Our Toronto... Like it or Not
With the arrival of the Our Toronto newsletter in most homes last week, I was somewhat annoyed over what I took as Miller's latest public outreach campaign. Though I have since come to terms with the fact that our city is not ready to move this information entirely online, I still see print initiatives as a backwards strategy.
However most concerning is the fact that Mayor Miller plans to divert $400,000 in tax dollars towards funding a newsletter that some city councillors clearly don't feel is needed.
Curious about this costly "difference of opinion", I contacted Councillor John Parker, one of the newsletter nay-sayers who was not permitted to voice his concerns at City Hall. In fairness, I also contacted Mayor Miller who had Kevin Sack, the city's Director of Strategic Communications, contact me on his behalf. Here's what they had to say about my doubts over Our Toronto.
There are some clear reasons for council to implement Our Toronto. It is replacing three other newsletters: Waste Watch, Water Watch, and City Routes. This should help to streamline the city's publication costs. In 2006, it cost the city $700,000 to put out 7 pieces, and in 2007 costs were lowered to only $450,000 because there wasn't enough material to publish more than three mailers.
Seems like a move in the right direction; scaling back costs, avoiding filler, and ultimately reducing waste. So why is something like Our Toronto needed in our city? According to Kevin Sack, it's in the interest of creating one publication to combine waste, water and city route information with updates on the work council is doing.
However, in the words of Councillor Parker, "If the content of the first issue of Our Toronto is any guide as to what we can expect in future issues, I would say our best alternative is to cancel its publication."
Based on the first issue, I have to agree. The entire newsletter reads like a very shallow report, with little to no critical analysis and lots of 'feel good' messages about city projects. There is some advice for Torontonians on flood protection and how to obtain city services, but the main focus is on Toronto council initiatives. This is useful information for sure, but given that most of these projects span several years and often don't come to fruition (like the 2 page spread on the waterfront project) I'm not sure it's something I need delivered to my door.
However, there may be a deeper motive in Mayor Miller's new initiative, and this is a major concern for Councillors like John Parker. "Issue number one [is that Our Toronto] has been rightly described as an instrument calculated to serve the Mayor's political interests. As such, I believe it should not be made to masquerade as an official City of Toronto document."
Sack dismisses this idea entirely, stating that the Mayor has very little to do with the publication and certainly does not edit it. The real question is whether the 24-page publication has any useful information, or whether it is simply a billboard for the Mayor's re-election interests.
Given that Councillor Parker, like many city Councillors, had neither heard of nor helped in planning the Our Toronto launch, it's clear there is some cause for concern. "I don't believe the average Torontonian will benefit from this publication," says Councillor Parker, "I am inclined to believe it is intended mostly to benefit the Mayor himself."
Having said that, there were very few copies of Our Toronto thrown into my building's recycling. If that's any indication of people reading this first issue, it can be said that it was a successful launch. Surely putting out only one issue and at the very end of 2008 (after no communication from the city for most of the year) will pique some interest.
Despite the protest over moving this information online, most of the articles require you to go online to learn any real information. Many articles are indeed promoting the use of online forums in this way, and links are provided for each. Seems like this newsletter could help to transition into an online only environment in the future. In fact, the back page of Our Toronto has an excellent subscription option for the city updates e-newsletter... why not ask people to subscribe to Our Toronto if they want to receive it, rather than blanket the city with more mailings?
I also find the logic behind the newsletter's 'multicultural outreach' kind of funny. It's printed in English only, with a small column found inside the front cover directing readers to the online version offered in 11 different languages. Considering how 'inadequate' online publishing is according to Kevin Sack, I wonder how much value there is translating the newsletter but printing only English copies; hopefully people track down their language of choice online, but I suspect the print copy will end up in recycling bins long before this happens.
I'm still not sure we need to fork over an extra $400,000 next year, in order to meet the quarterly publication schedule on Kevin Sack's wish list. Interestingly, this gives us a total requested budget of over $800,000 - about a hundred grand in excess of Toronto's newsletter publication costs in 2006 and well over the reduced budgets over the past two years. So much for tightening our belts.
