Dati

Questioni generali
Pianificazione & Sviluppo
Argomenti specifici
Bilancio - Locale
Spesa pubblica
Servizi pubblici
Posizione
Winnipeg
Canada
Ambito di influenza
Città
Genitore di questo caso
File
https://s3.amazonaws.com/participedia.prod/a8b5b281-49a1-48c1-a642-ed833fa34a5c_2017_Report.pdf
Collegamenti
https://www.winnipeg.ca/interhom/Budget/2017Budget/default.stm
Data di inizio
Data di fine
Tempo limitato o ripetuto?
Un unico periodo di tempo definito
Scopo/Obiettivo
Prendere, influenzare o contestare le decisioni del governo e degli enti pubblici
Approccio
Consultazione
Scala della partecipazione pubblica
Consultare
Numero totale di partecipanti
950
Aperto a tutti o Limitato ad alcuni?
Aperto a tutti
Legalità
Facilitatori
No
Faccia a faccia, Online o Entrambi
Entrambi
Tipi di interazione tra i partecipanti
Esprimere solo opinioni/preferenze
Discussione, dialogo o deliberazione
Informazioni e risorse per l'apprendimento
Materiali scritti di sintesi
Metodi decisionali
Sondaggio d'opinione
Comunicazione dei risultati e delle conoscenze ottenute.
Relazione pubblica
Tipo di Organizzatore/Manager
Amministrazione locale
Finanziatore
City of Winnipeg
Tipo di finanziatore
Amministrazione locale
Personale
Volontari
No
Autori del cambiamento
Funzionari pubblici / Dirigenti della PA

CASO

Winnipeg "Let’s Talk" Budget Consultation 2017

9 marzo 2019 Jaskiran Gakhal, Participedia Team
23 settembre 2018 Aengus Bridgman
22 settembre 2018 Aengus Bridgman
Questioni generali
Pianificazione & Sviluppo
Argomenti specifici
Bilancio - Locale
Spesa pubblica
Servizi pubblici
Posizione
Winnipeg
Canada
Ambito di influenza
Città
Genitore di questo caso
File
https://s3.amazonaws.com/participedia.prod/a8b5b281-49a1-48c1-a642-ed833fa34a5c_2017_Report.pdf
Collegamenti
https://www.winnipeg.ca/interhom/Budget/2017Budget/default.stm
Data di inizio
Data di fine
Tempo limitato o ripetuto?
Un unico periodo di tempo definito
Scopo/Obiettivo
Prendere, influenzare o contestare le decisioni del governo e degli enti pubblici
Approccio
Consultazione
Scala della partecipazione pubblica
Consultare
Numero totale di partecipanti
950
Aperto a tutti o Limitato ad alcuni?
Aperto a tutti
Legalità
Facilitatori
No
Faccia a faccia, Online o Entrambi
Entrambi
Tipi di interazione tra i partecipanti
Esprimere solo opinioni/preferenze
Discussione, dialogo o deliberazione
Informazioni e risorse per l'apprendimento
Materiali scritti di sintesi
Metodi decisionali
Sondaggio d'opinione
Comunicazione dei risultati e delle conoscenze ottenute.
Relazione pubblica
Tipo di Organizzatore/Manager
Amministrazione locale
Finanziatore
City of Winnipeg
Tipo di finanziatore
Amministrazione locale
Personale
Volontari
No
Autori del cambiamento
Funzionari pubblici / Dirigenti della PA
Questa voce è stata originariamente aggiunta in Inglese. Visualizza questa voce nella sua lingua originale. clicca per maggiori informazioni

The 2017 budget consultations were the second to be conducted by the Winnipeg Office of Public Engagement. The consultations consisted of an online survey tool, a wikisurvey tool, and a telephone survey.

Note: the following entry is missing citations. Please help us verify its content. 

Problems and Purpose

The 2017 process was named Let's Talk: Building a Stronger Winnipeg Together. The purpose of the public consultation was to collect high level input and feedback on spending priorities and preferences for revenue generation. 

