Editor,
Re: 'Unprecedented' civic lottery planned to shape the future of Burnaby (Jan. 9, 2024)
I read with interest the story on the City of Burnaby’s desire to hold a citizen’s assembly and invite members of the public to discuss the creation of Burnaby’s Official Community Plan OCP. As I understand it, the city already has an OCP, it needs an update.
First, I applaud the city in their desire to consult with the community in order to ask about the future of Burnaby.
The forums held last summer were to my knowledge the first time ever feedback was requested on an OCP. So it was predictable what feedback the city wanted but maybe not what they received. We are still waiting for an interim report on this.
I agree the upcoming assembly is another step in a type of consultation process.
As I read the article, I realized the city was being quite narrow in its selection of citizens to give feedback.
A letter to 13,000 residents and 45 people giving feedback. It seems to me a shallow and perhaps not a really representative pool to draw conclusions for the rest of us.
If I remember correctly approximately 450 people attended Mayor Hurley’s housing forum four years ago. That’s 10 times as many as for one albeit major issue.
So, only 45 people for this citizen’s assembly that could determine the fate and shape of Burnaby for the next 25 to 30 years?
Upon continuing reading of the article, it appears the city has decided to intentionally exclude a wide and deep cross-section of experts (paid and or unpaid) from within Burnaby who can provide their deeply grounded background and knowledge to others.
It seems confusing that no experts would be included.
In any major decision making process you want the experts at the table to clarify thinking, give facts, provide historical context and explain complex ideas to others who may never come across such individuals in their daily life, or have never heard of such issues before.
These people could include but would not be limited to those that work in community services, people with disabilities, people of color, cycling, faith groups, conservation, walking groups, climate action groups, business groups, fish/wildlife, streamkeepers, business, youth etc.
Why would the city want to exclude such groups in favour of 45 who may not be representative of the city?
I must say, I am also deeply underwhelmed by the question, “How should Burnaby grow and change by 2050 to create a city where everyone can thrive”. I am not sure if this is even the question that should be asked.
Finally, it is my opinion for the assembly to have credibility and for the citizens of Burnaby to buy into its results (remember the Foreshore Park recycling fiasco, and the proposed move of city hall to Metrotown) the citizens of Burnaby, and city council, must be able to look back on this exercise and realize there was benefit for everyone who attended, that consultation included experts and non-experts, thoughtful, deep and meaningful consultation occurred and those that did not attend can make meaning of the outcomes.
If any of this does not happen, results will be less than hoped for.
Thank you,
Cathy Griffin, Burnaby
