Our Public Consultation Plan!
Voters for Taxis will do the following, on behalf of Calgary's taxi customers:
| The Theory of Engagement
| What is currently occurring?
| The result?
| Voters for Taxis promises to: |
| The opportunities for public involvement should be made accessible and attractive. |
There appears to be only one means for getting an issue addressed: through the Taxi Limousine Advisory Committee (TLAC). |
As the only means available, and in a public setting, this single method of engagement appears intimidating and confusing. |
- maintain an ongoing dialogue with TLAC's three "at large" members who are there to represent the public.
- meet with Aldermen and senior Administration on a regular basis.
|
| Public meetings should be scheduled at convenient times and places. |
TLAC meets on the 3rd Friday of every month, early afternoon, at City Hall. |
Most working publics are unable to attend, and if they can, are confronted with downtown parking challenges. |
Attend on the public’s behalf and publish the outcomes of those meetings on its website. |
| The schedule and issues to be discussed should be given plenty of advance publicity. |
The agendas are only made available at the meeting. The process for adding items to the agenda is not public. |
Those with issues and expecting to have them addressed are not advised of their opportunity. |
Ensure matters raised through VFT are put on the agenda, notification is broadcast via this website, and the agenda item(s) addressed in a timely manner. |
| The potential for public influence should be made explicit. |
The purpose and desired outcome(s) of this Bylaw Review have not been made public nor opportunity for influence made clear. |
The public believes that like other civic and democratic processes there is no or limited reason to participate. |
Ensure that however a decision is reached, the inputs to that decision and reasons for the inclusion of that input are made public. |
| Stakeholder groups should be able to participate in any consultation process regardless of status or perceived legitimacy. |
Stakeholder groups are not invited to participate nor made a party to the process unless they are approved “industry members” and are perceived has having something to offer. |
Needless effort is expended trying to gain entry into the consultation process, and collaboration is made more difficult. |
Compile and make available letters, phone complaints and comments, position statements, policy submissions, and survey results. |
| Quality requirements of the decision and process are made clear and understandable. |
The problem definition “what we are here to solve” has not been made clear. |
Meaningful input is lacking because no one knows what they should devote time and effort to. |
Solicit and post feedback from key decision makers about what the decision and process criteria are. |
| Sufficient information in an understandable format is presented in advance or during a consultation process. |
There has been little data or information distributed, even about the consultation process itself. |
There is a lack of useful and balanced information. What is made available lacks context and relevance. |
Will post, on this website, position papers and issue analysis to assist in solution generation. |
| The problem structure is presented in an open format. |
The problem structure has not been defined to date.
|
In the absence of an open structure, problem definition results in a forced choice, thereby limiting meaningful participation. |
Insist to key decision makers on a process that enables dialogue around alternatives and broadens rather than narrows choices. |
[next page]