UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The evolution of municipal social planning Adams, Felicity 1993

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-ubc_1994-0032.pdf [ 1.89MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0087279.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0087279-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0087279-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0087279-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0087279-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0087279-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0087279-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

THE EVOLUTION OF MUNICIPAL SOCIAL PLANNINGbyFELICITY ADAMSB.A., The University ofManitoba, 1983A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OFTHE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OFMASTERS OF ARTSinTHE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES(School of Community and Regional Planning)We a this thesis as conformingTHE UMVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIANovember 1993© Felicity Adams, 1993In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanceddegree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make itfreely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensivecopying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of mydepartment or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying orpublication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my writtenpermission.(Signature)Department of Community and Regional PlanningThe University of British ColumbiaVancouver, CanadaDate 1993—NOV—25DE-6 (2/88)ABSTRACTThis thesis is about municipal social planning in Canada. The purpose of this workis to suggest conditions that may initiate the evolution of a process which results in amunicipality introducing social planning as part of the function of local government. Inthe effort to identif’ these conditions, the oldest municipal social planning programs inCanada (Halifax and Vancouver) are examined, as well as more recent British Columbiaexamples. The case of the social planning program in the City ofNanaimo, BritishColumbia is studied in depth to shed light on the dynamics involved in establishing amunicipal social planning program.In this thesis, the definition of municipal social planning utilized is borrowed fromthe Planning Institute ofBritish Columbia which defines social planning as a process bywhich the community and government take action to support community needs, includingsocial, physical, and economic realms. Such action includes the identification of socialimpacts and issues, the development of social goals, objectives, policies and priorities, thefacilitation of citizen involvement, the presentation of options, and the negotiation ofalternatives.A review of the literature provides the background information necessary to tellthe story of the municipal role in social welfare in Canada from the 1880’s to the presentday. Academic and community-based publications are surveyed to provide insight intohow the literature defines “social planning.” Reports and articles by both academics andpracticing social planners are reviewed to provide a description of two models of socialplanning: municipal and community-based. A review ofboth academic writings,municipal plans and studies, and community social planning documents provides adescription of the typical goals, objectives and functions of social planning. The evolutionof municipal social planning is learned from a review of various municipal documents andcase study research.11Conclusions about how municipal social planning programs are created and evolve,particularly about conditions that may initiate municipal social planning, are made throughan examination of the evolution of several municipal social planning programs in Canada.The thesis concludes with the identification of seven general conditions that have precededthe introduction of municipal social planning in Canada: (1) on-going and organizedcitizen pressure/action; (2) lack of or minimal public involvement in decision-making; (3)significant community social issues; (4) community frustration with the allocation of socialservice resources by external agencies; (5) lack of effective planning and coordinatingmechanisms; (6) unsatisfactory municipal response to social issues, both current andemerging; and (7) willingness on the part of the local government to initiate action.111TABLE OF CONTENTSABSTRACT iiTABLE OF CONTENTS ivLIST OF TABLES viiPREFACE viii1.0 INTRODUCTION 11.1 Purpose 11.2 Organization of the Thesis 11.3 Definitions of Critical Terms 21.4 Scope of the Thesis 32.0 THE EVOLUTION OF THE MUNICIPAL ROLE IN SOCIAL WELFARE 42.1 Introduction 42.2 The History of a Municipal Role in Social Welfare 42.2.1 Introduction 42.2.2 The Rise and Decline of Urban Autonomy 62.2.3 Intervention by Senior Government 82.2.4 The Devolution of Social Welfare 112.3 Social Planning Defined 152.3.1 The Rothman Typology 152.3.2 Planning For and With People 162.3.3 Comprehensive Activity 172.3.4 EquityPlanning 172.3.5 Three Classifications 182.4 Social Planning Models 182.5 The Origins of Municipal Social Planning 202.6 Social Planning Goals and Objectives 222.7 Social Planning Functions 25iv3.0 THE ORIGINS OF MUNICIPAL SOCIAL PLANNING IN NANAIMO .293.1 Introduction 293.2 Community Advocacy 293.2.1 The Nanaimo Community Law Office 293.2.2 The Nanaimo Affordable Housing Committee 323.3 The Response of City Council 333.4 More Community Pressure 353.5 The Formation of the Social Planning Task Force 353.5.1 Operational Model 353.5.2 Mandate 363.5.3 Membership 373.6 The Department ofPlanning and Development 383.7 Continuing Community Pressure for Social Planning 393.8 The Social Planning Task Force Report 403.9 Deciding on the Model 423.9.1 Community-Based Models 423.9.2 Municipal-Based Models 423.9.3 The Recommended Nanaimo Model 433.10 Council Responds 443.11 Implementing the Social Planning System 453.12 Conclusions 464.0 THE EVOLUTION OF MUNICIPAL SOCIAL PLANNING 494.1 Introduction 494.2 The Origins ofMunicipal Social Planning 494.3 Conditions Initiating Municipal Social Planning 504.4 Further Research 53V5.0 LESSONS FOR THE PLANNING PROFESSION AN]) GOVERNMENT .555.1 Introduction 555.2 The Relevance of Municipal Social Planning in the 1990’s 555.3 Policy Recommendations for the Planning Profession and Government.... 595.4 Final Words 62BIBLIOGRAPHY 63APPENDIX 1 Social Planning in Nanaimo: An Update 69viLIST OF TABLESTable Page1. Conditions Initiating Municipal Social Planning 52viiPREFACEAs I was appointed to the position of social planner with the City ofNanaimo inMay 1991 following the completion of my course work in Planning, this municipality wasselected as the case study for this thesis.Both the Nanaimo Community Law Office and the Nanaimo Affordable HousingSociety played key roles in the initiation of social planning in Nanaimo. These twoorganizations continue to be active in the City’s social planning program.viii1.0 INTRODUCTION1.1 PurposeThis thesis is about municipal social planning in Canada. The purpose of this workis to suggest conditions that may initiate the evolution of a process which results in amunicipality introducing social planning as part of the fhnction of local government. Inthe effort to identify these conditions, the oldest municipal social planning programs inCanada (Halifax and Vancouver) are examined, as well as more recent British Columbiamunicipal social planning programs. The case of the social planning program in the CityofNanaimo, British Columbia is studied in depth to shed light on the dynamics involved inestablishing a municipal social planning program.A review of the literature provides the background information necessary to tellthe story of the municipal role in social welfare in Canada from the mid-1880’s to thepresent day. Academic and community-based publications are surveyed to provide insightinto how the literature defines “social planning.” Reports and articles by both academicsand practicing social planners are reviewed to provide a description of the various modelsof social planning. A review of both academic writing, municipal plans and studies, andcommunity social planning documents provides a description of the typical goals,objectives and functions of social planning. The evolution of municipal social planning islearned from a review ofvarious municipal documents and case study research.1.2 Organization of the ThesisThis thesis comprises five chapters. Chapter Two describes the history of themunicipal role in social welfare in Canada during three periods: the late 1920’s whenurban autonomy was in decline, the period following the Depression and World War IIwhen intervention by the Federal government was increasing, and the 1980’s when seniorgovernments initiated a return to a local role in social welfare. This chapter provides1insight into how the literature defines “social planning”, its models of operation, its originsat the municipal level and its typical goals, objectives and functions.The City of Nanaimo case study is described in Chapter Three. This chapterincludes a description of the work done by activists in Nanaimo towards securing theissues of housing affordability and social planning on the municipal agenda. The casestudy covers the period January 1989 to May 1991, demonstrating the conditions whichinitiated the evolution of social planning in Nanaimo.Chapter Four draws conclusions from Canadian examples of municipal socialplanning and from the case study about how social planning programs are created andevolve, particularly about conditions that may initiate municipal social planning. Thechapter includes recommendations for further research in the field of social planning.Chapter Five describes implications for planning practice as identified by theresearch presented in this thesis and by current political and urban trends. This chapterdescribes the relevance of municipal social planning in the 1990’s and it provides policyrecommendations for the planning profession and local and provincial government.1.3 Definitions of Critical TermsSocial planning is classified into two models: municipal and community-based.The literature describes these two models as distinct yet complementary, with citizenparticipation important to both. Each model involves the enhancement of communitywell-being. This thesis deals only with the municipal model of social planning which canbe described as local government-based, planning activity related to enhancing the urbanenvironment for all people.In this thesis, the definition of municipal social planning utilized is borrowed fromthe Planning Institute of British Columbia which defines social planning as a process bywhich the community and government take action to support community needs, includingsocial, physical, and economic realms. Such action includes the identification of social2impacts and issues, the development of social goals, objectives, policies and priorities, thefacilitation of citizen involvement, the presentation of options, and the negotiation ofalternatives.1.4 Scope of the ThesisThe scope of this thesis is limited to studying the origins of the municipal model ofsocial planning practiced in Canada, particularly in British Columbia. A limited review ofthe community-based model of social planning is included. As this thesis focuses on theevolution of a process which results in municipal social planning, it does not emphasizewhat social planning might look like once achieved. This thesis highlights the continuedrelevance of social planning in the 1990s to demonstrate that the work done by localcommunities in achieving municipal social planning continues to be both relevant andimportant.32.0 THE EVOLUTION OF THE MUNICIPAL ROLE IN SOCIAL WELFARE2.1 IntroductionThis chapter will describe the history of the municipal role in social welfare inCanada during three periods: the late 1920’s when urban autonomy was in decline, theperiod following the Depression and World War II when intervention by the Federalgovernment was increasing, and the 1980’s when senior governments initiated a return to alocal role in social welfare.This chapter will provide insight into how the literature defines “social planning.”By examining reports and articles authored by both academics and practicing socialplanners, models of social planning and its typical goals, objectives and fUnctions will beexplored. The origins of social planning in several Canadian municipalities will also bereviewed.2.2 The History of a Municipal Role in Social Welfare2.2.1 IntroductionThe provision of social welfare in Canada has been delivered, at one time oranother, by all three levels of government, by charities, by churches and by non-profitsocieties.’ Social welfare has included direct financial aid to the needy, counselling toboth the young and the old, and shelters for the destitute, among many other programs.At the time of Confederation, Canada was a rural nation, the government of theday supported a laissez-faire philosophy with respect to social welfare, such matters beingseen as of minimal importance. As a result of Confederation and the signing of the BritishNorth America Act (1867), matters concerning health and welfare became theresponsibility of the provinces and their municipalities (B.N.A. Act, Section 92). At thistime, municipalities assumed responsibility for the sick, elderly, young and women only1This section is drawn from Andrew Armitage, Social Welfare In Canada (Toronto: McClelland andStewart, 1975); Dennis Guest, The Emergence of Social Security in Canada, 2d ed., rev. (Vancouver:UBC Press, 1990); and Allan Moscovitch and Glenn Drover “Social Expenditures and the Welfare State:The Canadian Experience in Historical Perspective” in The Benevolent State: The Growth of Welfare inCanada, eds., Allan Moscovitch and Jim Albert, (Toronto: Garamond Press, 1987).4after the resources of the family had been exhausted and local residence could beestablished.During the period of 1900 to 1920, major voluntary welfare organizations, such asChildren’s Aid Societies, began to emerge. The provinces began to introduce socialwelfare legislation and where this did occur (e.g. mothers’ allowances), it took thefinancial pressures of “relief’ off municipalities. The Federal Government maintained itslimited involvement in social welfare until after the Depression and the two World Warswith the exception of such programs as income security for veterans and the first federal-provincial cost-shared pension program which were introduced during the 1920’s. Theperiod of the Depression emphasized the decreasing ability of the municipalities and someprovinces (such as Saskatchewan) to provide a full range of social welfare services. As aresult of these financial limitations, the federal government became involved in support toanother sector of the population: the unemployed.The late 1930’s and the 1940’s saw the Federal Government examine its role in thecountry’s social welfare with the Royal Commission of Dominion Provincial Relations (theRowell-Sirois Commission) and the Dominion Provincial Conference on Reconstruction,among other inquiries. These inquiries resulted in the establishment of general objectivesfor Canadian social welfare which were enacted during the 1950’s and 1960’s. In 1966,the federal government introduced the Canada Assistance Plan (CAP), formalizing theFederal government’s role in social welfare and decreasing the provinces’ financialresponsibility for social welfare.The 1970’s began a period of restraint in social welfare spending as the Federalgovernment initiated cuts to social programs as a result of downturns in the economy:“considerable public rhetoric was expressed in favour of privatization andcommercialization”2during this period. The 1980’s saw the spirit of devolution return to2Canadian Council on Social Development, Social Policies for the Eighties, (Ottawa: CCSD, 1981), 87.5the Federal government as budgets continued to tighten and matters of social welfarebecame less popular to the government of the day.2.2.2 The Rise and Decline of Urban AutonomyIn Canada, the move towards autonomous local government began in the mid-1840’s, prior to Confederation. The B.N.A. Act (1867) gave the provinces responsibilityfor matters concerning health and welfare; however, this was done with the intention thatsuch responsibilities would be assigned to the municipalities. Assigning municipalitiesresponsibility for social welfare was based on the colonial tradition of the “poor laws”which “dictated that public welfare should be in the hands of lowest level of government”3and on the provinces having authority over municipal institutions. The urban reformmovement, which came of age during the 1880’s as cities in Canada experienced economicgrowth, encouraged collective solutions to social problems; however, voluntary effortsremained the preferred delivery mechanism.4 “The social welfare function of governmentwas then regarded as a ‘residual’ one, meaning that charity was, in the first place, theresponsibility of the family, the church, or private organizations.”5 Government wouldonly intervene if all other avenues failed.The development of the “commercial city” during the first half of the 1880’s sawcities seeking incorporation for two reasons: to create independent centres of local powerand to obtain economic independence.6 Acts of incorporation were frequently associatedwith the desire of the business class to expand its commercial power7 and to enhance itscontrol of local government. This early success in increasing local autonomy resulted in aweakening of power previously held by absent property-owners and a limiting of3Derek P. J. Hum, Federalism and the Poor: A Review of the Canada Assistance Plan, (Toronto: OntarioEconomic Council, 1983), 12.4Guest, Social Security. 30 - 31.5Hum, Federalism, 12.6John Taylor, “Urban Autonomy in Canada” in Power and Place: Canadian Urban Development in theNorth American Context., eds., G. Stelter and A. Artibise, (Vancouver: UBC Press, 1986), 271.7lbid., 270.6democratic control; in some circumstances this power was limited to only the property-owning residents of the community.8At the turn of the century, the “industrial city” emerged. This phase of economicdevelopment saw a continuation of the economic success of the business and propertyowning classes. Industrial development brought “social ills”9 such as health problems andthe family and the private market were expected to provide support to those individualsand families who found themselves in need. If an individual or family had neither of thesesupports to rely on, they would turn to a charitable agency and in turn to their municipalityfor “relief” This form of support was minimal, temporary, and gratuitous: “there beingno thought of a right to assistance.”10The growth of cities and the emergence of social needs led to the establishment ofthe concept of a social minima. Both the urban reform and social gospel movements andthe ongoing effects of industrialization on Canadians forced both the provincial and federalgovernments to re-examine their understanding of the causes and consequences ofpoverty. This examination initiated a process of understanding about the forces ofindustrialization and the resultant socio-economic impacts on Canadian society. Inresponse, provincial governments began to develop legislation to deal with specificproblems, such as young offenders, destitute mothers and children, veterans, the elderlyand unemployed. However, the financial responsibility for the community’s well-beingcontinued to fall to local government. By the late 1920’s, “many local governments werefinding it difficult to sustain such efforts and were beginning to call for a readjustmentamong all levels of government of revenues and responsibilities, including abandonment bythe federal government of the income tax fild.”h18lbid., 272.9Ibici.10Guest, Social Security, 1.“Taylor, “Urban Autonomy,” 273.7As a result of the inability of local government to meet the needs of thecommunity, urban autonomy began to decline. Highlighted by the lack of ability to collectrevenue, local government began to demand increased revenue and control from theprovincial government; however, they were met by provincial government intervention inlocal affairs. The process of intervention has been described as occurring in two phases:at the turn of the twentieth century when “poor laws” and the principle of less eligibilitycharacterized government assistance (e.g. Government Annuities Act), and around thetime of the First World War when the effects of industrialization were being felt andresponded to by Canadians (e.g. workers’ compensation movement). 12The first phase in the process of intervention by provincial governments resulted inthe creation ofvarious boards and independent positions to oversee new functions of localgovernment. New boards included library boards, park boards, and health boards, as wellas police commissions. Independent positions such as the medical health officer werecreated during this period. “The second phase in the erosion of local autonomy, beginningabout the time of the First World War, was more significant: ... senior governmentsimposed function and office on the local authority but retained most of the control overfunding and regulation.”32.2.3 Intervention by Senior GovernmentAt the time of Confederation, the provinces were given responsibility for matterspertaining to health and welfare with the plan that they would pass these responsibilitieson to local government. Over time, the haphazard approach provided by municipalities inthe delivery of social services was criticized by social reformers and as a social minimumfor services evolved (beginning in the 1880’s with education and healthcare and concludingin the 1960’s with the Canada Assistance Plan), direct responsibility was taken back by theprovinces.12pj and Guest, Social Security, 32 - 38.13Ibid., 274.8Events such as the world wars, the depression, post-war economic growth, and thedemand for universal social programs increased the federal government’s role in theprovision of social services.’4The advent of World War One saw the federal government encourage wartimeproduction, engage in rationing, and among other actions, impose a federal income tax onpersonal income. Such imposition by the federal government into the lives of Canadianswas unknown until this time. “The government also became the sole support of hundredsof disabled soldiers, their wives and children, and the widows and orphans of the menkilled in battle.”5 This move revealed to Canadians that the federal government couldplay other than its constitutional “law and order” role and could help to provide for theirwelfare. However, at the close of the war, the family and market place were once againexpected by the federal government to provide for Canadians. During this period and intothe 1920’s, provincial governments remained the sole providers of any form of publicassistance, primarily in the area of mothers’ allowances and minimum wage legislation.The depression of the 193 0’s had an impact on every Canadian, even those neverhaving experienced the humiliation of relief With fewer opportunities through the marketfor families, municipalities were forced to assume a larger role in social welfare and did sofirst through public works’ job creation projects, then through work-for-relief projects, andfinally through direct relief’6 During this same time, intervention by the provinces in thelife of local government could be seen in the growth of provincial statutory control in fourareas: municipal affairs; social welfare; planning and housing; and finance and audit.’7For example, the provinces created departments of public welfare, “an area within mostmunicipal acts and charters,” and introduced legislation related to “town planning,development control, and housing.”814Guest, Social Security, 8, 14, 63, 161.15Ibid., 48.16thid., 84.17Taylor, “Urban Autonomy”, 276.18Ibid., 277.9The federal government’s ongoing intervention into the field of social welfareoccurred with the passing of the Old Age Pensions Act of 1927. This Act enabled thefederal government to reimburse provinces, through the use of conditional grants, for anamount equivalent to one-half of the provincial spending on old age pensions. The use ofconditional grants allowed the government to provide financial help without violating theB.N.A. Act which had given powers relating to “health and welfare” to the provinces.When the Bennett government introduced its “New Deal” legislation, in particular theEmployment and Social Insurance Act of 1935, the federal role in social welfare waschallenged by the provinces and ruled by the Privy Council as ultra vires: highlighting theneed for constitutional reform.19In an effort to address constitutional reform, the Royal Commission on Dominion-Provincial Relations was established by the federal government in 1937. In its report of1940, the Commission, in regard to social welfare policy, recommended that the federalgovernment be responsible for national unemployment insurance and a contributory oldage pension program; all other services would be left to the provinces. As a result, “theB.N.A. Act was amended, in July 1940, to grant the federal government responsibility forthe Unemployment Insurance program and again in 1951 and 1964 to make concurrentprovisions for federal participation in the Old Age Pension.”2°Until 1966, when the federal government introduced the Canada Assistance Plan(CAP), the provinces held the sole responsibility for social services. CAP was introducedas a method of consolidating all the federal-provincial programs into a “single,comprehensive program of benefits that would meet financial need regardless of cause.”2’Under CAP, provinces were eligible for 50/50 cost sharing of programs that would helppeople retain or achieve independence and would improve standards of public welfare.‘9Guest, Social Security, 89.20SharJ& Yelaja, “Canadian Social Policy: Perspectives,” chap, in Canadian Social Policy, rev. ed.,(Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1987), 11.21Thid., 155.10Taylor concludes that the loss of urban autonomy by local government occurreddue to financial intervention of senior government. Such intervention resulted in localgovernment being granted funding to deliver specified services or not receiving financialassistance at all. As a result, the local community lost the ability to identifj problems andestablish priorities. The responsibility for problems and the power to solve them wereseparated.22Although intervention in social welfare by senior government resulted in the loss oflocal government responsibility for social welfare, local communities did not stopexpecting a local response to community social issues. Whether or not local governmentsare financially and/or constitutionally responsible for community well-being, communitiesexperience needs at the local level and they look for a local role in the prioritization ofgovernment response. Communities look to municipal social planning to provide themwith the opportunity for a local perspective in decision-making.2.2.4 The Devolution of Social WelfareThe history of the decline of local autonomy and the increasing assumption ofresponsibility for social welfare by senior governments has resulted in the current situationwhere “most municipal and regional governments have been content, if not pleased, topass the responsibility for social policy to the senior levels of government.”23 However,since the early 1980’s, senior governments have initiated a return to a local role in socialwelfare extending beyond the delivery of statutory social services.In the mid-1970’s, as a result of deficit problems, “governments began cutting backsupport to social programs, insisting that Canada [c]ould no longer afford sointerventionist and expensive a public sector.”24 Since this time, federal revenues havebeen constrained and cost-shared programs have become a target of expenditure22Taylor, “Urban Autonomy”, 280.23Brian Wharf, Conununities and Social Policy in Canada,(Toronto: McClelland & Stewart Inc., 1992),20.24cc8D Social Policies, 87.11constraint. Since the mid-1980’s, the election of a philosophically conservativegovernment has continued the trend toward less government spending on social policy.Highlighting this stance, the Government Expenditure Restraint Act (Bill C-69) waspassed by the House of Commons in 1990. This Bill established a formula for the cappingof the Canada Assistance Plan; limiting the federal monies for social assistance paymentsand social services to the provinces including additional limits for the three “richest”provinces: Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia.Provincial governments retained their Constitutional control over social welfarewith the signing of the Constitution Act in 1982. “Because the province has almostunrestricted legal authority (though not fiscal power) over social services, provincialpolicy sets the conditions for events in other domains.”25 