Who Watches the Watchmen?
“Executive members of a residents’ association do not have power over residents - they have a responsibility towards them.”
So writes PurplePoets.com when discussing the importance of having a good constitution when setting up a residents association.
This statement came to mind recently as I was pondering some publicized opinions of Windsor’s Downtown Residents Association (DRA). During the recent coverage (in the Star and National Post) of the board of Transit Windsor’s idea to reintroduce streetcars to the roads of our city, the DRA’s official statement was used by the Windsor Star to propogate misinformation regarding the proposal, calling streetcars “inflexible relics” citing Toronto mayor Rob Fords decision to change some streetcar lines to subways. Despite the fact that transportation experts identify fixed-rail streetcars as being integral to neighbourhood revitalization, DRA president Phillip Haddad feels they “offer no flexibility. They take up a lane of traffic in the centre of the road. It’s a fixed route system and you can’t change it“. I’m not here to debate buses VS streetcars (there’s sufficient reports out there doing just that) but the fact that the DRA appeared to voice their disapproval without consulting the actual residents of downtown Windsor.
This isn’t the first time this accusation has been made against the organization. During the ongoing debate about the merits of the proposed downtown aquatic centre, the DRA came out in favour of the plan to consolodate existing neighbourhood pools and the library on the Western Super Anchor site despite the fact that there was considerable resident opposition.
So this begs the question - exactly who does the DRA speak for and how does it vet it’s “official” communications to its membership?
I have tried contacting the DRA so they could tell their side of the story, but two weeks later I have yet to hear from them. The following is the email that landed in their inbox:
I am writing to you today in regards to some comments made against your organization and wanted to give you an opportunity to comment prior to writing about it.
The Windsor Star has recently written about the DRA’s supposed opposition to a plan to implement a streetcar system in the downtown area. Another recent column regarding the downtown aquatic centre has the DRA supporting the idea.
In both these cases, numerous downtown residents express their bewilderment with the comments made by the DRA, adding that to their knowledge, no residents had been asked their opinion about these two projects. According to these residents, the DRA had come out with an “official” statement way too fast in response to the article to get a consensus from the residents of the downtown.
I invite you to respond to these allegations prior to me publishing an article on the issue.
I have also contact many of my downtown-residing friends to ask them whether the DRA has ever approached their member residents regarding their feelings towards downtown planning proposals, and not one of them answered in the affirmative.
Resident Associations are an important component of a fully-functioning, healthy community and we here at ScaleDown fully endorse their establishment. The DRA has an important role to play in the revitalization of our downtown, as increasing the residential component of the area is paramount to increasing the livability and viability of it. However, there must be rules to their operation and how they reach conclusions that affect every downtown resident. They cannot be made in solitude by a small handful of active, yet reclusive, board members as it appears they do today.
It all comes down to the membership and the by-law structure the organization is built upon. Unless these two components are strong, the organization can face irrelevancy.
Again, I invite the board of the DRA to comment below and share their side of the story.
EDITOR’S NOTE: There are currently two additional resident asoociations (that I’ve heard about) in the process of forming in the “Mid-Town” area (south of downtown) as well as Walkerville. If you would like to play an active part or simply be made aware of events and meetings when they get underway, send me a private message ([email protected]) and I will put you in touch with the organizers.
Tags: Aquatic Centre, Downtown, DRA, Resident's Association, Streetcars
Post Feedback
I’m a member of the DRA - or I thought I was and on their mailing list and a twenty three resident of Downtown, yet I also got nothing from the DRA about their statement coming out against LRT et al.
I will state emphatically, they, the DRA, did not speak for me on this subject. My views are totally opposite of what they expressed. A streetcar takes up no more room than the current city buses downtown and if powered by electricity, pollute less if at all and will be a lot quieter.
I haven’t even gotten any email updates from the DRA - total silence on what they are doing. Don’t know of scheduled meetings or anything else they are doing in “representing the residents!”
I had a gut feeling in the initial meetings of the DRA, that this was going to be a top down organization run by clique of special interest people who only have one view of what Downtown should be - theirs! I think I am being proved right about this.
But you are wrong about one thing Chris, there was not a significant resident outrage about moving the Central library, just the opposite. Fewer than a one hundred “supposed residents,” (the most outspoken came from out of area and a lot were NDP) of the core appeared or let alone spoke at any of the meetings held in the downtown. There are roughly 13,000 residents in the core/downtown area, fewer than one hundred, does not rate a ’significant outrage!”
