For 130 years, the principle under which municipal governments are supposed to operate is openness and transparency. That’s not just us saying that, this is how the BC Ombudsman describes the legislative history that lays the groundwork for how local councils should function under the Community Charter.
It is, therefore, somewhat of a surprise to learn that there is a committee of Coquitlam council — Strategic Investment Advisory Panel (SIAP) — that operates behind closed doors with a select group of people from the development and real estate sectors.
Is this committee operating illegally? No it is not, according to the city. Indeed, the 2012 BC Ombudsman’s report on meeting best practices notes that workshops and shirtsleeve sessions can be closed to the public if they don’t deal with issues that form the basis of council business, don’t require a quorum, no voting occurs and those in attendance are gathered “strictly to receive information or to receive or provide training.”
Those appear to be the operating rules for SIAP, which was established in 2010 to advise the city on development issues.
But at a time when the real estate and development industries are under scrutiny because of housing affordability concerns, and trust in institutions appears to be waning along with voter turnout, these types of gatherings, once completely acceptable, should be rethought.
While we're not accusing Coquitlam council of being beholden to the development industry (despite political fundraising records that show developers do indeed back certain politicians), the optics of this closed door committee are too opaque to let pass without comment.
Indeed, it could be argued that Coquitlam is doing good work on the affordability front with its Housing Affordability Strategy, which seeks to create more housing types and rental opportunities for people struggling to rent or buy in the city.
Notwithstanding this good effort by the city, SIAP needs to be reconsidered and the fact that it gets rubber-stamped every year by council is disappointing.
In our opinion, the fact that such a committee exists, and does so without accountability and transparency, such as, at the very least, the public release of meeting minutes, does Coquitlam a disservice.
We would like to see more transparency and openness from our public bodies, and as a civic election approaches, we will be returning to this issue for both councils and school board over the coming months.