This includes events at the locallevel. Provinces, as a result of federal cut-backs to the joint fhnding of social programs,such as Bill C-69, are increasingly relying on the non-profit and private sectors to delivernon-statutory social services.Today in Canada, social (income) assistance is delivered primarily by ministries ofthe provincial government; however, in three provinces, Nova Scotia, Ontario andManitoba, “the responsibility for social assistance is decentralized to municipal or regionalgovernment.”26 The responsibility for the delivery of personal social services also variesacross the country with most provinces delivering statutory services via provincialministries and non-statutory social services via community-based non-profit and privateagencies.For example, social services in British Columbia fall into two categories: statutoryand non-statutory services. Statutory services include income maintenance and childprotection and non-statutory services include prevention, counselling, and treatment. The25Jacqueline S. Ismael, “Privatization of Social Services: A Heuristic Approach” chap. in Privatizationand Provincial Social Services in Canada: Policy, Administration and Service Delivery, eds. Jacqueline S.Ismael and Yves Vaillancourt, (Edmonton: The University of Alberta Press, 1988), 2.26Brian Wharf, “Social Services” chap. in Urban Policy Issues: Canadian Perspectives., eds. Richard A.Loreto and Trevor Price, (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart Inc., 1990), 176.12B.C. government provides income maintenance and protection services and has privatizednon-statutory services to non-profit and private agencies through the use of contracts, fee-for-services and grants.27 The privatization of previously administered provincial socialservices is “causing a substantial shift in responsibility for social services to thecommunity.”28 This means that local agencies are being relied on to provide many of thesocial welfare services available to improve a citizen’s quality of life and therefore theoverall quality of life of the community. “The very incentive of the privatization drive isnot so much to permit individuals and local communities to assume more responsibilities;it is more to allow provincial governments to reduce their social program responsibilitiesin order to limit the financial resources of the state committed to the empowerment ofindividuals and local communities to assume responsibilities. In this sense, the rhetoric ofprivatization of social services sounds like a regeneration of the old residual model ofsocial provision.”29 This model views the family and private charities as responsible forindividual and community well-being with local government stepping in as these resourcesdeplete.These recent shifts by senior government have been difficult for municipalities toeffectively respond to for a variety of reasons. One of the most significant reasons is thatsince municipalities are “creatures” of the province, their ability to direct their own socialwelfare course has been curtailed. In addition, the financial support needed for a servicedelivery response is overwhelming for, and unavailable to, most municipalities.30However, a municipal role in social welfare does not necessarily require, nor perhapsshould it, the provision of direct service to individuals and families or the absorption of27Michael Clague et al., ReforminE Human Services: The Experience of the Community Resource Boardsin B.C., (Vancouver: UBC Press, 1984), 289.28Michael Clague, The Social quality of Conununity Life, (Vancouver: GV.RD, 1990), 14.29lsmael, “Conclusion: Privatization in Comparative Provincial Perspective” chap. in Privatization andProvincial Social Services in Canada: Policy, Administration and Service Delivery, eds. Jacqueline S.Ismael and Yves Vaillancourt, (Edmonton: The University of Alberta Press, 1988), 225.30GIenn Drover and 3. D. Hulchanski, Future Directions for Urban Social Planning in Canada, UBCPlanning Papers, Discussion Paper #11, (Vancouver, B.C.: UBC School of Community and RegionalPlanning, 1987), 11.13cost. A municipal role in social planning is one way that municipalities have begun toeffectively respond to local social issues and maintain influence over their role in socialwelfare. As described later in this chapter, municipalities in Canada have been involved in“social planning” for at least 25 years.The devolution of social services has an important impact on the role of localgovernment in social planning. In provinces where income assistance and personal socialservices are delivered at the local level, such as in Ontario, social planning programs tendto focus almost exclusively on planning for “social services.”3’ Social planning in thesesituations tends to focus on activity relating to the coordination and delivery of social andother human services within a provincial framework. In other provinces, such as BritishColumbia, where the province delivers statutory social services and non-statutory servicesare delivered locally, municipal social planning tends to be practiced in a variety of waysincluding research-based activity, advocacy planning and social services planning.It has recently been advocated by Clague and Wharf that a framework for socialservice planning and provision be established. Such a framework would involve apartnership of provincial ministries, local government, the voluntary sector, andconsumers.32 Such concepts are supported by the Federation of Canadian Municipalitieswhich believes that “municipal governments must become active partners with provincialand federal governments in establishing social policies that affect the lives of citizens.”33Municipal interest in social issues in British Columbia can be witnessed through thecreation of social planning departments or the hiring of social planning staff in at leastthirteen municipalities, most recently in Nanaimo, Kelowna and Kamloops.34Ontario Ministry of Community and Social Services, “Planning,” chap. in Report of the Provincial-Municipal Social Service Review, (Ontario: Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 1990), 161 - 83.32Clague, Social Quality, 17; ‘Wharf, “Social Services”, 186 - 87.:33Wharf Communities, 23.34SPARC, Proposals to Strengthen Community Social Planning in B.C.: A Policy Paper, (Vancouver:SPARC, 1993), 3; “Social Planning in the G.V.R.D.”, PIBC News 33, no. 5 (December 1991), 8. Asocial planning function exists in the following B.C. municipalities: Vancouver, City of NorthVancouver, District of North Vancouver, District of West Vancouver, Burnaby, Richmond, Surrey,District of Langley, Victoria, Nanaimo, Kelowna, Kamloops and Delta.14The above discussion begins to identif,r the range of activities undertaken as a partof social planning at the municipal level. The next section of this chapter outlines thosedistinctions and identifies three classifications of social planning.2.3 Social Planning DefinedVarious definitions of social planning can be found in the literature. Although it isdifficult to locate a consistent definition of social planning, most definitions includecharacteristics relating to research, advocacy, citizen participation and/or communitydevelopment. In reviewing the literature, distinctions emerge between the focus of socialplanning and its locality or auspices. Several authors relate social planning to thecommunity development typology developed by Rothman.2.3.1 The Rothman TypologyRothman has described three types of planned intervention in a community:locality development, social planning, and social action.35 Locality development refers toself-help action by a local area or neighbourhood in an effort to resolve local problems andis characterized by cooperation and consensus. Social action, by contrast, involvesstrategies of confrontation by oppressed groups in an effort to “realign the distribution ofwealth and power” and is rooted in the Marxist ideology that “society is governed by anelite few who rule in their own interests.”36Rothman defines social planning as “a rational, technocratic approach to practice[which] requires the application of research and other methodologies”37to solving socialproblems. Similarities between the practice of social planning as defined by Rothman andwhat Charles Lindblom referred to as “disjointed incrementalism” have been identified inthe literature.38 Friedmann makes a distinction between radical planning (social35Jack Rothman, “Three Models of Community Organization Practice,” in Strategies of CommunityOrganization. 2d. ed., Fred Cox et. al., eds., (Itasca, Illinois: Peacock Press, 1974) quoted in WharfCommunities, 16- 17, 230-1 and Brian Wharf with Novia Carter, Planning for the Social Services:Canadian Experiences. Volume 5 in a Series of Case Studies in Social Planning, (Ottawa: C.C.SD.,1972), 5.36Rothman, Ibid.37Thid., 24.Wharf and Carter, Canadian Experiences, 6.15action/social reform) and social planning and has written that “radical planning and socialplanning are mutually contradictory forms of social construction, yet they are necessaryfor each other. Assertion of the first implies existence of the second.”392.3.2 Planning For and With PeopleThe International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences defines social planning as itrelates to dealing with consequences of other types of planning: “the traditional land useapproach is called physical planning whereas social planning ... describes planning forpeople or by implication for disadvantaged people, probably because physical plans havecatered so largely to building programs for more affluent city residents.”4°Perloff echoesthe connection between social planning and other kinds of planning with his definition that“social planning provides a ‘human resources counterpart’ to physical city planning or toeconomic planning.”41 Callahan and Dill define social planning as “a commitment to planfor and encourage an optimum quality of life for residents of a given community.”42Wharf combines the connection of social planning to other types of planningtogether with the importance of the active involvement of the citizenry by defining socialplanning “as systematic and research-based efforts to identifS’ causes of social problems, todevelop programs to remedy these problems, and to identify the social consequences ofother kinds of planning activities. In addition, social planning includes the involvement ofcitizens in the challenge of social problem-solving.”43 Clague carries forward theimportance of community involvement with the following definition of social planning:“Community social planning is a local, democratic system for setting priorities, arriving at39John Friedmann, The Good Society, (Cambridge, Mass.: The M.I.T. Press, 1979), 41.40David Sills ed., International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences XII, (LISA: Crowell Collier andMacMillan, Inc., 1968), 135 quoted in District of Surrey, Social Planning in Greater Vancouver, (Surrey,B.C.: Planning and Development Services, 1989), 3.41Harry Perloff “New Directions in Social Planning” in Journal of the American Institute of PlannersXXXI, no. 4 (November, 1965), 300.42Marilyn Callahan and Rob Dill, “Report on Social Planning in Victoria”, Report for the Mayor’s TaskForce on Family and Children’s Services, March 1988, (City of Victoria, Planning Department, Victoria,B.C., 1988), 4.43Wharf “Social Services”, 173.16equitable compromises and taking action. It supports community needs and interests insocial, cultural, economic and environmental affairs. It is a process for buildingcommunity well-being.”44 The Social Planning and Research Council of B.C. (SPARC)defines social planning as “a local, democratic system of planning and taking action towardcommunity needs in social, economic, and environmental affairs.”45 In this same vein, thePlanning Institute ofBritish Columbia (NBC) states that “social planning may generally becharacterized as a process by which the community and government take action to supportcommunity needs, including social, physical, and economic realms.”462.3.3 Comprehensive ActivitySocial planning has also been described as a comprehensive activity linking thefiscal, monetary, employment, and social service sectors. Similarly, Kahn describes socialplanning as dealing with the “social aspects of economic or physical development... aneffort in which the economic, physical and social are examined together to promote“development”-- or other societal goals.”47 Callahan and Dill also define social planningas “a comprehensive overview of the social implications of decision-making at the local orregional level.”48 Social planning was defined by the City Administrator for the City ofNanaimo as “an ‘attitude’ or ‘approach’ to dealing with the whole gamut of complexcommunity issues across departmental and organizational lines.”492.3.4 Equity PlanningIn many instances it is assumed that the reader knows what social planning is orwill be able to determine its definition by piecing together the various functions attributedto it. For example, in the planning text published by the American Planning Association44Michael Clague, A Citizen’s Guide to Community Social Planning, (Vancouver: SPARC of B.C.,1993), 4.45SPARC, Policy Paper, 2.46PmC, “Strengthening Social Planning: A Brief to the Provincial Government from PIBC”, PIBC News35, no. 1 (February 1993), 5.47Ka]m, The Theory and Practice of Social Planning, (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1969), 27.48Callahan and Dill, “Social Planning,” 4.49City of Nanaimo, “Report of the City Administrator to Council Re: Social Planning and AffordableHousing, 1990-JAN-22,” 1.17social planning is loosely defined as the “social perspective.” The social perspective isdescribed as focusing on “the diversity of need within a community” and “the equity ordistributional implications of planning.”5° In this same regard, Drover and Hulchanskistate that “urban social planning, ... , defines a certain set of needs as “basic”, makingaccess a right and the democratic process a necessity.”5’2.3.5 Three ClassificationsDefinitions of social planning can generally be classified into three groups: (1)planning for and with people, (2) comprehensive activity, and (3) equity planning. Allthree groups of definitions emphasize the importance of community well-being. Eachinvolve community input although to varying degrees. Aspects from all three groupscharacterize the practice of municipal social planning.By examining the Rothman typology and the various definitions of social planning,two distinct, yet