It’s seems one of my dreams has come true!

Today, I was featured in a CBC story on Open Data in New Brunswick –  airing on CBC radio, web, and TV:

Read onward for the Web version (with video):

Citizens ask for access to public data

The New Brunswick government and its universities are coming under pressure from citizens to make more raw data available to the public.

Many governments in Canada and around the world have embraced the so-called open data agenda and have freed up raw data to citizens so they can arrange public information in useful ways and collaborate with others to better understand the numbers.

Now, New Brunswick citizens and companies are arguing the government and universities should stop holding back similar information.

Shawn Peterson built the website — propertize.ca — because he wanted to compare his property tax assessment with his neighbours.

It’s now online and contains easy to find data for the entire province.

“I’d like to take it forward and be able to expand it into other provinces,” he said.

He’s taken public information and made it easy to use. But Peterson has also taken something for nothing and turned a profit.

Those pushing for more access to data have other ideas of how information can be used.

City buses could be tracked through smartphones, potholes could be reported and a city could notify people when they were fixed and snowplows could be monitored so people don’t have to shovel twice.

Patrick Lacroix, the managing director for the Fredericton-based company T4G, said there are many ways that the open data agenda could actually make life easier for citizens and allow communities to become more democratic.

“We have technology today that enables for much easier citizen engagement, and citizen engagement in a much smarter way,” he said.

Peterson said the potential applications and business models are only limited by the amount of information governments are willing to make public.

Open data sites

While the New Brunswick government is being pressured to start freeing up data for its citizens, the federal government is already moving in that direction.

The federal government announced last month that it is easing restrictions on the use of the taxpayer-funded data it makes available to the public.

The federal government’s open data portal collates 260,000 data sets that span everything from immigration statistics to mapping co-ordinates.

When Treasury Board President Tony Clement made the announcement, he said he had not heard yet of anyone doing anything creative with the federal government data made available to date. But he said the federal government was “liberalizing” the approach to opening up data.

He said the new rules would “make it easier for innovation to occur.”

Open data sites are not simply the domain of the federal government. The British Columbia government also has an open data site.

That page lists recent health data, information about visitor attendance at provincial parks and salary information for civil servants who earn more than $75,000.

What do you think about Open Data? Let me know!

A great article was featured in today’s Telegraph-Journal on the topic of Open Data – including mentions of the T4G hosted ‘Hackathon’ event in Fredericton this Saturday!

I also got a few quotes for Propertize.ca and the Canadian Fuel Consumption Guide Application that I am also working on.

Read on for more information:

The City of Fredericton has increased public access to government data by joining the open data movement that is sweeping the country.

Open data sites have been created in major centres across Canada and now Fredericton has recently launched its own open data site where users, such as software developers, can access information, collected by the municipality, to create interesting, new applications for the Web and smartphones.

“We’re trying to encourage local developers to develop new technologies, making it freely available without any restrictions,” said Rob Lunn, co-ordinator of Geographic Information Systems for the City of Fredericton. “It’s about being transparent and offering new services … the information we are putting out, the public has already paid for it.”

Shawn Peterson, a local IT consultant, started to develop open data applications after struggling to manoeuvre through a provincial tax information database.

“If you’ve been on the government site for tax assessment, you’ll probably find that it is really complicated,” Peterson said. “Using the data out there already, I built my own application that does a lot of the leg work for you.”

After his web-based application, propertize.ca, experienced some heavy traffic, Peterson said, Service New Brunswick started sending people to his site instead of recommending the government database.

He is currently working on an application that involves vehicle fuel consumption data.

Saturday is International Open Data Day and Fredericton is one of approximately 40 cities around the world that will participate in an event titled Hackathon, a forum that encourages entrepreneurs, government officials and academics to join forces and discuss new ways to use open data.

T4G, a technology solutions organization with offices across North American, including Fredericton and Saint John, will host the event at its Fredericton office from noon until 4 p.m.

The purpose of Hackathon is to raise awareness about open data and explore how government officials can contribute and improve public services at the same time.

It can be “something as simple as garbage collection,” said Patrick Lacroix, T4G’s managing director of leadership and productivity improvement.

“If the City of Fredericton or the City of Saint John had a map for the garbage collection services and the schedule, then somebody could develop an app for your own computer or smartphone. You could get a warning the night before saying ‘Don’t forget to put out your garbage. It’s Thursday night.’”

