committee is a collection of individuals who bring unique knowledge and skills which augment the knowledge and skills of the formal board of directors in order to more effectively guide the organization.
What is the role of a steering committee? By definition, a steering committee involves monitoring the quality of the project as it develops; Providing advice (and sometimes making decisions) about changes to the project as it develops. The steering committee provides support, guidance and oversight of progress. Members do not usually work on the project themselves.
Overall, these two would seem to have some common threads. Why then, the need for a second committee on the same subject? Were there some weak areas in the steering committee’s work or did council not like what it was presented with?
There would seem to be something wrong with this development or is council becoming slightly paranoid as election time draws near?
Ron Barillaro
Penticton