As city councillors ponder another about-face to tame public anger, here's hoping lessons learned from recent history will avoid another PR disaster.
In the face of public anger, some councillors have already said they will vote against a plan to require residents to buy a $50 annual permit for the “privilege” (the word used in the staff report) of having a campfire in the backyard.
The change was one of many approved last November during the budget process. I remember thinking at the time people wouldn't notice until spring, and then, well, they'd lose it. Northerners love backyard fires, and there really didn't seem a reason to make people buy permits, other than the staff report concluded it was a good idea.
What bugs me most is the fact important decisions are being made – the type that affect residents directly – apparently without a strategy to explain the whys and wherefores of what's being done.
Take the abrupt reversal last month on the new rules surrounding when you can put your garbage to the curb. When approved in fall 2015, we had just come through the summer of the bear. Many people were panicked to see bruins ambling up city streets at night, checking out the roadside garbage buffet. Police were forced to kill several of the bears, in addition to responding to a stream of calls from frightened residents.
So when council approved a plan to force people to throw out the trash no earlier than 5 a.m., it seemed a reasonable response. But that was pretty much the end of it until the April 1 start date. As people realized what was happening, they predictably were upset. But why did we get to that point without some sort of messaging plan for people who were going to be affected?
Had the city reached out to people who, for whatever reason, couldn't put their trash out between 5-7 a.m., a sound public policy decision might have been spared. Even if city hall agreed to make a number of exceptions to the new rule, it still would have helped. Because with the late winter surge this year, and the bears' remarkable memory, there's a good chance the berry crop will be late and the bears will head back to town.
Getting garbage off the street at night was the best chance to discourage that. But a good decision was poorly implemented, and, well, let's see what happens this summer.
Which brings me to the next PR landmine: the reduction in the garbage bag limit from three to two, beginning this fall. Again, this is a sound policy decision. With recycling and composting options, and the ruinous cost and complexity of opening a new city dump, it's a wise and forward-thinking move.
But with the change coming into effect in just a few months, what has the city done to reach out to people who will be affected? How have they communicated the options available to young families and others who have legitimate reasons why two bags a week isn't enough? Have they made the green composting bins and recycling containers readily available – even for free? How about a campaign explaining (again) how to divert food waste to the composter and how to keep them from getting gross (a big issue for me)?
I would hate to see another reasonable decision fall to the wayside because of a poor implementation plan. They can still get it right, but time is short. Some people won't be happy no matter what, but acting now could blunt the worst of the backlash.