Attending a few of those public meetings I did not see or hear of any DRA representation at those meetings.
That’s the sad part, Rat. I’ve heard the DRA sarcastically referred to as the Victoria Park Place Residents Association, and knowing where you live, the fact they couldn’t even keep you in the loop speaks to the cloistered aspect of he group. Downtown residents need to make their voices heard on this issue.
I think our only disagreement is our respective definitions of the word “significant”. Personally, any time a disparate group of unaffiliated residents organize around an issue in this city, I would refer to their numbers as significant. I was not making any judgment call as to the validity if their arguments, only the fact that there seemed to be more people organizing around the aquatic centre issue than in the DRA itself.
Point given on the second paragraph, VPP is a bunch of retirees that don’t want the status quo changed. In bed by nine, get in your car, drive to the Big Boxers, come home park,
On another point, Kim and I do a lot of walking downtown and it has come to our observation that there aren’t a lot of condo dwellers etc using downtown, either for shopping -limited I know but also not in the restaurants and bars. Condos are like gated communities.
Nice article Chris. Effective consultation is not easy, but I agree, it’s a core function of a neighbourhood association.
In this morning’s rag, the DRA takes aim at downtown’s night life. Why are these people buying condos downtown if they object to the noise and other elements of living in any downtown? It’s like those who move next to the airport then cry about the perils of living on the flight line. Insane.
This may deserve its own post John
There is some noise you have to put up with downtown but living downtown does not mean you sentenced to sleepless nights.
Windsor’s problem is that it can’t even acknowledge and agree on what is acceptable. You can’t solve a problem if you don’t acknowledge it.
Some cities require higher buildings standards for downtown residents that include soundproof windows. Some cities subsidize upgrades to these standards to encourage residential population growth
Police focus on businesses and rarely enforce noise bylaws on revellers screaming from the top of their lungs.
There are a lot of ways to address this problem but first you have to set a realistic goal of what is acceptable. Austin is the best role model because you have an expanding music festival encroaching on residential neighborhoods and they’ve done the most work. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Texas/austin/thecodeofthecityofaustintexas?f=templatesfn=default.htm3.0vid=amlegal:austin_txanc=
search noise
They do have different requirements for residential zoned areas but there is no free run in downtowns.
It’s really too bad that more people aren’t willing to come out and tell their stories about this group. I’ve heard from dozens who have strong opinions about the leadership guiding this ship. From “secret meetings” with the mayor to the megalomania tendencies of certain board members, there are compelling reasons why the legitimacy of the DRA should be questioned.
Time will tell whether the perceived “power” this group currently enjoys is a gift from the mayor to a small group of “agreeable” downtown residents, or from the combined interests of the downtown resident population at large.
Talked to some residents associations in other cities and they said that this is common with residential startups, that they are championed by one or two, causing them to be guilty of those issues but then they either survive and evolve this stage or die. I think that they need to be fostered, In Edmonton they had a residents association (different name) coordinator employed by the cty that would help guide the new associations through this formative stage
Its important because the biggest problem is letting residents associations know what can be accomplished and what cannot, what other associations have achieved. They said that this process takes a coupla years. But according to the book “From Good to Great” the true level 5 leadership means they have to recruit more leaders to take over for continuity and to build
BTW when you wrote that comment I couldn’t tell if you were referring to the DRA or the DWBIA. Both organizations have gone through this. In the DWBIA case, multiple times.
Again, we need a who does what conference so that the DRA DWBIA, City, Police, politicians stop worrying about each others’ jobs and focus on what they’re supposed to do. We have DWBIA paying for development incentives, incubators and sidewalk upgrades while the city pays to promote events like Red bull and likely the coming childrens games. How is a residents association supposed to find their way around?
As a former board member I can attest to the lethargy of the downtown residents themselves.
How do you get a a common view of what downtown should be when only 75-100 people come out out a general meeting? How do you gauge properly when sending a news letter out (at a significant cost) and receive little info back on survey’s?
The DRA is still a rather young association with a small budget (from DRA members or board members who chip in their own money).
I find it rather perplexing that while this column is about the DRA, the DWBIA has once again started with another “new vision” (can we get a column about the puppeteers from that association???). From what I know of those city politics, it has been the same people running that show for years…and we wonder why downtown hasn’t changed in 25+ of those years.