Still, in the interest of being fair, this is a nice, colourful and relatively well-written publication. Although it is expensive, it is an excellent way for the city to claim it has reached every citizen, no matter what their income, age or ethnicity. Even Sack agreed that there may be changes needed, both to the newsletter and publication schedule.
Ultimately I hope City Council is more involved in the newsletter creation. As Councillor Parker suggests, "We should be certain to balance the benefits of any form of publication against all countervailing criteria. Cost to the taxpayer and environment are valid considerations in this regard."
Comments (27)
I don't see how this is a bad thing. Of course the finger prints of the mayor are going to be all over this thing -- he's been leading the city for five years now, what else would you expect?
And I find it helpful to have a publication that allows the City to explain itself. Usually the Royson Jameses and Sue-Ann Levys of the world distort facts to suit their narrow views so relying on the media just doesn't cut it.
Frankly, John Parker's opinion is worthless to me. He is a Harris-era Tory who refuses to take responsibility for the harm he and his Harriste friends did to this city. Makes me think he's still trying to dismantle Toronto, just now it's from the inside.
Oh, also, the writer/editor might want to decide whether the Director of Strategic Communication's name is Kevin Sack or Joe Sack.
Generally, this a waste of tax dollars, that could be better spent on city maintainance, programs for kids and public safety. I highly doubt that most people bothered to sit down and read the entire issue. In my house, after 5 minutes of reading this, I threw it into the recycling.
For clarification, Parker is a Harris-era Tory MPP, booted out when Torontonians finally came to their senses and expelled the scoundrals from our city.
"Considering how 'inadequate' online publishing is according to Joe Sack,..."
"Joe Sack's wish list"
Do you mean the previously quoted Kevin Sack?
If English wasn't my first language, I doubt I'd look through it for the part about different language options. I'd sooner toss it. What an waste.
This should be an online version only, with the option of subscribing by email.
My apologies to Mr. Sack, apparently had a few names floating in my mind this morning - Kevin Sack is his name, and he was nice enough to spend time answering my $$ questions.
As for whether or not Parker's opinion in valid, the fact is he serves on council and wasn't invited to plan/prepare/launch any part of this. Seems like it should be a collective effort - not just Miller's team - if it's a city-wide publication.
There's not enough 'meat' in the newsletter to make it a valuable resource, imho ;)
Who on "Miller's team" put this together? If you're saying this was written by politicians then name names because that's not what your interviews say, except for the weak inferences of the tin foil hat-wearing Parker. Sack said that city staff wrote and edited the material (except the Mayor's greeting, I assume).
Hmm, well I definitely read it, or scanned it anyway. I certainly would not have taken any interest (or noticed) if it were online.
Not everyone has a computer, an Internet connection, or (in my case) a willingness to browse the monstrosity that is Toronto.ca to determine if there's anything of value there.
Miller's team loosely meaning anyone who supported the creation of this newsletter and was privy to/involved in its conception and creation... apparently not Parker or other Councillors.
I don't really care who on staff writes it, obviously not Miller himself, but I do care that Council is involved in any decisions that will cost this much money. I think creating a whole new newsletter should have been discussed, no?
No, Corina, a new newsletter shouldn't be the subject of a debate at council. We're talking about the board of directors of a $10 billion organization. Talking about a tiny change like combining a bunch of newsletters into one shouldn't be debated by that group.
Further, "Miller's team" is not the Toronto Civil Service. Bureaucrats report to the city manager and the city manager reports to council as a whole. The "Miller team" could loosely relate to a bloc of councillors but since they're all technically independent then really just to Miller and his own staff.
Playing fast and loose with the facts isn't right. You should practice more responsible journalism.
Thanks for the commentary o_O
I try to save my personal opinion for the comments section, hopefully none of the article's facts are too confusing/ambiguous for an editorial on my junk mail :)
Blanket the city with mailings so people know it exists (see Adam's note regarding not giving most websites a glance), and later make it subscription only (send this back, postage pre-paid, to ensure further paper mailings). Encourage using it online.
