PART 2 - Analysis of Toronto's Open Government Progress Report

(Above: Screen capture of page four of the Toronto Open Government Progress Report)

“They know the words, but they don’t know the music.” - Jimmy Hoffa, 1992 Hoffa, Twentieth Century Fox

This is Part 2 of a series that examines the newly released Toronto City Clerk Open Government progress report. Please keep in mind that the premise for this analysis is that while the City of Toronto does know the principles of Open Government, they do not truly understand its spirit.

This post will dissect five of the six elements the city profiles in their “Open Government Highlights” found on page four of the progress report. The piece on the Ryerson University ‘Open Government in OpenSpaces’ forum will be analyzed in part three of my series, but I do provide a bonus analysis.

THE TORONTO PUBLIC SERVICE BY-LAW
The very first thing the Open Government progress highlights is a very stuffy By-law aimed at setting the relationship between the public service and city council. Here is the definition of the By-law as described by the City of Toronto:

"In June 2014 City Council adopted The Toronto Public Service By-law (TPS By-law) to set important foundational legislation which strengthens the separation between the administrative and political components of Toronto's government; and advances Toronto's public service as professional, impartial and ethical."

At first glance this is a code of conduct that mimics many other Canadian jurisdictions. This fact is even acknowledged in the By-law FAQs, but let's have quick a look at what other jurisdictions have installed.

The Federal government has both a Code of Conduct and a "Duty of Loyalty" which have been around since atleast 2003. The Province of Alberta has something similar, but it is seven pages (instead of 25). Both are independent of an Open Government mandate.

While the Toronto Public Service By-law represents two of the three pillars of Open Government and is billed as an Open Government initiative in the progress report, I ask the following question: Why is the term “Open Government” nowhere to be found in the 25 page By-law? As a matter of fact, there is only one instance of the word “open” and it is in reference to polls being open on election day.

Also please consider the following. I suggested in Part 1 of the series that the spirit of Open Government is its ability to warm-up the cold relationship that exists between people and their government.

While I am not a lawyer and cannot make that kind of objective assessment, I was able to create a Wordle of the By-law (on the right). And as you can see there is absolutely nothing warm here.

So my next question is this: Why mention this By-law in the report? And why is it given so much priority?

In my humble opinion, since this By-law is about accountability and transparency, it was shoehorned into the report because it has the veneer of Open Government. But it is not. If it were, you could make an argument that Toronto’s Integrity Commissioner or Toronto Council’s Code of Conduct are also Open Government initiatives.

REVENUE LOOK-UP TOOL
Toronto.ca describes this tool as “a convenient way for the public to review their property, utility, and parking ticket information anytime, anywhere." As much as I would like to provide a detailed analysis, I cannot. Reason being? I have always been a “Renter” in Toronto.

But such a tool is definitely a demonstration of the Open Government spirit and I congratulate the city for taking the time for making it possible. I do have one question though: Would it be possible to know how many people know and use this tool? And do users feel as though it works as advertised? I apologize for being nitpicky, but there is no point in creating something that doesn’t work, or worse yet… creating something that works great but no one knows about.

ONLINE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST
I will be “Trudeau” blunt here. It is 2016. However, unlike Trudeau I am not framing that statement in a positive light.

The city should be embarrassed that it has taken this long to provide this option, especially considering that Toronto’s online FOI portal is just a couple of webpages with an online purchase tool. Any Wordpress "submit form" and an e-payment plugin could have made this feature possible 10 years ago.

Besides, this is not even Open Government. This is e-government (aka Digital Government), and much like the TPS By-law it has been shoehorned into the progress report. I hate repeating myself here, but if this was truly an example of Open Government you could make an argument that the city’s website or that applying for tennis lessons online are also examples of Open Government.

TORONTO.CA/OPENGOV
Toronto.ca/opengov is an aggregation of the city's Open Government and Open Data initiatives. It is an information repository, not unlike a library or Trivago. Question is: is this the spirit of Open Government? Sorta kinda.

While many cities have Open Data Portals, most do not have a dedicated Open Government page and that is definitely a feather in Toronto's cap. Mind you, I would be more inclined to give full marks if their interface was a little less intimidating and had a dedicated URL. Allow me to show you examples of what I mean:

•     City of Boston
•     City of San Francisco
•     Province of Ontario
•     United States

STAFF & PUBLIC OPEN GOVERNMENT SURVEYS
I must admit, I was impressed when I learned the City not only commissioned two surveys on Open Government, but also published the results on Toronto's Open Data Portal. There is just one problem: The document published for the staff survey does not include an index or a summary like it does for the public survey.

Additionally, it only features three questions whereas the public survey contains 14 questions.

The Open Government progress report states that the surveys “helped City staff identify the challenges that need to be addressed [when it comes to Open Government].” Now, I am not a statistician, but how much insight can you really discern from three questions?

NOTE: I was not able to find the Open Government insights mentioned in the progress report anywhere online.

Making this even more suspect is the fact the city employs close to 50,000 people, everything from 16 year-old-lifeguards to our most esteemed City Manager. Yet, the city chose not to release any demographic data associated with the staff survey.

They state that "identifiable information was removed in accordance with privacy standards." However, they did not exercise this privacy standard when it came to the public survey demographic data.

Lastly, the public survey is laden with scientific methodologies and even identifies Ipsos Reid as the administrator. Unfortunately, the staff survey has no such provenance or scientific backing.

If I did not know any better, I could swear the staff survey was put together by someone at the City Clerk’s offices using “Survey Monkey” and sent out as part of a mass email to staff.

BONUS
It might surprise you to learn that Toronto's Open Government Committee is closed to the public and meeting agendas/minutes are not published. Ironically, the Open Government progress report boasts that 93% of meeting times were held in open session. Granted, the factoid probably refers to council meetings, but at the same time, you can’t help but feel as though there is something not right here.

In case you are wondering, the City of Guelph also has an Open Government Committee. Not only is it composed of senior management, but it also includes residents #justsayin.