Three Calgary city councillors are asking for an independent review of the City of Calgary’s public engagement, tapping into citizen frustration with the consultation process.

A Notice of Motion will come forward for technical review at the Oct. 2 Executive Committee asking for a third-party, independent analysis of the City’s Engage policy, in comparison with other public participation best practices.

Public engagement has long been a sore spot for some citizens in discussions around transportation, land use and planning, with a common drawback being that views or preferences aren’t reflected in outcomes.

Ward 7 Coun. Terry Wong has consistently questioned city administration on the lengths they’ve gone to ensure robust public engagement. He, along with Couns. Andre Chabot and Sonya Sharp are sponsoring the Notice of Motion.

“This has been brewing for quite a while, and one of the questions I’ve asked since coming on council is the Engage policy that was approved back in the late 90s, early 2000, which I was a part of that process back at that time, have we done an audit since then?” Wong said.

“Are there avenues to improve it? The constant response is, it works, and we haven’t had complaints.”

Wong said that since the citywide rezoning public hearing and debate, he and other councillors have had numerous citizen questions wondering how there could be so many letters and speakers against the measure, yet it was approved.

“The feedback we’ve got since from the constituents is then, why don’t you waste your time going through all of this if Council doesn’t run with this and accept amendments?” he said.

“That’s just one of the triggering reasons. We had similar conversations following the Green Line. Similar conversations with the water main break and the public just getting frustrated as to whether or not the public participation process is meaningful.”

Engage Policy review

The Notice of Motion asks the independent review to come back with lessons learned and opportunities to improve the public participation and engagement.

The Policy Statement from the current Engage document outlines the goal of the public engagement system.

“The City of Calgary (Council and Administration) recognizes that decisions are improved when we engage with the individuals and groups impacted by, or interested in, those decisions,” it reads.

“Where appropriate and within the City’s ability to finance and resource, the City commits to conduct transparent and inclusive engagement processes that are responsive and accountable.”

The purpose of the policy also states that the engagement process should help achieve alignment with City Council’s priorities for Calgarian-centric service delivery.

Engagement is defined in the policy as “purposeful dialogue between The City, impacted or interested Calgarians and other communities or groups to gather information to influence decision-making.”

Wong said often the characterization is that only certain segments of the population attend public hearings or engagement sessions. He said in the public hearings on citywide rezoning, several citizens from different demographics and socio-economic backgrounds participated.

He does think more needs to be done to invite different people into the conversation.

“One of the difficulties we have in public registration and engagement is making the vehicles and the avenues for public participation available for everybody in a very convenient or accessible manner,” he said.

“I think we need to improve on how we do that.”

Other groups have also expressed a desire for public engagement to change to ensure a broader range of Calgarians are reflected in policy decisions. Students have said the City of Calgary needs to do a better job reaching out to them on planning issues.

Wong said he believes the City must examine its approach of starting with a predetermined outcome and asking for people’s opinions on it. He said too many citizens are going to city engagement sessions thinking they’ll have input, but they see signboards with information already on it and asked what they think.

“If we want to solve the problem, we need to understand what the real problem is and get the root issue before we present to people solutions,” he said.

If approved, the work is thus far unfunded and would require an amendment to the mid-cycle budget adjustment. A report would be expected back by Q2 2025.