complementary, models of practice emerge: government and community-based (voluntary). These models are discussed in the next section.2.4 Social Planning ModelsRothman (1974) as quoted in Wharf has delineated four auspices or models ofoperation for community intervention: “formal public- and private-sector interventions forsocial planning; neighbourhood-based associations for locality development; and socialmovements for social action.”52 The approach taken by Drover and Hulchanski definesall four of Rothman’s interventions as “social planning approaches” and distinguishes themas either government-based or voluntaristic.53Government-based social planning, according to Drover and Hulchanski, includesRothman’s public-sector interventions. Drover and Hulchanski go on to clarify that thedegree to which this government-based model is “a ‘social’ rather than a bureaucratic50Frank S. So and Judith Getzels, eds., The Practice of Local Government Planning, (Washington, D.C.:American Planning Association, 1988), 330.51Drover and Hulchanski, Future Directions, 18.52Wharf Communities, 182.53Drover and Hulchanski, Future Directions, 12.18affair depends upon the extent to which citizens or residents of a community participate inthe process.”54 Voluntaristic social planning, according to these authors, includes theremaining types of community intervention in the Rothman typology: community councils(private-sector social planning), locality planning (neighbourhood-based groups forlocality development), and citizen coalitions (social movements for social action).55Both government-based and voluntary sector-based social planning occurs inBritish Columbia. Government-based social planning occurs mostly through the operationof local government although recent changes at the provincial level have seen theintroduction of “community development” workers and assistants in the Ministries ofSocial Services and Health.56 In both Vancouver and Victoria both municipal andcommunity-based social planning is in place.The Social Planning and Research Council (SPARC), the provincial social planningcouncil in B. C., has a presence in many municipalities through either local projects orboard member activity. In other cities, only a community-based social planning council isin operation. These councils vary in size from informal organizations with project staff tolarger operations servicing several municipalities. As well, the United Way of the LowerMainland provides a significant community-based social planning function for thecommunities it serves.There are various models of municipal-based social planning in operation in B.C..These models range from a Social Planning Department with professional stafl to staffwithin Planning Departments having social planning responsibility, to social planningcommittees of Council. Most municipalities have either an advisory social planningcommittee to Council or “specialist” committees focusing on particular areas such asdisabled persons’ access, race relations or housing. Some municipalities hired social54Thid.55Thid., 12 -13.56The current N.D.P. administration is introducing ‘closer to home’ policies and is hiring staff to assistwith implementation, e.g. Community Health Councils.19planning staff prior to forming a social planning committee and others had committees forseveral years before hiring staff with specific social planning responsibility. Chapter Threedescribes the model of operation in Nanaimo, B.C..2.5 The Origins of Municipal Social PlanningSocial planning has been practiced in Canada by local government for at leasttwenty-five years. The origins of municipal social planning have been attributed to“citizen reaction to unbridle(d) growth coupled with decay of inner cities during thesixties” that brought the realization to city officials that although “they were able to altercities’ physical shapes, [they] were often unable to anticipate the social impact of theirplans.”57The earliest Canadian municipal social planning programs were established inHalifax and Vancouver. The Vancouver Social Planning Department originated as a resultof four factors: the recognition by City Staff of “the growing demand on localgovernment for social initiatives;”58 the recommendation of Staff that a Department ofSocial Planning and Community Development be established; the reports of externalagencies promoting service coordination; and the recommendation of Staff that a SocialPlanning Board be established to address social problems in “skid row” prior to plans forurban renewal.59In Halifax social planning originated as a result of three factors: the lack of aneffective mechanism to plan and coordinate social services; the widespread dissatisfactionwith the municipal welfare department; and the social conditions of residents in the Blacksettlement of Africville.6° The origins of the Vancouver and Halifax social planning57Callahan and Dill, “Social Planning,” 4.58City of Vancouver, Social Planning: A Tenth Year Report, (Vancouver: City of Vancouver, 1977), 3.59Canadian Council on Social Development, Case Studies in Social Planning. Volume Four: PlanningUnder Voluntary Auspices, Vancouver, (Ottawa: CCSD, 1972), 33 - 35.60iiaii Council on Social Development, Case Studies in Social Planning. Volume Three: SocialPlanning in Halifax. (Toronto: C.C.S.D, 1971), 13 - 17, 78 - 79.20departments begin to identify conditions that may initiate the evolution of a process whichresults in a social planning function being implemented at the local government level.In British Columbia, the City of Vancouver social planning program is the oldest,having been established in 1968. Since then, several other B.C. municipalities haveestablished social planning programs. A report entitled Social Planning in GreaterVancouver, commissioned by the District of Surrey, Social Planning Task Force (1989),identifies the following reasons for the evolution of municipal social planning programs inthe Greater Vancouver area:• the effect of urban renewal programs.• the reaction to possible freeway development.• the concern about multi-family development, youth problems and the need tocoordinate various services.• the need to provide professional advice and assistance to the Community ServicesAdvisory Commission of Council.• the need for professional staff in the Development Services Department to provideadvice on social issues.• the increasing pressure for a response to community social services.• the creation of a Social Planning Committee.Recently established municipal social planning programs in B.C. (Victoria,Nanaimo, Kelowna and Kamloops) have originated due to similar reasons as theirpredecessors, as well as in response to emerging issues. Such issues61 include:• the impact of rapid growth and development.• the impact of changing demographics, including a growing seniors population.• the impact of increasing cultural diversity.• the impacts of unemployment and poverty.61Tl-jjs list is based on a review of social planning documents from Victoria and Nanaimo and fromconversations with the Social Planners from Kelowna and Kamloops at the Provincial Social PlannersRound Table, 1992 - 3.21• the impact of provincial deinstitutionalization policies.• the need for a local response to housing issues, including tight rental vacancy rates andincreasing house prices.• the increasing demands for local government involvement in the managing of socialservice and health care resources.• the need for additional planning expertise at the local level.The growing demands placed on local government by senior governments isadding to the reasons why municipalities are beginning to look at social planning or areincreasing their social planning mandates. In B.C., the devolution of social serviceresponsibility and health care resources and the closing of provincial institutions in favourof community-based services is placing increasing responsibility for social services at thelocal level. As a result, citizens and community groups are viewing the involvement oflocal government in the social welfare of their communities as both appropriate andnecessary.2.6 Social Planning Goals and ObjectivesKahn has described the objectives of social planning in the context of planning forpeople: “one can no longer make decisions about land use, transportation, housing, andcommunity facilities without debate and decision about the goals of urban life and thevalues and ends toward which the urban environment is to be shaped.”62 Kahn’s statementof objectives defines the practice of municipal social planning as integrated with otherplanning fttnctions within the municipality. The Planning Institute of B.C. states a similargoal for social planning: “to maintain and enhance the quality of life, and thereby developcommunity well-being.”6362Alfred J. Kahn, Studies in Social Policy and Planning, (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1969),175.63pmc “Strengthening,” 5.22Examples of municipal social planning objectives as they relate to other types ofplanning include:• To include a social planning perspective that willmaximize the positive and minimize the negative impactsof planned development.• To address market housing and special needs housingrequirements.64• To continue to strengthen the formal ties betweenprivate development and social needs by encouragingthe social use bonus provisions in the zoning by-law.• To further integrate public buildings and socialprogramming by planning new buildings and services inconjunction with schools, libraries and recreationcentres.65• To integrate the social aspects with other aspects of cityplanning, including urban rehabilitation and publichousing projects.66The American Planning Association describes the purpose of social planning as itrelates to equity planning as “not simply to discover the likely distributional impacts ofdecisions but to reduce impacts that place particular groups at a disadvantage and toachieve greater equality among social groupS.”67There are also social planning goals and objectives that describe social planningactivity as it relates to planning for the provision of social services or coordinating activity.Some municipal social planning programs in Canada focus on the delivery of socialservices. As described in the previous section, where this occurs in British Columbia, themunicipal focus is on the delivery and coordination of non-statutory social services. Inother Canadian cities (such as Halifax and Toronto), statutory social services are deliveredat the municipal level which results in a social services-focused social planning program.64Disthct of Burnaby, Official Cominunit-y Plan, (Burnaby, B.C.: Burnaby, Planning and BuildingInspection Department, 1987), 29.65Pymond Young, City of Vancouver: Social Change and Municipal Response. The Past Decade,(Vancouver: City of Vancouver, Social Planning Department, 1976), 7.66Cy of Vancouver, Social Planning, 6.67So and Getzels, Local Government, 330.23As stated earlier, a municipal role in social services, both statutory and non-statutory, isincreasingly being demanded ofB.C. municipalities. Municipal objectives for socialservice coordination and planning include:• To plan, develop, coordinate and integrate health,education, welfare, recreation and community renewalprograms.68• To evaluate municipal participation in social servicesand to define and strengthen those achieving prioritymunicipal objectives.69• To facilitate and cooperate with senior levels ofgovernment in the provision of human services andhousing.7°Social planning goals also focus on citizen action and participation in the planningprocess. Most municipal social planning programs, whether focusing on land use planningor social service planning, include goals and objectives related to citizen participation andempowerment. Examples of such municipal goals and objectives include:• To emphasize citizen participation in all Social Planningdecisions affecting Nanaimo.71• To establish an open and consultative planning processinvolving municipal departments, senior levels ofgovernment, outside agencies, community groups andthe general public in determining needs, strategies, andimplementation actions.72• To foster citizen self-help and community bettermentprograms.73• To encourage citizen involvement in analysis of socialissues, promotion of progressive policies, and theplanning and development of social services and relatedservices.7468City of Vancouver, Social Planning, 6.69Young, City of Vancouver. 7.70District of Burnaby, O.C.P., 30.71Social Planning Task Force, Social Planning Task Force Report, (Nanaimo, B.C.: City of Nanaimo,1990), 5.72Cfty of Burnaby, O.C.P., 30.73City of Vancouver, Social Planning, 6.74Ontario, Ministiy of Community and Social Services, “Planning,” 166.24As can be seen by the following objectives from two community-based socialplanning councils, citizen participation and involvement is also an important component oftheir work.• To facilitate communication between individuals, groupsand institutions.• To help the community formulate quality of lifeobjectives it wants to achieve for residents.75• To facilitate a community response to social issues andto coordinate a community planning process for servicedelivery in order to enhance the quality of life for thepeople of York Region.762.7 Social Planning FunctionsThe functions ascribed to the practice of social planning reflect which definitionand which model is being used. Social planning functions have changed over time,reflecting the political and social reality of the day.In the 1960’s, social planning functions were categorized into four essentialelements: definition of the planning task, formulation of policy and goals, programmingand evaluation, monitoring and feedback.77 Clague adds the following functions to the listin respect of today’s realities: citizen action, public participation and local governance.78Municipal social planning has three general functions: research to identify unmetneeds, advice on the social consequences of development, and review of key social andeconomic indicators.79 Two major distinctions exist between how municipal socialplanning programs respond to issues. One approach has been to take an active role in thedelivery of services to meet the community’s social service needs, for example, in the75Social Planning Council of Winnipeg, Winnipeg’s Next Decade: The Challenge of Social Equity,(Winnipeg, MB.: Social Planning Council of Winnipeg, 1991), 6.76Ontario, “Planning,” 167.77John W. Dyckinan, “Social Planning, Social Planners and Planned Societies” in the Journal of theAmerican Institute of Planners XXXII, no. 2 (March 1966), 66 - 76 quoted in Kahn, Theory and Practice,18.78Michael Clague, “Five Social Planning Functions” in Proceedings: Greater Vancouver Social FuturesConference, (Vancouver: GVRD Development Services Department, 1988), 41.79Wharf “Social Services,” 178.25provision of social assistance and housing directly by the municipality. The otherapproach has been to work with the community to develop the needed response and totake a role in funding new services, for example, through contract services or grants-in-aid. The first approach is generally practiced in provinces where statutory social servicesare delivered at the local level, such as in Ontario. The latter approach is generallypracticed where the local community only has responsibility for the delivery of non-statutory social services, such as the case in B.C..The following is a listing of various functions of municipal social planning, bothpast and present.