I appreciate Mark’s comments as things from both sides (good and bad about DRA and DWBIA). But the suggestion of megalomania on the DRA may be a bit true. But isn’t it of any and every association or organization? Without some megalomania nothing would be achieved. It is the megalomania that drives many people especially in a city that embraces such provincial attitudes with a nothing must change but I’ll bitch anyway mentality.
Not to worry though. The only two megalomaniacs that I can think of are no longer on the board (I’m one of them ; ) ). Ok, well maybe three which would leave one left but if it is who I think it is that person works a lot to get the issues tendered to with little help from the city on the issues at hand. I would hazard that the person has to be a megalomaniac to deal with city hall.
Now that the above is out of the way. I still don’t understand why the DRA would have said no to streetcars. The only understanding I could think is that due to the sound levels downtown they want the bar noise addressed first before they add more noise.
John, people have to remember that many of the residents lived downtown BEFORE it become a kiddy bar destination. Most understand it will be noiser living downtown. But it doesn’t have to be the “mob mentality rules” every 3 nights of every week. I had proposed that the police giv e1 warning of noise to patrons if they are screaming outside; After that a ticket is given (can we amend a bylaw and pay cops or have a court open at night for dowtnown revellers who break laws?).
By clamping down on the easy things, people will stop tearingg out flowers and shrubs, pissing in alleyways, fighting, puking and walking out in front of cars.
Perhaps then downtown will be what is it supposed to be. A friendly neighbourhood open to everyone. And maybe even a bit more retail ; )
BTW; There is a website for information on what is happening with regards to the DRA and the downtown area (really DRAW, Downtown Residents Association of Windsor).
http://drawindsor.ca/
If you have any questiosn or concerns I would contact them via that website and the director of communications will get back to you rather quickly.
Also this is summer with a lot of people on vacation and some personal issues going on. That could be why you haven’t received any response as of yet.
These board member do a lot of work on their time without pay and with little volunteers. If anyone loves downtown so much I suggest they volunteer for one of the many committees to make downtown in their image. Instead of talk it would be action!
The DRA was contacted through their website prior to this blog being written, Dave, and three weeks later nobody has contacted me in any capacity. Not even a “no comment”.
Which brings us to council’s planned Neighbourhood Advisory Councils. Will they be what their being touted as: “enhanc(ing) communication between City Hall, residents and administration and assist(ing) in decision making”? Or will they be, as indicated by some, a hand-picked group of council backers meant to convince residents that they are being consulted on city matters?
http://www.citywindsor.ca/DisplayAttach.asp?AttachID=23333
I can’t say why they haven’t responded and it certainly is disappointing. Usually they are pretty good in responding to inquiries.
The NACs, imo, will be just that; hand-picked residents who don’t make waves. Which is totally against what these NACs should be.
Very different show at DWBIA. Lots of new members who I fear may not know their history and are repeating mistakes of the past. I would not have supported $100,000 going towards a potential “one-off” balloon event (my description, not theirs”. I made quite a few passionate pleas for the DWBIA to get out of the event production business.
Even though I started it, the DWBIA was supposed to have merged its development initiatives with the city by now. They are inneffective when unilateral and the point of the facade grant program was to show the city how to do it right and then replace the city’s not to have two parrallel programs this far out.
One think that I am very positive about is that the board members left over from my day are EXTREMELY PRO resident issues. They deserve credit for standing up to their own members on issues such as noise and entertainment issues.
Hopefully the new campus’ will start to see new residents that include more university professors like the one in the Star article that wants to study noise. Thats the kinda resient we need more of
Mark, you are quite corrrect in your last post.
There are some on the DWBIA that are very pro residents. They understand that without them the downtown will never succeed no matter how cheap some sell their liquor in plastic cups.
I can understand why the DWBIA is doing the event business…the city doesn’t! Just like the capital investments; Why is this so ass-backwards here and why does the DWBIA put up with it. Together we should demand city hall be run like most other cities where the city invests in downtown and the residents and businesses invest in their property.
This response was received on August 5 from the DRA’s Communications Director. He also asked that we print his direct email address ([email protected]) for SD readers, should they feel the need to contact him directly.
“We represent 7000 residences, 12,000 residents. When all the facts surrounding the proposed aquatic centre/library were released by the City, the DRA considered the factual information and decided we would not object to the project.”
I am to presume then, the DRA has 12,000 memberships to make such a claim as to “represent” the same?
