After months of discussion, it looks like Erin’s first committee of the whole meeting proved to be positive one for councillors and staff.
If one had taken a quick look at the long agenda, one would have expected a long night ahead, but instead things moved along smoothly and quickly – as council meetings go.
As the meeting drew to a close on Jan. 31, clerk Kathryn Ironmonger said council and staff had approached the meeting a bit differently.
In saying that, she sought feedback about what worked and what did not. She said part of the goal is to determine how councillors want to see the materials presented.
Council had set up a working meeting of council and department heads to get a better grip on what the issues were. Ironmonger asked if council still wants all department heads present for the next such meeting.
Councillor John Brennan believes the night “turned out very well. I’m really, really happy with the way things turned out.”
He added, “When I first looked at the agenda, and I said this to some people that this is not what I wanted to see.”
Councillor Barb Tocher added, “Me too. But he [Mayor Lou Maieron] handled it well.”
Brennan said, “It turns out [the meeting] was what I wanted to see. It goes to show, that at first glance, you can be mistaken.”
He was pleased with the presentation format for items to be considered at a future council meeting, and said discussion was very good.
Ironmonger asked if that indicates councillors are happy leaving the meeting flexible.
“I thought tonight was fabulous,” said Tocher.
She had shared Brennan’s concerns at the outset of the meeting.
Tocher had noted a few items of the agenda and thought “We did not want recommendations and reports, and Larry [Van Wyck] handled it beautifully.”
Van Wyck’s roads report, in writing, was distributed to council, noting it was being presented to council on Feb. 7.
“We didn’t go into it [in depth]. It was exactly what the way I thought we should handle it.”
To staff she added, “I know I hate to keep you here all night, but if we have to bear through it, so do you.”
Councillor Deb Callaghan echoed the comments.
“I think it’s been great and it’s been good to see staff open up to just general conversation and questions.”
Councillor Josie Wintersinger agreed the meeting went well. “This meeting has been very productive and very positive.”
One suggestion she offered was about council’s suggestions that were placed near the bottom of the agenda. She wondered if that might be considered sooner.
Ironmonger said if questions are directed to staff ahead of time, staff could bring appropriate information to the meeting.
Tocher agreed, but maintained there still needs to be a place, “where we can be open enough to ask, are there any new ideas out there.”
It would be a time to bring up items that had not been discussed to that point.
Callaghan said the meeting was the first taste of the approach. She had no issue with leaving council questions where they are on the agenda, “since most of our questions were already answered.”
The section at the end, she suggested, would just clean up any leftover issues.
Mayor Lou Maieron said his comments were two-fold.
He, too, had looked at the 90-page agenda with staff reports. He said maybe the approach might need splitting in half to and be limited to staff involved in the issues.
Tocher predicted as meetings followed, they would require less time.
Brennan did not advocate limiting staff at this point.
“This is going to evolve with fewer and items. I’d hate to put any limitations right now,” he said.
Maieron said there are some issues which may take longer in the future. “I think two hours is good; four hours is pushing.”
Tocher asked what staff thought of the process.
While mention was made of possibly too many items on the agenda, the overall opinion was positive.
Tocher said so many of the issues are combined with roads, water, planning, recreation. “It is all inter-related … and everything has to do with money.”
Ironmonger said that for the meeting minutes, “It will be as much in bullet point as I can possibly be. It will not be who said what – the highlights of what was covered.”