• Unifying the direct service approaches of a variety ofcivic departments and outside agencies.• Integrating the social with the other aspects of cityplanning, including urban rehabilitation and publichousing projects.• Studying and defining social problems, evaluating theimpact of community services on these problems,supporting successful programs and recommendingdiscontinuance of ineffective services.• Encouraging residents to assume personal responsibilityfor improving the social and economic conditions oftheir community. 80• Participating in arts administration, development review,low-income housing, social services delivery, and socialresearch.• Providing input into the review of developmentapplications and negotiations with developers for socialamenities.81• Setting goals, developing long-range plans,implementing needed programs for the community, andcoordinating services on a local area basis.82• Preparing social policies within land use and communityplans, identifying and addressing social aspects andimpacts of physical development.• Identifying local issues, needs and services, coordinatingwith various social service and human care providers80City of Vancouver, Social Planning, 6.8tDistrict of Surrey, “Social Planning Task Group Minutes, 1988-OCT-26,” 1.82Callahan and Dill, “Social Planning,” 4 - 5.26and liaising with senior governments regarding thedelivery of social services.• Developing social economic profiles, providinginformation and analysis to assist Council in formulatingpolicies in the social arena.83• Advising on social needs and effectiveness of services,funding and resources, and policy direction.84From this rather lengthy list the following functions have been identified in the documentSocial Planning in Greater Vancouver85 as the minimum functions for a municipal socialplanning program:• Identifying the social impacts of physical developments.• Developing social policies and providing informationregarding social issues.• Coordinating with providers of social and communityservices to ensure adequate policies, services andprograms.Social planning definitions, goals and objectives cited earlier indicate that the facilitation ofcitizen involvement in local decision-making should be added to this list of minimumfunctions.Like municipal social planning, community-based social planning can include amyriad of functions. Generally, community-based social planning includes research onshort and long range issues, the mobilization of community input into social issues and thedevelopment and coordination of social services.86 Clague has articulated seven activitiesthat may be involved in community social planning: advocacy, social policy analysis,informing and educating the public, community organizing, community problem-solving,and demonstrating innovation.87 Clague has also identified two overarching functions for83Distict of Surrey, Social Planning in Greater Vancouver, (Surrey, B.C.: Planning and DevelopmentServices, 1989), 7.84C.C.S.D., Halifax, 101.85Disnict of Surrey, Social Planning. 21.86Callan and Dill, “Social Planning,” 4.87Clague, Citizen’s Guide, 3.27community social planning organizations to undertake: “to provide leadership in theplanning process and to assist in developing the content of the issue.”88In B.C., differences exist between municipalities as to what type of activity isconsidered as social planning. Differences also exist between municipal and community-based (voluntaristic) social planning activities. However, often distinctions are difficult todiscern as social planners from various organizations work together on issues of commonconcern. Where differences between the two models do exist, Wharf identifies thesedifferences as positive and complementary, each auspices of social planning uniquelyplaced to excel in a particular task.Wharf concludes that “municipal social planning departments can and shouldinform local politicians about the social impact of new developments and propose ways ofmeeting social problems in concert with senior levels ofgovernment.”89 He alsoconcludes that “social planning councils can represent the position of consumers and ofneighbourhood organizations and can help to organize the efforts of the agencies in thevoluntary sector.”9° As these two models are seen to be complementary and coexist well,it may become a trend for communities to ensure that both models are in place.88Ibid., 32.89,1lo.f “Social Services,” 179.90Thid.283.0 THE ORIGINS OF MUNICIPAL SOCIAL PLANNING IN NANAIMO3.1 IntroductionThis Chapter will describe the work done by activists in Nanaimo towards the goalof placing housing affordability and social planning on the municipal agenda. Through anexamination of municipal records, the origins of the Nanaimo social planning programwill be chronicled in an effort to determine what conditions led to its institution.The main research question asked in the case study is “Why did the City ofNanaimo add a social planning function to the Department of Planning andDevelopment?”. To develop the answer, the following subsidiary questions are asked:• What does social planning mean to Nanaimo?• Who was involved in establishing the social planning function in Nanaimo?• What motivated them?• When did this happen?3.2 Community AdvocacyCommunity advocacy in response to tight vacancy rates and problems withsubstandard rental accommodation contributed to the City of Nanaimo implementing amunicipal social planning program. Two groups, the Nanaimo Community Law Officeand the Nanaimo Affordable Housing Committee, lobbied City Council and worked withmunicipal planning staff over the period of January 1989 to October 1990 to ensure thatsocial planning and affordable housing were addressed by the City.3.2.1 The Nanaimo Community Law OfficeIt was clear to the Board and Staff of the Nanaimo Community Law Office(C.L.O.), one of the community advocates, that Nanaimo was facing both a severe rentalhousing crisis and a serious problem with substandard rental accommodation. The 0.2percent vacancy rate reported by the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation91(C.M.H.C.) in October 1988 had verified for the Community Law Office the existence of a91See CMHC, Rental Market Report: Nanaimo, (Victoria, B.C.: CMHC, 1992).29rental housing crisis in Nanaimo. Casework done by the C.L.O. Staff confirmed that aserious problem with substandard accommodation was occurring at the same time.The availability of rental accommodation had not been as restricted since May of1980 when the vacancy rate for Nanaimo was reported at 0.4 percent. This situation hadreversed itself by October 1982, when the rental vacancy rate was reported at a high of16.2 percent. Three years later (October 1985) the vacancy rate had fallen to 7.5 percentand it continued to fall by approximately two percent yearly to its reported low of 0.2percent in October 1988. Nanaimo was experiencing a housing crisis in rental housingavailability and consequently with substandard accommodation.In response to this housing crisis, the Vice-Chairperson of the C.L.O. Boardappeared before Nanaimo City Council in January 198992 to speak on the impact that thelow vacancy rates were having upon rental accommodation in Nanaimo. The C.L.O.reported to Council that low income renters were increasingly experiencing problems withsubstandard rental accommodation. The C.L.O. presentation concluded that the tightvacancy rate enabled some landlords to avoid upkeep on rental property because as soonas a vacancy occurred other tenants were immediately ready to rent the premises,substandard or not. The C.L.O. requested that Council establish a bylaw to provide theCity the power to order and enforce repairs to rental housing.In response to the C.L.O. presentation, Nanaimo City Council established a specialtask force “to discuss possible regulations which could be implemented to force owners ofsubstandard accommodation to bring the premises up to safety and health standards.”93The C.L.O. was represented on this Task Force. As part of its research on possibleregulations, the Task Force obtained a legal opinion that indicated that the Municipalityhad limited power to enact a standard of maintenance bylaw. As a result of learning this,the Task Force recommended to Council that the City of Nanaimo correspond to the92city of Nanaimo, “City Council Minutes, 1989-JAN-30.”93Ibici.30Minister responsible with the request that the Municipal Act be amended to include thispower. The Mayor wrote to the then Minister of Municipal Affairs with this request;however, the Minister declined to entertain the amendment.94Community efforts to address Nanaimo’s housing crisis did not end here. In June1989, the Nanaimo Community Law Office and the Malaspina College CommunityEducation Department co-sponsored a Housing Forum95 to bring people in the communitytogether to discuss ways of addressing the housing crisis being experienced in Nanaimo.The Housing Forum featured speakers from all levels of government and the non-profitsector who presented to the community various approaches for increasing Nanaimo’ssupply of affordable housing. Representatives from B.C. Housing ManagementCommission (B.C.H.M.C.), C.M.H.C., Capital Region Housing Corporation, and M’akolaHousing Society (a Vancouver Island-based urban native housing society)andapproximately thirty citizens were in attendance. The Housing Forum resulted in aSteering Committee of citizens being formed to look at ways of addressing Nanaimo’shousing needs, including the possibility of forming a local non-profit society to deliveraffordable housing.In October 1989, the Steering Committee dissolved and the Nanaimo AffordableHousing Committee was formed. This Committee, made up of a group of citizenvolunteers who were concerned about the housing crisis, had two aims: (1) to ensure thataffordable rental housing is made available in Nanaimo, with rent not exceeding 30% of afamily unit’s gross income and (2) to ensure adequate maintenance of existing rentalhousing and fair treatment for tenants and landlords.96 Many of the individuals involved inthe Committee were community activists, some were employed in the non-profit sector,some had been active in municipal politics, some were active in provincial or federal94Lyall Hanson, Minister of Municipal Affairs, Victoria B.C. to Mayor Frank Ney, LS, 1990-APR-23,City of Nanaimo, Clerk’s Office, Nanaimo, B.C.95Marilyn Zink, “Housing Forum Hears Options,” Nanaimo Daily Free Press, 1989-JUN -20, 3.96Nanaimo Affordable Housing Society, “A Brief to the Rental Housing Forum” in City of Nanaimo,Nanaimo Rental Housing Strategy, (Nanaimo, B.C.: Planning Department, 1990), Appendix II.31political parties, and some were retired professionals. All of the members of theCommittee had a concern about the quality of life in Nanaimo for low income people.3.2.2 The Nanaimo Affordable Housing CommitteeIn the Fall of 1989, two members of the newly formed Nanaimo AffordableHousing Committee appeared as a delegation at a regular meeting of Nanaimo CityCouncil97 to speak on the housing situation existing in the City. The delegation refreshedCouncil on the details of the January presentation by the Nanaimo Community Law Officeand reported on the June Housing Forum. At that meeting the first recommendationregarding a municipal role in “social planning” was made before City Council. TheAffordable Housing Committee presented a Brief including the followingrecommendations for Council’s consideration:1. Establish an Affordable Housing Committee of City Council to plan for the provisionof affordable housing.2. Hire a Social Planner to work within the Planning Department.3. Establish a housing registry.4. Establish a land bank.5. Stop sales of City-owned land until a housing policy is prepared.6. Publicize the names of landlords who rent unsightly, unsanitary, overcrowdedpremises.7. Press the Provincial Government for amendments to the Municipal Act to allow forcities and municipalities to enact bylaws to force proper upkeep of rental housing andto require tax sale property to revert to cites and municipalities as in Manitoba.8. Press the Provincial Government to raise welfare rates, and control rent increases.98Following the presentation by the Nanaimo Affordable Housing Committee, CityCouncil referred the Committee’s Brief to Staff “for a report on the feasibility of striking97City of Nanaimo, “City Council Minutes, 1989-NOV-20.”98Ibid.32an Affordable Housing Committee to review the recommendations contained within thebrief’ and to its Expenditure and Review Committee99to consider “the recommendation tohire a Social Planner to work within the Planning Department.”°°3.3 The Response of City CouncilIn response to Council’s request for a report on affordable housing and socialplanning, a “Report on Social Planning and Affordable Housing”10’was prepared by theSenior Planner, Community Development. This Report was considered by City Council,January 22, 1990. The report concluded that the need for social planning arose out ofconcerns about (1) the low rental vacancy rate, (2) the fast pace of growth in Nanaimo,(3) the increasing seniors’ population, and (4) the affordable housing issue. In addition tothis report, Council received an analysis of the report by the City Administrator. In hisreport, the Administrator defined social planning as “an ‘attitude’ or ‘approach’ to dealingwith the whole gamut of complex community issues across departmental andorganizational 102 and recommended against the establishment of a dedicated socialplanner’s position while the City was in the position of finding additional funds forprotective services and capital improvements. The Administrator’s Report recommendedthat Council receive the Senior Planner’s report and refer it to the Council Expenditureand Review Committee where it could be discussed as a “seminar topic.”