While the goal of transparency and easy access to information is well-intentioned, some experts say open data may inadvertently reveal sensitive information.

“The dark side of this is … you didn’t intend to publish something that exposes a vulnerability, but you did. You can publish one set of data and another set of data in two different places, but when people cross-reference them, you get an insight that helps shut down the U.S. electrical grid (for example),” said Robert Austin, dean of business administration at the University of New Brunswick. Austin co-authored a case study called ‘data.gov’ which outlines the complexity of open data policies within the United States government.

“There are pretty profound philosophical differences that come up when you start talking about open data in government. A lot of it has to do with how much you trust the right thing to happen when the data comes to bear.”

Austin says he believes that ultimately open data is a good thing but freedom of information isn’t so cut and dry.

“If you’re going to do it the way the U.S. government has, you have to be OK with people taking your data, spinning it in a way that is convenient to them, and using it against you,” he said.

Lunn said that the city is cautious about what data is released and it would be unlikely any harm could come from it.

“There is always the negative side to these things. Our feeling is that there are going to be more benefits that are derived,” Lunn said.

“There is power in making your data available and people can grab it and come up with some very interesting uses.”

For anyone interesting in attending the T4G hosted event, below are links to data sets that I am interested in working with:

• 2002-2011 Canadian Fuel Consumption Guide Data
• 2008 NB Municipal Election Results
• 2010 NB Provincial Election Results

Propertize.ca has been updated to version 3.4, and it is rocking some new features:

• Create an account or login using OpenID (will be used to support saving searches in the future).
• Friendly Share/Print buttons are now available on most pages.
• The ability to include nearby streets is now stable.
• Additional “popup” help is now available on the landing page (by popular request).
• The search results page now lists all of the streets included in the search (helpful when including nearby streets).
• The Average Last Sale Price is included on the search results page.
• Lots of tiny bug fixes.

As always, updates to Propertize.ca  are driven by your feedback – so let me know what you think!

I wanted to highlight a blog post from Sarah Craig yesterday about a neighbourhood meeting that got out of hand due to the antics of Councillor Bruce Court (our Ward 4 representative):

Initially, I was pleased they took the time to show up, and they did exactly as they said they would by sitting at the back of the room and took it all in. It was a fairly orderly meeting despite the unexpected high turnout, lack of an agenda, and high tension in the room. Overall, people were not thrilled with the re-zoning application, and as all these things tend to do, it devolved at one point into a group vent about poor snow removal and city services. We settled on a path forward, people volunteered, and we have an action plan. True grassroots organization at its best. That was until I heard shouting.

As people were mingling at the end of the meeting taking the rare opportunity to meet and catch up with neighbours I heard a lady yell “you assured me it wouldn’t happen and it did!” I looked over to see a petite dark haired women and our East Side Representative, Councillor Bruce Court, in a very heated exchange. He was in her face, yelling at her, and pointing a finger at her nose. This went on for a minute or so, when eventually he put his hand, palm out, in her face and walked toward the front of the room. He spoke to the women who organized the meeting, brought her back to the petite dark-haired women, where he continued to yell at her for a further 30 seconds. He put up his hand again in her face, and walked out. She followed him and continued to yell, “You’re not listening to me”.

Check out Sarah’s post for more details along with pictures!

The Telegraph-Journal had an interesting article yesterday on a city staff report declaring that cancelling private garbage collection would save the city money:

The city should take full responsibility of trash collection services and scrap the contract with private haulers, a move that would save the municipality $500,000 annually, a city staff report says.

In their review of expenses, city staffers compared the current costs of trash collection to the costs of fully contracting out the service or taking it over completely. They based their calculations on submissions from private haulers who estimated what they would charge if they assumed total control of curbside pickup.

Too bad it doesn’t add up in short term or long term.

In the short term, the city would need to pay $794,000 up-front to buy new trucks AND hire more city workers (remember that pension issue – the one where we, tax-payers, are paying for everyone else’s pension):

Long term is where it get’s even more ridiculous, consider the following:

The final report concludes that while the two alternatives are comparable in price, hiring private contractors to service all 53 routes is not viable largely because the city can’t lay off crews who are responsible for trash collection.