Why the complaints about sending people online to get it in 11 languages? They translated this into ELEVEN languages? That's INSANE. Kudos to the city for going through the trouble. As for not printing all 11 languages, well, take the cost of printing and shipping this one newsletter, then multiply it by eleven. BOOM, HEADSHOT. True not every language would need to hit every house, but how else would you get each edition to the right people?
Regardless of English not being a lot of people's first language, it's safe to say that a majority of Torontonians can speak and read basic English. I'd be interested in knowing the read-through rates of ESL speakers versus English speakers; who is more interested in their city?
There's not enough "meat" in most offerings, print or online, official or non-official sites/blogs/newsletters. But then again I tend to shit on most things. I'd've shat on this too if everyone else hadn't shat their shit on it.
Re Comment: "Miller team" is not the Tooronto Civil Service.
This is the issue and this is the problem because we have hear another case were the Miller team is directing the Civil Service for political advantage; just as with the recent "garbage memo" that only went to the "Miller Team" when clearly it should have gone to all Councillors because it was a clarification of policy that was of interest to all citizens. When the resourses of city staff are reserved only for the political interests of one party we have a clear abuse of power and Democratic principles.
As far as I know, this went out to every municipal community. Hamilton, Burlington, Oshawa, Pickering, etc, etc...So, as far as the insinuation of a Miller attempt to show last offerings, or whatever promotional conspiracy is believed...Wake up, its just a news letter that barely cost anything span of crap our tax dollars went to ..I bet there is something everyone loves in this city or the next one that probably has something bad associated to it...So buck up, and honestly just move on...Its a bloody newsletter.
DaveMcD: The memo in question, according to mainstream outlets, was written by the mayor's own staff, not the civil service. There are very clear lines between the mayor and civil service. Confusion is created by those whose interest that confusion and misinformation serves, like Harris's friend John Parker.
To date, Thursday, November 20, 2008, at 17:06, my house has not received a copy of the "Our Toronto". So I went online and downloaded a PDF copy of it.
I will probably get a paper copy after I finished reading the PDF version.
yammy&o-O: I think you are missing the point. It is not clear in the various outlets whether the Mayor's spokesperson" on Garbage is a political staffer or civil servant but if the memo was from the Mayor's own staff it makes the issue even more damning. I don't know if you have spent much time at City Hall but the comment about clear lines between Mayor and civil service is simply not the case and it is getting worse. Staff reports now come out saying what the Mayor wants to hear and as the Mayor likes to say that is a "simple fact."
Understood that they're coming from different sources, but when I saw Our Toronto recently my first thought was that it was way more inviting and practical than The Bulletin (which would've seen the recycling bin right away). I would love to see the Bulletin axed--the douchiest section which kills the Bulleting is where they take pictures of people at parties/functions which have nothing to do with 99.99% of the Toronto population...do I really need to see on a constant basis pictures of people I don't care about attending an industry party/function???????
"Not everyone has a computer, an Internet connection, or (in my case) a willingness to browse the monstrosity that is Toronto.ca to determine if there's anything of value there."
The first two of these are not usable arguments given the internet service provided by the Public Library. The third is far more persuasive - toronto.ca bites. We have a Web 1.0 city with a whole lot of Web 2.0 citizens. It burns me that we are sending out a magazine destined for the Blue Box but we don't have Google Transit.
"...we are sending out a magazine destined for the Blue Box but we don't have Google Transit."
So frustrating!
I threw my copy in the garbage. Recycling would mean the city would make money out of it to pay Miller's salary. Enough of playing with our garbage!!!
Dave, Dave, Dave, Dave, Dave, Dave.....Dave Dave.....Is it really going to change your life..? Thats a rhetorical question...So don't say anything cause you already know the answer..Dave I like you...I have seen you around here on BlogTO..You write interesting comments..But mayor this or mayor that...In the span of the BIG T.O...Things ain't gonna change now...The only thing that will are the people we know, and food we eat...So just be merry and as my mother always says...."Sit, Have a Falafel, Eat, Eat!"
yammy,I actually did have a Falafel last night. I guess your comment means you agree with my comment. And you are wrong. It will change my life. Without the prospect of change their is no hope and without hope there is no life.
View More Events
Suggest an Event
Join the blogTO Flickr group
Join the blogTO YouTube Group
RSS