°3With the knowledge that the Senior Planner’s Report was on the Council agenda, arepresentative of the Nanaimo Affordable Housing Committee requested permission toaddress Council as a late delegation. Council approved the request and the representativereiterated the Committee’s concerns about housing in Nanaimo. The delegation requestedthat the recommendations contained within the “Report on Social Planning and Affordable99The Expenditure and Review Committee of Council was one of two standing committees of Council.Budgetary items were considered by this Conunittee.‘00Nanaimo, “Minutes, 1989-NOV-20.”‘°‘City of Nanaimo, “Report on Social Planning and Affordable Housing, 1990-JAN-12.”102Nanaimo, “Report, 1990-JAN-22.”‘°3City of Nanaimo, “Council Minutes, 1990-JAN-22.”33Housing” be approved immediately. Council concurred and later that evening endorsedthe recommendations contained within the report.The recommendations endorsed by Council included support for the formation of aSocial Planning Task Force. This Task Force was to be charged with the mandate toevaluate municipal options, to establish priorities, to develop a framework for socialplanning in Nanaimo, to develop a proposed work program, and to report back toCouncil.’04 In response to the housing issues raised by the community through theNanaimo Community Law Office and the Nanaimo Affordable Housing Committee, Staffalso recommended that a sub-committee of the Social Planning Task Force be establishedto examine affordable housing issues. This recommendation was also endorsed byCouncil. By the end of the meeting, Council had established a Task Force with themandate to advise Council on social planning and it had established an Affordable HousingSub-Committee of the Task Force with the mandate to examine housing issues, torecommend policies, and to develop a housing strategy. The community’s goals had beenrecognized and work to meet them was underway.With Council’s support for the establishment of a Social Planning Task Force and aSub-Committee on Affordable Housing, the Director of Planning and Developmentsubmitted a report’°5 containing recommendations on the operationalization of both theTask Force and Sub-Committee to the Council Expenditure and Review Committeemeeting of February 12, 1990. Council deferred consideration of these recommendationsuntil further review had been completed and until Provincial funding for a rental housingstrategy had been secured. The motion to defer was reflective of the City Administrator’searlier recommendation that decisions on how the City would address social planning andaffordable housing be deferred to allow for further review.104Nanaimo, “Report, 1 990-JAN-12,” 14.‘°5City of Nanaimo, “Report to G. D. Berry, City Administrator, re: Social Planning Task Force, 1990-FEB-12.”343.4 More Community PressureConsideration of the Planning Director’s report on the operationalization of theTask Force was rescheduled to the Expenditure and Review Committee of March 12,1990. Again the Nanaimo Affordable Housing Committee’°6requested and were grantedpermission to address Council on social planning in Nanaimo.The representatives from the Affordable Housing Committee reminded Councilmembers that “forty-nine days had passed”107 since Council’s motion to endorse theformation of a Social Planning Task Force and Affordable Housing Sub-Committee. TheAffordable Housing Committee recommended that the following actions be takenimmediately:• A Social Planning Task Force be set up as soon as possible with a Sub-Committee toexamine housing issues.• Council members be appointed to the Task Force and the Sub-Committee.• Terms of Reference be adopted that would allow the Task Force and the SubCommittee to study the affordable housing issue and bring recommendations back toCouncil.3.5 The Formation of the Social Planning Task Force3.5.1 Operational ModelThe Staff Report presented Council with two options for the operational model tobe utilized by the Social Planning Task Force. The first option included no Councilrepresentation on the Task Force with the Task Force reporting directly to Council. Thealternate model, which was endorsed by Council, included both Council representation onthe Task Force and direct reporting to City Council.Council representation was seen as important both to maintain Council’s directinterest in social planning and affordable housing and to provide the Task Force with‘06Cfty of Nanaimo, “Minutes of the Council Executive and Policy Committee, 1990-MAR- 12.”107bid.35political legitimacy. Any concern with respect to Council “controlling” the discussion wasoutweighed by the perceived benefits.3.5.2 MandateOn the advice of Stafi Council endorsed the following seven-point mandate forthe Social Planning Task 108• To identif,’ and prioritize existing social planning issues affecting Nanaimo now andfor the next five years.• To determine necessary elements of a social planning program to address current andanticipated issues.• To identify Nanaimo’s current social planning programs, i.e. organizations andagencies within Nanaimo which currently address social planning issues.• To identify gaps in Nanaimo’s social planning system and service delivery program.• To examine and evaluate alternate ways of delivering a social planning program, i.e.municipal government based or community-based.• To identify for each alternate framework for social planning in Nanaimo, the rolesinvolved and a model for operation.• To establish and oversee the operations of the Sub-Committee on Affordable Housing.The mandate109 endorsed by Council for the Affordable Housing Sub-Committeeincluded the following responsibilities:• To review the terms of reference for the preparation of a rental housing strategy forNanaimo.• To work with the consultant selected to prepare the rental housing strategy and to cohost housing workshops.• To examine possible solutions to the housing problem as presented in the SocialPlanning Report.‘08Ibid.36• To organize and host a symposium on Housing in Nanaimo and once the RentalHousing Strategy is complete, to provide a forum to discuss the report’s findings.• To report its findings to the Social Planning Task Force.3.5.3 MembershipThe Staff Report presented Council with three options with regard to the selectionof membership of the Task Force. The first option mirrored the membership structureoutlined in the original “Report on Social Planning and Affordable Housing” and involvedrepresentation from existing Council Committees dealing with social planning issues, aswell as representation from outside service agencies. The second option invited onlyrepresentation from key community organizations and the third option enlisted the moretraditional method of advertising through the media for community membership. It wassuggested to Council by Staff that the selection of appropriate membership was critical tothe ability of the Task Force to achieve its mandate. As well, the Staff Report emphasizedthat the process but not necessarily the membership of the Task Force must involverepresentation from the community-at-large.Council selected the first membership option and appointed the two CityCouncillors who had membership on the Advisory Planning Commission and the AdvisoryCommittee on the Disabled and the Elderly, thus also fUlfilling the need to include Councilmembership on the Task Force. At this meeting, Council reinforced by motion that theoperational model of the Task Force involve the City Council representation as “fullyfledged members of the Task Force.”11° At a subsequent meeting, Council appointedrepresentatives from the Nanaimo Family Life Association, Association for BetterCommunities, Nanaimo Community Law Office, and the Nanaimo Affordable HousingCommittee as members of the Task Force.”1110bid.111City of Nanaimo, “City Council Minutes, 1990-APR-23.”37The membership structure recommended by Staff and endorsed by Council for theAffordable Housing Sub-Committee included two members of the Task Force, onemember of Council, one developer, at least one member of the Nanaimo AffordableHousing Committee and representation from key community organizations. Councilsubsequently appointed three members of the Nanaimo Affordable Housing Committeeand one representative from the Nanaimo Home Builders’ Association to the SubCommittee. One of the City Councillors on the Task Force also sat on the AffordableHousing Sub-Committee.”2The members of both the Task Force and the Affordable Housing Sub-Committeeappointed by Council provided sufficient community expertise to fulfill their mandates.However, as the members of both groups recognized the importance of soliciting inputfrom other stakeholder groups and the community-at-large, they utilized participatorymethods in their work. Social planning objectives were important to this work from theoutset.3.6 The Department of Planning and DevelopmentAt the same time that community pressure for a municipal role in social planningwas building, the City’s Department of Planning and Development was increasing its rolein the area of long range planning. A Senior Planner had been hired in the Fall of 1989 tooversee the long range or community development section of the Department.The Department had recognized that housing issues, including affordable housing,would be a major component of the long range program. In order to further investigatethe issue of rental housing in Nanaimo, the City secured a grant for a Rental HousingStrategy from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Recreation and Culture under theMunicipal Incentive Program for Rental Housing.”3 The Terms of Reference for theRental Housing Strategy had been prepared in August 1989, prior to Council’s new social‘13Cfty of Nanaimo, “Report to G. D. Beny, City Administrator re: Rental Housing Strategy, 1990-OCT-15.”38planning initiative. The proposal call and strategy development were assumed into themandate of the new Affordable Housing Sub-Committee of the Social Planning TaskForce. The objective of the Rental Housing Strategy was “to recommend steps which themunicipality may take to ensure that (1) the supply of rental housing in Nanaimo issufficient to establish and maintain a healthy rental vacancy rate and (2) there is a range ofchoices of rental accommodation available so that those who have low and moderateincomes have access to decent, affordable housing.”4Staff support for these two new Community Development initiatives came in theform of a short-term co-ordinator to provide professional support to the Social PlanningTask Force and the hiring of a consultant to develop the rental housing strategy. Thenewly established Affordable Housing Sub-Committee was also a key player in thedevelopment of the rental housing strategy having been given the mandate to work withthe consultant.3.7 Continuing Community Pressure for Social PlanningIn July 1990, a Rental Housing Forum was co-sponsored by the AffordableHousing Sub-Committee and the Consultant developing the Rental Housing Strategy. Thepurpose of this Forum was to inform the public about facts pertaining to the rental housingmarket and to seek ideas and suggestions.”5 Several formal presentations were receivedat this Forum, including presentations by the Nanaimo Community Law Office, theNanaimo Affordable Housing Committee and the Association for Better Communities.Both the Nanaimo Community Law Office and the Association for BetterCommunities made recommendations with regard to social planning. The CommunityLaw Office suggested a municipal approach while the Association for Better Communitiesrecommended a community-based model. In total, four social planning-relatedrecommendations were made at the Rental Housing Forum:114Nanaimo, Rental Strategy, 1.115bid., 4.391. That the City place as much emphasis on social development as it does on economicdevelopment.2. That the City show its commitment to social development by hiring a social planner.3. That the City, through the office of a social planner, develop a social plan to beintegrated into the Official Community Plan.”64. That a social planning council/agency for Nanaimo Regional District be created.”7These recommendations highlighted the link between social planning andaffordable housing. The recommendation that a social planner be hired illustrated that ifthe municipality was to take housing issues seriously, staff resources would be necessaryto develop an expertise for the Council. This was a concrete action that Council couldunderstand and consider. As well, the identification of ways in which social planningissues could be linked into the municipally-mandated planning process illustrated forCouncil real options for change.3.8 The Social Planning Task Force ReportOn October 15, 1990, following six months of intensive work, the Social PlanningTask Force reported”8 its recommendations to Council. The Nanaimo Rental HousingStrategy Report”9 was also tabled by Staff at the same time. The Rental HousingStrategy and its thirteen recommendations were endorsed by Council as the basis for amunicipal program.’2°These Reports were tabled by Staff at the same time in order that the links betweenthem, as previously articulated by the community, continued to be recognized by Council.As well, Staff needed a home for issues concerning housing affordability and it was hopedthat achieving additional planning staff as recommended by the Social Planning Task16Nanaimo Community Law Office, “Brief to the Rental Housing Forum” in Nanaimo, Rental Strategy,Appendix II.117Association for Better Communities, “Priorized Recommendations from the Child Poverty Forum, June10, 1989,” in Nanaimo, Rental Strategy, Appendix II.118Scyial Planning Task Force, Task Force Reiort.119Nannjpdo Rental Strategy.t20City of Nanaimo, “City Council Minutes, 1990-OCT-15.”40Force, may provide for this. From the community’s point a view, the establishment of anadvisory committee to Council and the hiring of staff was important to provide for an ongoing voice for social planning and affordable housing and to ensure that communitysocial issues remained on the municipal agenda.The Chairperson of the Social Planning Task Force appeared before Council andreported on the findings and recommendations of the Task Force. The introduction to theSocial Planning Task Force Report stated that “the Social Planning Task Force hasevaluated Municipal options and developed a framework for Nanaimo’s social planningfunction. The three recommendations are:1. Council should restructure the Committee system, currently addressing social, culturaland recreation issues, by adopting a two-pronged advisory model. This model has twoparts: a broad-based community Advisory Social Planning Committee and a SocialPlanner.2. Council should establish an Advisory Social Planning Committee consisting ofrepresentatives from each of the ten [proposed] advisory groups and four community-at-large representatives appointed by Council.3. Council should appoint a Social Planner to coordinate the Advisory Social PlanningCommittee.”21These recommendations were based on the findings of a survey of organizations workingin the community services sector, recommendations from social service agencies regardingthe municipal role in social planning, a review of coordination and partnership workoccurring in the community, and a review of the various models of municipal socialplanning operating in the Greater Vancouver area.121Sociai Planning Task Force, Task Force Renort, 1.413.9 Deciding on the ModelTo assist in the evaluation of the appropriateness of the community-based versusthe municipal-based social planning model to Nanaimo, the Task Force developed thefollowing criteria.