The city’s contract with the outside workers union, CUPE Local 18, guarantees 293 jobs will stay on the payroll until mid-2014, a provision the employee group secured when negotiating pension concessions. This means if the city fully contracted out the collection service, it would have to move the crews somewhere else.

Because the city has a contract the specifies a staffing level number (which make no sense at all) until 2014, they somehow decided that this still saves money in the long term – even the costs are cheaper for going private (factoring in the extra costs for new trucks and employees).

Consider if we keep things as-is until the contract expires.

The city could then switch to fully private garbage collection afterwards – reducing staffing numbers, reducing pension liability, and maintaining a reliable contract cost.

This shouldn’t be a difficult decision, contracting out garbage collection is good for Saint John taxpayers!

Today, an opinion piece captured it perfectly:

Council must weigh full service costs

The growing debate over garbage collection in Saint John illustrates the appeal and the drawbacks of short-term thinking. The city contracts out garbage pickup on 19 routes, while 34 routes are handled by municipal workers. At council’s request, city staffers have investigated two alternatives to this arrangement, from contracting out every route to abandoning private contracts.

These options are comparable in price, but in the short term, the city’s labour agreement with outside workers prohibits layoffs. Even if the city were to shift all garbage collection to a private contractor, it would still be paying the wages of municipal garbage crews until mid-2014. So, city staffers are recommending that the city take over all garbage collection. The appeal of this proposal is the potential savings it would create, which staffers have estimated at $500,000 a year. The drawback is that to service those 19 extra routes, the city would need to spend $794,000 on new trucks and hire four additional workers.

Even on the face of it, this is no bargain. The current garbage contract does not expire until September, 2011. A retooled municipal garbage service would not be available for eight to 10 months, taking the city into 2012. The capital expense of buying new trucks would write off the first year and a half of savings, so council would not see any net benefits until the 2014 fiscal year. Maybe we’re missing something, but that’s roughly the same time as the city’s guarantee of 293 jobs for outside workers is set to expire. Wouldn’t it be just as easy to plan for a smaller municipal workforce in 2014, supported by more private contractors?

Every time council increases the municipal workforce, it drives up the city’s annual financial obligations, from basic payroll costs to its pension commitments. Council must have a full accounting of the labour costs associated with this proposal before it can make an informed decision.

Councillors should review the city’s last three budgets. The cost of in-house labour and servicing the municipal pension deficit make up 60 per cent or more of the city’s spending.

If council wants to save more money in the long run, that is where it needs to cut.

——————-

More great comments from the original article:

John Campbell wrote:

was the cost of pensions for city employees taken into account

owen meaney wrote:

What a joke. The alleged savngs are based on the minimum worker contract, which is one of the main problems. The next contract must remove this clause, and everyone knows it. Keep the 6 workers and have them fill potholes until 2014, then deal with it. In the meantime, the current contract allows for no pension liability. Oh, and the casual mention of spending big money on trucks, and decreasing service. Silly. Imagine trying to get through the south end while garbage pickup is done through the day. Now imagine the trash all over the place because of biweekly pickup. This is a stupid idea, and should be treated like a stupid idea. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Ella H wrote:

Operating costs drop by 500K….. and on the other side…buy three new trucks, costing about $794,000, and hire four workers ..and those four new workers come with employment expenses – pension,benefits,employment taxes.

So just how is the city SAVING anything? I see an INCREASE in costs to the city.

Colin H wrote:

The city’s contract with the outside workers union, CUPE Local 18, guarantees 293 jobs will stay on the payroll until mid-2014″

I hope the city staff report looks at what the potential savings of contracting it all could be after 2014 (assuming the city doesn’t lock itself foolishly in to a minimum number of employees again). Does there cost projections include fully loaded wage costs including bebfits? Can taking over the contracted out routes require hiring of more city staff and the long term costs of that or can it be done with existing staff?

I look forward to reading the report seeing how the costs and potential savings were estimated.

Riverhill Drive wrote:

Let’s be realistic about what this is all about. The Mayor and his brother are doing anything they can to support unions at the expense of the tax payers. Do you wonder why they asked unionized employees to prepare an analysis that could lead to the addition of more members in their local? The answer was defined from the beginning. I have to give the preparers of the report credit for at least putting honest numbers in their report. Anyone with a calculator though can tell the private route is a much better way to go in the long term. Until we elect a council that is qualified to manage things, this is what is going to keep happening. It’s embarrassing that they think they can convince us of this stuff.

