LARRY'S CORNER- Hamilton's Former Mayor Speaks

Amalgamation Revisited

By Larry Di Ianni
(posted September 14, 2009)

No. No. No.  I haven’t become enamoured of the Free Flamborough-ites or other de-amalgamation crazies such as those championed by former Councillor Dave Braden.  It is just that now, nearly 10 years after amalgamation, we should reflect on lessons learned from the experience to see if any tweaking might be in order.  Why are these thoughts coming to mind?

Glen Peace and I have teamed up yet again to do a series for Mohawk College called “The Culture of Success”.  This is an eight session series dealing with the following: Organizational Development, Leadership for Success, Advocacy for Non-Profit Agencies, Governance and Board Management, Mission, Vision, Values and Success, Climbing the Ladder, Accountability and Evaluation in Institutions.  The session is a mix of academic research on the topics, real-life experiences garnered after 30 years in education and 25 in politics for me and almost 40 years in leadership at various levels for Glen.  We also invite a panel of well-known experts to share their perspectives.

Last week was the first session and it was fun to do.  The setting is the Mohawk Enterprise Center at the McMaster Innovation Park on Longmoor.  As well as the thrill of being in front of a class again after many years, it was great to see the progress being made on the CanMet site and the newly refurbished former Camco site.  But I digress.

The first session dealt with Organizational Development issues and the role of the ‘change agent’ in organizations.  The two guests were Marvin Ryder and Doug Lychak.  They were asked to come in specifically because of their experiences in creating the ‘New’ City of Hamilton when the decision was made to amalgamate the communities of Hamilton, Ancaster, Dundas, Flamborough, Glanbrook, and Stoney Creek, as well as the former Regional level of government.  The effort of their work remains with us today.

Mr. Lychak and Professor Ryder did not disappoint. They were marvellous; and the candidates revelled in their candour, intelligence and forthright opinions, even when critical.

Among the nuggets each contributed during the one hour and a half of their presentation was the following:

1. Experts were brought in from across the country to help administer the city.
2. The Transition Board which oversaw the amalgamation for a whole year made it clear that the policy side run by the appointed Board and the Administrative side run by the hired staff never crossed into each other’s territory.
3. Over 80% of the recommendations made by the Board were approved by the new City Council of the unified city.
4. Over 30 expert panels were commissioned to give input into policies for the new city.  This was a great experiment in the devolution of policy development in the city.
5. It would have been better for the new city if the Transition Board had been given a three-year mandate to be in charge.  This would have given them an opportunity not only to design the systems, but to implement them as well.  It was acknowledged that this would have been a very difficult thing for the province to do politically.
6. It would have been beneficial if politicians had been able to participate in the expert panel discussions if it could have been managed.
7. The newly elected Council did not have buy-in into the process and this made implementation tricky.  However, as stated above, over 80% of the recommendations were accepted.
8. Some of the unions took a very antagonistic approach to the amalgamation process even though no one from any bargaining unit was terminated as the result of amalgamation.
9. Staff reductions were made by attrition or through a buy-out process.  Contracting out for specific skill areas was facilitated.
10.  $25M dollars were saved in year one with a promise to save as much in years two and three.  No property taxes were increased in year one.
11.  Provincial downloading gobbled up much of the savings in subsequent years.
12.  Regret was expressed that the ward boundaries maintained the status quo rather than mixing up the wards to create a new configuration mixing up urban and rural representation.  A ‘pie’ was envisioned with the epicentre in the downtown core taking in the lower city, the escarpment and the rural areas.  Unfortunately, the geography of the lake mitigated against this approach, there obviously being no population in the waters!
13. An opinion was shared that ward organization detracts from a birds-eye view perspective. The city would be better served if all Councillors ran city-wide. For example, the current Council doesn’t even totally buy into the “Hamilton: City of Waterfalls” project, even though it is community driven. Some don’t see this marketing program as germane to them.
14.  Remuneration is probably too high for locally elected officials.
15.  The Call Center was a great innovation, whittled down by successive Councils.
16.  Budget savings can be had if Council were to make difficult but beneficial decisions.

And many other points were made.  And then, when we went out for a beer and wings, the conversation continued.  Through it all, what was reinforced for me were the contributions that both men made to this city’s well-being.  They were true change-agents and should be thanked.

And to come back full circle, wouldn’t it be great to organize a symposium of individuals involved at the time and since who might share some  of their perspectives and suggest some changes that might yet be made to better the structure and service delivery for this community.  It’s about time.  Ten years have passed.

BACK TO LARRY'S CORNER

HOME