• Evidence of a formal planning process.• Evidence of coordination among agencies and organizations.• Evidence of citizen participation.• Evidence of a broad-based representation.• Ability to respond to changing social conditions.3.9.1 Community-Based ModelsThe Task Force uncovered that several local efforts with regard to coordinatedsocial service delivery were emerging, particularly in the areas of youth, seniors, and adultmental health. These efforts were reviewed by the Task Force. It was concluded thatthese community-based efforts were limited in their usage as they focused on particulargroups, lacked broad representation, lacked formal links to City Council and were limitedto information sharing.’22The Task Force also examined two community-based social planning models fromoutside Nanaimo: the North Shore Inter-Agency Forum and the Community Council ofGreater Victoria. Neither of these models was adopted by the Task Force due to thelimited public participation offered by one and the lack of broad representation offered bythe other. 1233.9.2 Municipal-Based ModelsThe Task Force also gained knowledge of the municipal-based social planningftmnctions operating at that time in the City of North Vancouver, the District of Surrey andthe City of Richmond. The Task Force utilized the same criteria developed for itsevaluation of the community-based models to evaluate these models. In addition, the122Thid., 18-23.123Thid., 24-26.42Task Force had also prioritized that the model to be utilized in Nanaimo must include botha broad-based Advisory Committee to City Council and a Social Planner: in essence amunicipal model. Based on this criteria, components from all three municipal models wereused to develop Nanaimo’s model.3.9.3 The Recommended Nanaimo ModelThe social planning model recommended by the Task Force combined elements ofboth current community- and municipal-based models. From the community-basedmodels, the Task Force adopted grassroots elements, such as broad representation, localplanning for community services and significant public participation. From the municipalmodels studied, the Task Force took the importance of formal sanction by City Council,recognition of the municipal advisory committee structure and dedicated social planningstaff resources.In respect of the grassroots elements identified as important, the Task Forcerecommended that ten Advisory Groups be established. An advisory group was looselydefined’24 in the Report as a collection of citizens, service providers and consumersinterested in a particular social service area. The formation of Advisory Groups also metthe need of the majority of local community service agencies for assistance in defining andin planning for common community goals.’25 Advisory Groups in the following areaswere suggested: seniors, disabled persons, poverty, youth, mental health,multicuhuralism, arts and culture, service and fraternal, recreation and ancillary services.As this listing included both “target groups” and “issues”, it was later refined to be issue-based in an effort to invite participation and discussion beyond the social service providerand sector.126 Appendix One provides some insight into the success of this approach.124thid., 32125Thjd., 13.‘26The first Social Planning Advisoiy Conunittee endorsed the following nine Advisoiy Groups:Multiculturalism, Seniors’ Issues, First Nations’ Issues, Disabilities, Mental Health, Child and YouthIssues, Poverty, Community Health, Women’s Issues and it invited representation form the City’s Parks,Recreation and Culture Commission.43The mandate of the advisory groups as outlined in the Social Planning Task ForceReport127 was:• To have meetings on an ongoing basis in order to remain current with the ongoingproblems, concerns and issues of its affiliates.• To develop a set of common priorities.• To select one representative, via elections, to sit on the Advisory Social PlanningCommittee.3.10 Council RespondsWhen the Social Planning Task Force Report was tabled with City Council, it wasaccompanied by a Staff report from the Director of Planning and Development. Thereport recommended that Council receive the Task Force Report and, that therecommendations contained within the Report be considered further by Council during itsevaluation of planning priorities and programs for the 1991 Provisional Budget. Inconsidering both the recommendations of Staff and the three recommendations outlined inthe Task Force Report, City Council endorsed the following:• the Social Planning Definition for Nanaimo, as outlined;• the Social Planning System for Nanaimo, as outlined;• the continuation of the Social Planning Task Force during the preliminaryimplementation stage of the Social Planning System to ensure continuity; and• that funding for the program be considered during the 1991 Provisional Budgetdeliberations.’28Council’s endorsement of the recommendations of the Social Planning Taskoccurred one month prior to the municipal election in 1990. The decision about how topay for the recommendations was left for the newly elected Council to consider. Theelections resulted in some changes in the membership of Council, most significantly in a127Social Planning Task Force, Task Force Report. 32.128Nanaimo, “Minutes, 1990-OCT-15.”44new Mayor being elected who had a deeper understanding of the importance of amunicipal role in community well-being. As a result of (1) this shift in Council, (2) ongoing community vigilance, and (3) the support of the Planning Director, financial supportwas made available for municipal social planning.3.11 Implementing the Social Planning SystemIn early 1991, the Planning Department, having received provisional approval for atemporary, part-time Social Planner position, began to implement the social planningsystem for Nanaimo as outlined in the Report of the Social Planning Task Force. InFebruary, Council was presented with a report129 on the formation of a new advisorycommittee to Council: the Social Planning Advisory Committee.As the composition of the Social Planning Advisory Committee includedrepresentation from each of the advisory groups which were not yet formed, Council wasasked to consider a modified committee structure in order that advertising forappointments could commence. Council endorsed the modified structure recommendedby Staff which included two City Councillors, four members of the Social Planning TaskForce, one member of the Affordable Housing Sub-Committee, two members of the 1990Advisory Committee on the Disabled and the Elderly, and four members of thecommunity-at-large. The Advisory Committee on the Disabled and the Elderly wasdisbanded when the new Social Planning Advisory Committee was formed. Councilconfirmed its appointments to the City’s first Social Planning Advisory Committee onMarch 18, 1991.’°The job description for the temporary Social Planner’3’position focused on theimplementation of the Social Planning System for Nanaimo as outlined in the SocialPlanning Task Force Report, in particular on the formation of the advisory groups. As129Cjty of Nanaimo, “City Council Minutes, 1991-FEB-04.”‘30City of Nanaimo, “City Council Minutes, 1991-MAR-18.”‘31City of Nanaimo, “Job Description, Social Planner (Temp.),” (Personnel Department, City of Nanaimo,Nanaimo, B.C., 1991).45well, the implementation of the recommendations contained within the Rental HousingStrategy was included as a responsibility of the Social Planner. The first Social Plannerhired by the City of Nanaimo was employed in May 1991, one and one-half years afterCouncil was first presented with the recommendation that the City engage in SocialPlanning.3.12 CondusionsWhat does the Nanaimo case study demonstrate about the conditions that mayinitiate the evolution of a process which results in a municipality introducing socialplanning as part of the fi..inction of local government? What were the factors, bothexternal and internal, that prompted City Staff; City Council and the community to act?The action taken by City Staff in the creation and development of the socialplanning program was influenced by both internal and external factors. Internally, Staff’sactions were influenced by the incorporation of a long range program into the PlanningDepartment through the establishment of the Community Development Section. TheManager of this Section had, at that time, the responsibility to build a program that wouldmeet the City’s community planning needs. At the same time that this internal work wasbeing done, citizen delegations were both raising critical community social issues beforeCouncil and were requesting a municipal response.The request by Council that Staff respond to the issues raised by the communitycoincided with the Planning Department’s consideration of its role in community planning.This was neither purely coincidence nor planned as it was the recognition of significantcommunity issues (e.g. the affordable housing crisis) that caused both the City andcommunity to act. Although the City Administrator was initially reluctant to considersocial planning (given competing demands for municipal resources), the support of thePlanning Director and the process of creating a Task Force envisaged by the Manager ofthe Community Development Section kept the issue alive and allowed for further46municipal review and community input: the evolution of a process which resulted in amunicipal social planning function.The following generalizations can be made about conditions at this stage of theprocess, where the goal of placing social issues on the municipal agenda was achieved.1. That ongoing and organized citizen action was evident.2. That a local response to community social issues was seen to be appropriate.3. That municipal government was viewed to have provided an unsatisfactory responseto community social issues in the past.4. That municipal government was viewed to have not actively invited publicinvolvement in decision-making.The next stage in the Nanaimo case study was the involvement of a broader baseof the community in the discussions about municipal social planning. In addition to theongoing work of the Nanaimo Affordable Housing Committee and the NanaimoCommunity Law Office, two external factors influenced the community’s interest in socialplanning. The first factor was the frustration experienced and expressed by social serviceagencies in the lack of coordination and planning among themselves. The second factorwas the lack of community influence or input into the allocation of social service resourcesat the local level; highlighted by the increasing negative effects being felt by clients andagencies as a result of the shifting of social service responsibility to the local communityand the limited funding available.The following generalizations can be made about conditions at this stage of theprocess, where the goal of initiating municipal action on community social issues, i.e.social planning was achieved.5. That ongoing and organized citizen action continued to be evident.6. That effective planning and coordinating mechanisms were viewed as desirable.477. That community social service agencies recognized the need for local input into theallocation of resources by external agencies, e.g. senior government.8. That municipal government (City Council and Staff) was willing to initiate action.Finally, the following general lessons can be learned from the Nanaimo case study:• Achieving municipal social planning takes time.• Community social planning models already in practice should be reviewed.• A model can be designed that fits the community’s unique needs.• Involvement of citizens and citizen groups is vital to placing community issues on thepolitical agenda.• Staff can be and need to be supportive.• City Council needs to be supportive.• Involvement of social services agencies and funders is important.