Background History and Context

Building on the earlier success of mass participation in City planning in the form of OurWinnipeg, the City launched public budget consultations in 2014 to solicit and compile feedback from Winnipeggers into city budget and planning priorities. This work was contracted out to a consulting firm (MNP) which was generally perceived to have conducted an ineffective process with few shifts in spending as a result of community input. The following year another consulting firm conducted a similar exercise which included a series of town hall meetings and an online survey with the results ultimately not reported to council or released to the public. This rocky start to formal budget consultations in the city caught the attention of the incoming Mayor Brian Bowman (assumed office at the end of 2014), who had made a campaign promise to improve public consultation for both the budget and other projects. To this end, Bowman established an Office of Public Engagement in 2015 with a mandate to support all City activities and projects through public consultation and engagement.

After a successful 2016 budget consultation process, the number of opportunities for engagement were expanded with in-person `Community Conversations' and telephone survey's being added. These additional mechanisms were not accompanied by an expansion of participation (in fact the opposite) with approximately 900 participants (0.1% of the Winnipeg population).

Organizing, Supporting, and Funding Entities

The process was organized by the Office of Public Engagement with the support of Dialogue Partners. The Office of Public Engagement and the budget consultation process were funded through regular operations of the City of Winnipeg. 

Participant Recruitment and Selection

All members of the public were free to participate. However, most of the participation (approximately two-thirds) were recruited through a telephone survey, with the remaining split between the website, community conversations, and community visits. The majority of participants were full-time workers, with an even split between 18-34, 35-55, and 55+ respondents.

Methods and Tools Used

Similar to previous years, there were a variety of methods used to solicit input. The three main ways were: an online engagement tool, a series of community conversations and visits, and a telephone survey.

The Let's Talk interactive online discussion tool that was developed for participants to respond to and share with others their responses to key project questions. Interested participants could respond to surveys, share stories, and generally provide their best advice to the City. The platform was bilingual. There were a series of "Community Conversations and Visits" that were held. There were five of these hosted at different times and locations through the week. A 600-person telephone survey was conducted. These different mechanisms were used not to gather different types of input but rather to ensure a wider consultation net was cast.

The telephone survey used quota sampling to produce a representative sample.

What Went On: Process, Interaction, and Participation

There was little deliberation or education as part of the campaign, with direct feedback solicited and then compiled for input into the budget process. Relative percentage support for different spending priorities were assessed, but the report did note that priorities and preferences for city spending and revenue generation are varied and that citizens disagreed about fundamental components of the consultation (e.g. should taxes be decreased or increased).

Influence, Outcomes, and Effects

The consultation report provided a list of guiding principles to the city that represents the distilled findings of the consultation.

  • Spending Wisely: finding efficiencies and opportunities for innovation
  • Communication and transparency
  • Desire for opportunities to support decision-making
  • Aligning spending choices of today with a vision for tomorrow

The highest priority services identified in the online and telephone survey include: street and sideway maintenance, public transit, roadway snow removal, and waste collection.

Part of the Winnipeg budget consultations is to play an awareness increasing function and there was some engagement on twitter and through the website, albeit limited. 

Analysis and Lessons Learned

There were a series of methodology limitations identified. In particular, the consultation process focused on gathering input as opposed to any more deliberative or discussion-based model. This meant that trade-offs were not considered and those compiling the feedback were only able to report absolute numbers in favour or against specific proposals. Also the financial cost of particular issues were not considered. As the results of the survey were not necessarily fully representative or statistically valid, this exercise cannot be considered as genuine, meaningful, and impactful consultation.

As in previous years, citizens continued to be interested in additional background information and better communication from the city. While not as strongly worded as the 2014 report, there is a continuing concern that only informed consultation is meaningful. The report contained the recommendation that the consultation be started earlier and that input be tied to the development of the budget in a more meaningful way.

A number of participants stated that following-up and “closing the loop” are critical components of any consultation process. Participants would be more likely to participate if they felt their voice was heard and if they could see how their input was used in decision-making. This is a key challenge of the budget consultation process in Winnipeg.

See Also

Winnipeg Budget Consultations

Winnipeg Budget Consultation 2018

References

External Links

Notes