Can they be challenged to hold themselves accountable? Is there some metric (homes built, I'd suggest) where they can set themselves a bar, and agree to not-run-again if the bar isn't met?
I'd like somebody to show a graph of total housing, which at least is a rising line, if not fast enough - then draw in the line that they're going to make happen, the steeper one. With an agreement to step aside if they don't succeed.
With most city councils, they can dodge with "I'm not a dictator, can't be held responsible for collective failure". But THIS city council has a majority, and claim to be one united group. (Are they a party? Whatever...)
So, they should be able to make promises. If they can't, they should be reminded of it all the time. "You won't make promises, because you have no confidence in your big plans, either. Why should we?" etc.
It's kind of a pleasure to be talking about about a material problem you can apply metrics to. Far better than talking about "culture" .
"It's kind of a pleasure to be talking about about a material problem you can apply metrics to."
Absolutely!
I think of homebuilding as having multiple bottlenecks. Pretty much everyone (including ABC) agrees that the slow and discretionary approval process is a huge bottleneck - "3-3-3-1" (fixed timelines for approvals) was a big part of the ABC platform. https://morehousing.ca/bottlenecks
I figure the main accountability mechanism is elections. Party platforms are a major factor in setting voter expectations (although not the only one). If they're elected with a majority, and they fail to meet expectations, voters will look for alternatives at the next election.
Thanks for going up there and making very reasonable suggestions they can hardly ignore. The one-stairway rules are a stroke of the pen!
I notice the guy two before you was calling for metrics and everybody was comparing production to the 18,000/year need. That seems clear enough.
I wish we could fund a clock. Counting people in Metro Van going up, housing going up...but the clock would subtract 2.5 people from the adding population for every house going in, and show the difference as "additional homeless people since last election", and a countdown of days to the next election.
Something to keep the pressure on, the metric reminded, constantly.
I really appreciate this post and that your links make it easy to access the counsel notes!
Can they be challenged to hold themselves accountable? Is there some metric (homes built, I'd suggest) where they can set themselves a bar, and agree to not-run-again if the bar isn't met?
I'd like somebody to show a graph of total housing, which at least is a rising line, if not fast enough - then draw in the line that they're going to make happen, the steeper one. With an agreement to step aside if they don't succeed.
With most city councils, they can dodge with "I'm not a dictator, can't be held responsible for collective failure". But THIS city council has a majority, and claim to be one united group. (Are they a party? Whatever...)
So, they should be able to make promises. If they can't, they should be reminded of it all the time. "You won't make promises, because you have no confidence in your big plans, either. Why should we?" etc.
It's kind of a pleasure to be talking about about a material problem you can apply metrics to. Far better than talking about "culture" .
"It's kind of a pleasure to be talking about about a material problem you can apply metrics to."
Absolutely!
I think of homebuilding as having multiple bottlenecks. Pretty much everyone (including ABC) agrees that the slow and discretionary approval process is a huge bottleneck - "3-3-3-1" (fixed timelines for approvals) was a big part of the ABC platform. https://morehousing.ca/bottlenecks
I figure the main accountability mechanism is elections. Party platforms are a major factor in setting voter expectations (although not the only one). If they're elected with a majority, and they fail to meet expectations, voters will look for alternatives at the next election.
Thanks for going up there and making very reasonable suggestions they can hardly ignore. The one-stairway rules are a stroke of the pen!
I notice the guy two before you was calling for metrics and everybody was comparing production to the 18,000/year need. That seems clear enough.
I wish we could fund a clock. Counting people in Metro Van going up, housing going up...but the clock would subtract 2.5 people from the adding population for every house going in, and show the difference as "additional homeless people since last election", and a countdown of days to the next election.
Something to keep the pressure on, the metric reminded, constantly.
I think of asking rents as the metric! https://rentals.ca/national-rent-report