Note: As always, the following post is written by myself as a tax paying citizen of Saint John, and do not reflect the views of any other group or organization!

As highlighted by the Telegraph-Journal last week, three new development projects are seeking approval from Council that clash with PlanSJ:

Developers will soon ask city council for the green light to build more than 250 homes along Loch Lomond Road, but they will likely have to prove their projects pass the muster of the municipality’s new plan.

Two numbered companies and A. J. Mallette & Sons have proposed three separate developments on the east side artery. And they want to build fairly big subdivisions, ranging from 69 to 111 lots.

—-

One of the proposed developments, a 69-lot subdivision on 2797 Loch Lomond Rd. near Greenwood, would be in a rural, non-serviced area.

—–

The other two big proposals for Loch Lomond Road would not fall inside any of these targeted areas.

A numbered company proposes a 76-lot subdivision on 1429 Loch Lomond Rd., between Bon Accord Drive and Ganong Road. Another numbered company wants to build a 111-lot subdivision on 1515 Loch Lomond Rd., between Ganong Road and Pauline Street. Both proposals ask for zoning that would allow for one and two-family homes.

The issue is that this isn’t a test of PlanSJ – it’s a test of Council to actually follow the draft plan:

• The rural development plan definitely goes against PlanSJ. The plan is clear that growth outside the serviced areas of the city isn’t sustainable. There is room for minor development in the rural areas; but, it’s meant to be small growth on existing streets.
• The two suburban plans are also against the Plan.  While these plans are both located inside the serviced area of the city, the Future Land Use Map identifies this area as Stable Residential and not inside an intensification area (meaning major change, such as two new subdivisions, is not planned here).  See below for more information on Stable Residential areas – special emphasis on Policy LU-82 section f.

From the Draft Municipal Plan document (still open to citizen feedback):

3.5.4 Stable Community Areas

These lands are other developed lands inside the Primary Development Area identified as Stable Community Areas the City which are generally built-out and are not anticipated to receive major change over the planning period. Three land use designations are established in this Plan to provide policy direction for the future use of land in these areas:

Stable Residential Areas

Council shall:

Policy LU-80 Create the Stable Residential designation on the Future Land Use Map.  Within the Stable Residential designation, housing of almost every form and density may be found and its acceptability is dependent on its specific location.  In addition, other compatible uses may be found in the Stable Residential designation including convenience stores, home occupations, parks, and community facilities which are permitted in the designation without amendment to the Municipal Plan.

Policy LU-81 Intend that the areas designated Stable Residential will evolve over time from a land use perspective but that new and redeveloped land uses are to reinforce the predominant community character and make a positive contribution to the neighbourhood.

Policy LU-82 Ensure that significant new development and redevelopment in areas designated Stable Residential shall generally be permitted only subject to a rezoning process where compliance is demonstrated with the following criteria:

a.  The proposed land use is desirable and contributes positively to the neighbourhood;

b. The proposal is compatible with surrounding land uses;

c.  The development is in a location where all necessary water and sewer services, parks and recreation services, schools, public transit and other community facilities and protective services can readily and adequately be provided;

d.  Site design features that adequately address such matters as safe access, buffering and landscaping, site grading and storm water management are incorporated;

e.  An exterior building design of high quality is provided that contributes positively to

f.  The proposal is on a property identified as a Corridor in the City Structure Map or new residential development to the Primary Centres, Local Centres, and Intensification Areas.

It will be interesting to see what Council decides.  I will be watching to see if the draft plan is followed (and hopefully mentioned as part of the decision making process).

Ignoring this draft plan (and in turn the feedback from many citizens of Saint John over the past year and a half) would not instill a great deal of confidence in me that the finalized Municipal Plan, to be adopted this fall, will be followed going forward.

Join in the conversation on Saint John’s Municipal Plan online using: Twitter (via the hashtag #plansj) or the Facebook Group!

PlanSJ will be hosting a “Up for Review” open house from 5:30pm-9pm on Wednesday, June 15th, 2011 at Saint John High School.

Below are additional details from the PlanSJ website:

What will we be talking about?