So, utilizing their assumptions Scaledown can claim to represent 218,000 people? That may give us a louder voice at city hall!
That way lies madness. If there is a democratic process to determine the legitimacy of an organization’s mandate and a democratic process to determine membership and representation, it can legitimately claim to speak for a group within its mandate. Otherwise it only speaks for card carriers. That’s my right under section 2 of the Constitution Act of Canada which protects my right to freedom of association and freedom from association. That’s the distinction between a BIA’s authority versus a resident’s association. One has an authority, responsibility and process granted by law and the other doesn’t.
If I choose not to join the Walkerville, Little River or Sandwich resident’s association, then it may not speak for me whether it sends me a ballot or not. And Scaledown, as much as I love it, represents the views of about three people.
Hey! It’s six people! I counted…
Did I read that correctly? Is the DRAW claiming a mandate from 12 000 Windsorites?
Yup. According to the DRA’s vice president, that’s what they claim Jody.
…,and the knives come out for an organization that is trying to protect their neighbourhood(s) from the poor decisions of city hall and that has been ignored for 20+ years on the problems of the neighbourhood(s) mostly caused by other people not living there; while trying to do exactly the same thing Scaledown is trying to promote in this city.
Shouldn’t like-minded orgs work together not against one another if their goals are similar. Windsor eats it own yet again.
P.S. I wonder if it is the drinking water that does this? Because Detroit is just the same.
@ Dave
That statement might ring true if the DRA was out there connecting with other neighbourhoods and assisting them in their struggles. The unqualified support for the Aquatic’s centre is a case in point. Additionally, Mike’s claim in his post that the relatively small number of people that attended those meetings to express support for their community facilities represented one side, and the majority of people that didn’t attend somehow represented those who wanted those facilities closed is a leap of judgment that is completely illogical.
I respect the fact that this group is attempting to influence decisions that impact their part of town. I do however find this notion of claiming a default mandate from thousands of residents that have not expressly joined their organization troubling.
I would also point out my disappointment with the DWBIA’s “enthusiastic” support for the Aquatic’s Centre proposal. It would have been nice to see some of those that claim to represent DT also stand up for other neighbourhoods. How can DRA or DWBIA expect the rest of the city to support investment in DT if those groups support taking from the other neighbourhoods to fund these investments? This bunker mentality has got to stop.
Huh, The DWBIA is not an altruistic charity, its mandate is to promote and beautify the downtown. If it did not support the Aquatic center, technically the board could be sued for not acting within its mandate (unlikely but theoretically possible)
The DWBIA is also composed of business owners who would like to see fiscal responsibility.
As a scaledowner, I would like to have seen more of a win win solution pursued but as a downtown business owner, there was no alternative choice. AND ITS NOT NECESSARILY BUNKER MENTALITY
Jody, as a very small property investor and Business investor, I not only paid full asking price for my walkerville property, I sat down with business partner and doubled the amount we planned to open the new restaurant.
We did that because of the University and aquatic center announcement. I made the case to my partner that our business would benefit from a successful adjacent neighborhood. That walkerville and downtown are close enough to each other to draw each other’s residents and visitors as customers.
If other investors and business owners follow my lead, you will see assessments stop their plummeting decline beyond the downtown and maybe even see assessments back on the rise again.
That money’s could pay for services and amenities in other parts of the city (or lessen the need for deep cuts).
The University and aquatic center/library will not just benefit the downtown neighborhood They will benefit the entire core
Mark, I understand your position with respect to who the DWBIA needs to be looking out for, but I assure you that many folks in the affected neighbourhoods (particularly in the West end) feel like they were sacrificed for the (special) interests of the DT.
The DWBIA could (and should have IMO) came forward with support for keeping the other facilities open without prejudicing their support for the Aquatic’s Centre.
Feel free to go over to the projects near College Ave and tell them how giving up their community centre to offset the cost of a guaranteed public money loser for the benefit of DT will ultimately benefit them.
You know I am continually surprised how unions, social justice groups, community organizations etc, are painted as “special interest” groups with a negative connotation. Business groups however are never painted as “special interest” and are always portrayed in a positive light.
The only special interest that needs to be looked after is the entire community of Windsor. Robbing one to benefit another isn’t going to get us where we need to go. It may make for more profitable businesses DT, but it comes at a cost to other areas.
Unfortunately, this Mayor and Council has allowed this to be turned into an either/or proposition….IMO that is truly sad.