Open House Agenda:
5:30-9:00pm –Open House
6:00 – Presentation

The new Municipal Plan will guide development and investment in the City for the next 25 years and will inform the review of the Zoning and Subdivision By-laws and the development of new Service Plans and Neighbourhood Plans.

The DRAFT Municipal Plan being presented at the “Up for Review” Open House for the community’s feedback was developed based on what we heard from the community through PlanSJ engagement and what we learned from technical and best practices research.

We’ll be reviewing and looking for community feedback on the policies in the DRAFT Municipal Plan and the land use designations on the DRAFT Land Use Map.

Do I need to register?

No.  You’re welcome to drop into the Open House at any time, but we encourage you to be there for the 6:00pm presentation.

If I can’t come to the Workshop, is there any other way I can comment on the DRAFT Municipal Plan?

Yes.  The same panel set is up in the PlanSJ Storefront and copies of the DRAFT Municipal Plan and Workbook are available at the Storefront and for download below. The Open House will be followed by a four-week public review period and we ask that all comments on the DRAFT Municipal Plan be submitted by Friday, July 15th, 2011 to help us meet our tight timelines.  Please respond by e-mail to plansj@saintjohn.ca or in writing at the PlanSJ Storefront.

Join in the conversation on Saint John’s Municipal Plan online using: Twitter (via the hashtag #plansj) or the Facebook Group!

Since Propertize.ca was listed on the front-page of the Telegraph-Journal earlier this year, there have been only minor updates to fix bugs.

That has changed with the release of version 3.2!

Finally, one highly requested feature is now included (although it’s still experimental) – the ability to include nearby streets!

Just select “Yes” from the “Include Nearby Streets?” drop-down on the search page to use this new feature.

I’m still working on improving the nearby street selections (unfortunately there is no easy way to do this); but, I want to put it out there now for everyone to try out – hopefully people will let me know if they run into any problems!

I’d also love to hear any other feedback on Propertize.ca – just send me a note!

Uptown Saint John released the 2011 Live Life Award Nominations today!

Uptown Saint John’s Selection Committee had the tough job of choosing the following award finalists for each of the 12 award categories.

The winners will be announced at the June 9th awards event.  Tickets are available at the Uptown Saint John offices at 40 King Street or by calling 633-9797.

New Business of the year:

• Britt’s Pub
• Bourbon Quarter/Magnolia Cafe
• Relish

Best Retail Business of the year:

• Stylin Mama, Baby & Tot
• Manchester Shoe Salon
• Je Suis Prest

Best Restaurant of the year:

• Thandi
• Urban Deli
• Saint John Ale House

Best New or Renovated Residential Space:

• Upper Floor of the Brodie Building Princess Street
• Upper Floor Prince William Street Restoration by Derek & Terri Riedle
• Phase 2 of Historica Court by Keith Brideau Canterbury/Princess Street

Best New or Renovated Commercial Space:

• Britt’s Pub
• Silver Daisy Designs
• The Canterbury Lounge

Arts Infusion of the year:

• Uptown Gallery Hops
• Harvesting the Arts Festival
• “The Originals” 225 Gala Awards

Best Freebie of the year:

• 2010 New Years Eve Celebration on the Boardwalk
• Karim Rashid at The Imperial Theatre
• Parties with a Purpose, hosted by Fusion Saint John

Best Event of the Year:

• Chop Chop Festival
• “The Originals” 225 Gala Awards
• Sea Dogs Presidents Cup Finals vs. Moncton Wildcats

Best Tourism-Related Business or Product of the year

• The Saint John City Market
• The New Brunswick Museum
• Harbour Station

Heritage Project of the year

• Bourbon Quarter/Magnolia Café Façade Restoration
• The Clock at the foot of King Street
• Marco Polo, The Musical

The Live Green Award

• Commercial Properties
• Olivier Soaps
• Plan SJ

The Thomas L. McGloan Award

• Mr. Charlie Swanton
• Mr. Barry Ogden
• Mr. John Irving

The Lily Lake Pavilion will be hosting an exciting fundraising event for the PALS Program: the first-annual NB Soap Box Derby!

This event is open to everyone in the community and will feature a range of fun activities for the whole family.

For more information, visit http://nbsoapboxderby.ca.
Twitter: http://twitter.com/NBSoapBoxDerby
Facebook event page: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/event.php?eid=193982710638391