• It is an evolutionary process which can be initiated by either the City or the communityor by both.484.0 THE EVOLUTION OF MUNICIPAL SOCIAL PLANNING4.1 IntroductionThis thesis has examined the evolution of the municipal role in social welfare,explored the definition of social planning, its goals, objectives and functions, and examinedmodels and origins of social planning. The City of Nanaimo was used as a case study.This work was done in order to suggest conditions that may initiate the evolution of aprocess which results in a municipality introducing social planning as part of the functionof local government.Chapter Two includes a description of the origins of municipal social planning inseveral Canadian cities. Chapter Three describes the work that was done in Nanaimo toput social planning on the municipal agenda and the conditions that initiated this work.This chapter draws conclusions from Canadian examples of municipal socialplanning and from the case study about how social planning programs are created andevolve, particularly about conditions that may initiate municipal social planning. Thischapter includes recommendations for further research in the field of social planning.4.2 The Origins of Municipal Social PlanningMunicipal social planning originated in Canada at least twenty-five years ago. Thefirst two cities that adopted a social planning function were major urban centres with bigcity problems. As described in Chapter Two, in Halifax, the program originated due to themunicipality’s role in the delivery of social services and to the urgent social conditions inthe Black settlement of Africville.’32 In Vancouver, the program originated in response tourban renewal and social issues of the 1960’s.’33 More recently in British Columbia,municipal social planning programs developed due to the increasing pressure on localgovernment to respond to more than “roads and sewers.” Changing demographics, theaffordable housing crisis, the perceived down loading by senior governments, increasing‘32CCSD, Halifax, 13- 19.33CCSD, Vancouver, 33 - 37.49unemployment and poverty, and rapid growth and development have forced a localresponse to community social issues.4.3 Conditions Initiating Municipal Social PlanningAlthough twenty-five years have elapsed between the formation of the firstmunicipal social planning programs and the most recent social planning programs inBritish Columbia, the reasons why these programs emerged are very similar.There are at least seven generalizable conditions that facilitate the introduction ofmunicipal social planning:1. On-going and organized citizen pressure/action.2. Lack of or minimal public involvement in decision-making.3. Significant community social issues.4. Community frustration with the allocation of social service resources by externalagencies, e.g. senior government.5. Lack of effective planning and coordinating mechanisms.6. Unsatisfactory municipal response to social issues, both current and emerging.7. Willingness on the part of the local government to initiate action.The evolution of the Halifax and Nanaimo social planning programs are used toillustrate the relevance of these conditions. In the case of Halifax, it was the Blackcommunity who mobilized citizen action around the physical and social conditions of thearea in Halifax known as Africville. The Black community had received an unsatisfactoryresponse to their concerns from local government over the last century. As well, therewas general dissatisfaction with the public welfare system (statutory social services beingdelivered by local government) which was met by an unresponsive local government.Community agencies recognized the need for coordinated service planning but lacked theauthority or resources to provide for this. The municipal government was compelled toact and did so initially with the formation of an Advisory Committee of Housing andSocial Planning.50In the case of Nanaimo, it was affordable housing advocates who providedpressure to the municipality. This group was motivated by an affordable housing crisis.Nanaimo City Council had not taken a leadership role in addressing the housing crisis norhad it traditionally solicited input into decisions affecting community well-being. Socialservice groups, although having a tradition of not working cooperatively, were beginningto recognize the need for effective service planning and coordination. In the Nanaimoexample, local government showed its willing to act by endorsing the formation a SocialPlanning Task Force and Affordable Housing Sub-Committee.The following table provides and overview of the seven conditions and theirrelationship to the Halifax and Nanaimo experience.51TABLE 1CONDITIONS INITIATING MUNICIPAL SOCIAL PLANNINGCONDITIONS INITIATING HALIFAX NANAIMOMUNICIPAL SOCIAL PLANNiNG (Established 1968) (Established 1991)On-going and organized citizen Mobilization of the Affordable housingpressure/action. Black community. advocates.Lack of or minimal public involvement in Dissatisfaction with No municipaldecision-making. the public welfare committee Qn socialsystem. or housing issues.Significant community social issues. Conditions of Affordable housingAfricville. crisis.Community frustration with the allocation Lack of support for Lack of communityof social service resources by external relocated residents involvement in theagencies. of Africville. allocation ofresources.Lack of effective planning and Limited authority Limitedcoordinating mechanisms. and financial coordination due toresources for the historic turf issuesWelfare Council to among socialperform this task. service agencies.Unsatisfactory municipal response to Poor response to Historic nonsocial issues, both current and emerging. conditions in involvement byAfricville for 100 local government inyears. social issues.Willingness on the part of the local Formation of an Formation of thegovernment to initiate action. Advisory Social PlanningCommittee on Task Force.Housing and SocialPlanning.Source: Developed from C.C.S.D., Case Studies in Social Planning. Volume 3: PublicSocial Planning in Halifax, (Toronto: CCSD, 1972) and the Social Planning Task Force,Social Planning Task Force Report, (Nanaimo, B.C.: City ofNanaimo, 1990).The development of a climate where local government (City Council,Administrator or Planning Director) is willing to move towards implementation needs tobe fostered by those advancing the case for social planning. From the outset, advocatesfor social planning may include local politicians and city staff. It is more likely, however,that in the beginning, the decision-makers within local government may be suspicious of52what may appear to be asking for local government acceptance of down loading by seniorlevels of government.The pressure for a local response to and responsibility for social issues is being feltfrom both the local citizenry, as well as from senior levels of government. As more andmore citizens become involved in and concerned about the physical and socialdevelopment of their communities, local government is experiencing increasing pressurefrom its citizens to respond to issues beyond its traditional mandate. And as seniorgovernments continue to restrain themselves fiscally, local government is pressured byprovincial governments to increase its involvement in and responsibility for new areas.If local government views social planning as assuming responsibility for theservices traditionally provided by the federal and provincial governments, it will be resistedas down loading. Opposition to down loading is being heard in City Council chambersacross British Columbia, most recently as a result of the withdrawal of the federalgovernment from its role in finding the construction of new social housing units forseniors and families under the non-profit and urban native housing programs.4.4 Further ResearchThe purpose of this thesis was to suggest conditions that may initiate theintroduction of a municipal social planning fhnction. Such conditions were identified byexamining the evolution of municipal social planning in Canada, particularly the case ofNanaimo, B.C. As a result, much of the research focused on the municipal model of socialplanning. The community-based model of social planning was included to a limited extent.It is recommended that research on the complementarity of the two models be pursued.This thesis focused on origins. Many similarities emerged between the origins ofthe metropolitan and non-metropolitan municipal social planning programs. It would beinteresting to undertake further study to determine whether similarities continue to existonce these programs are operationalized. A comparison of the social planning programs53of the larger municipalities within the Greater Vancouver Regional District and the othermunicipal social planning programs scattered across British Columbia is suggested.This thesis focused primarily on the municipal social planning programs inoperation in British Columbia. To a limited extent, programs from other Canadianmunicipalities were included. Further research on the municipal models in place in otherprovinces and inter-provincial comparisons would help to extend the existing knowledgeof municipal social planning in Canada.The models of municipal social planning discussed in this thesis did not emphasizethe role of social planning in the public policy debate. However, it is known from both theauthors in the field and the current Canadian reality that this is an area of importance tosocial planning. An examination of social planning from a public policy perspective wouldcontribute to the literature.545.0 LESSONS FOR THE PLANNING PROFESSION AND GOVERNMENT5.1 IntroductionThis chapter will describe some of the reasons why municipal social planningcontinues to be relevant in the 1900’s. Recommendations, based on both the researchpresented in this thesis and on current political and urban trends, are presented for theconsideration of the planning profession and local and provincial governments. Thischapter concludes with final words about municipal social planning.5.2 The Relevance of Municipal Social Planning in the 1990’sSocial planning has remained relevant and continues to be relevant to the functionof local government in spite of the fear of local government that it is opening itself to“down loading.” Down loading, the “ongoing pressure to accept a realignment of servicedelivery, responsibility and funding,”34 is a condition that has emerged for localgovernment over the past twelve years. The pressure for a local response to andresponsibility for social issues is being felt from both the local citizenry, as well as fromsenior levels of government.It can be argued that a municipal role in social planning can “protect’ localgovernment from the intervention of senior government by providing it with the tools itneeds to “control” its role in social welfare. This role is advocated by the Federation ofCanadian Municipalities (FCM) which states in its report “A Municipal Social Policy”:“The Task Force has consciously avoided reference to social services and questions aboutthe delivery of services. The emphasis here is strictly on the capacity of municipalgovernments to engage in social policy development and planning Accordingly,municipalities feel justified in demanding that the other orders of government engage inthat type of policy development and planning which will complement and reinforce what isbeing done municipally.”35‘34Greg Halsey-Brandt, “Differences and Commonalities in Social Planning” in G.V.R.D., Proceedings,40135Federation of Canadian Municipalities, Policy Development: Task Force Reports and Resolutions,(Ottawa: FCM, 1987), 33.55How can social planning achieve this? Social planning can provide localgovernment with the information that it needs to develop an effective response tocommunity social issues. Social planning can also assist the local community in ensuringthat those responsible provide adequate social policies, services and programs. Theseapplications relate most directly to the social planning approach that is focused onplanning for service delivery.The ongoing relevance of social planning is also due to the pace and effects ofphysical development. Social planning can provide an important perspective on howgrowth and development impacts on people, especially on those most vulnerable insociety. This application relates to the approach that deals with the impacts of other typesof planning. The FCM encourages municipalities to engage in social impact assessmentwhich “require that municipalities judge the effects of projects or policies on people.”136The FCM advocates that “effective planning must integrate both social and environmentalaspects if municipal governments are to respond to community needs.”137 Social planningcan play an important role in ensuring that the citizen-voice continues to be heard at themunicipal level.Wharf argues that municipalities, where applicable, should relinquish their role inthe direct provision of social services in favour of taking an advisory role to provincialgovernments.’38 This recommendation focuses on provinces where statutory socialservices are delivered by the municipality. Although this is not the case in BritishColumbia, some municipalities in B.C. do play a major role in fbnding non-statutory socialservices. By staying out of direct service provision, municipal government, according toWharf can develop a capacity for social planning that enables it to more effectively workwith the provincial government in ensuring that appropriate services are available at thelocal level. This approach will also enable local government to contribute to the social136Thij, 32.138Whaxf, “Social Services”, 186 - 187.56policy debate. According to Wharf; as “social problems are played out in the municipalarena, and if municipal governments are to communicate information on the size andseriousness of these problems and plan responses to these problems, they require socialp1ang.”139Halsey-Brandt, a former planner and current Mayor in Richmond, B.C., identifiesthe conflicts between down loading, the local manifestation of social issues and thefinancial limitations of local government.’40 In contrast to Wharfs recommendation of amunicipal withdrawal from the direct provision of social services, Halsey-Brandtrecommends that municipalities assume responsibility for social programs. In order tomeet the challenges of social planning, Halsey-Brandt recommends that a new frameworkfor the funding of community social programs be developed. This framework wouldaddress the reality that the trend towards the devolution of social services is not retreating.Such a framework would provide clear direction to local government about what servicesit is responsible for delivering and the source of revenue for these programs. In this way,local government would have the power to respond to the social needs identified throughits social planning program.Drover and Hulchanski argue that the challenge for the future of social planningrelates to public policy. These authors believe that social planning must not onlycontribute to but also extend the public social policy debate.’4’ These authors state that associal planning “defines a certain set of needs as ‘basic’,”42 its ongoing effectivenessdepends on the public policy debate focusing on two types of policies: redistributivepolicies and policies with respect to basic rights. If the Drover and Hulchanski hypothesisis to be accepted, the necessity for social planning to extend the public policy debate ismore important now than ever before. Federal and provincial “belt tightening!’ and debt13Ibii, 187‘40Halsey-Brandt, “Differences,” 40 - 41.141Drover and Huichauski, Future Directions. 17 -18.57and deficit myopia have and continue to result in fiscal policy driving the development ofsocial policy. As a result, the concept of “basic” rights is being eroded in favour of“targeted” rights.The current fiscal constraints of the federal and provincial governments isenhancing both the process of devolution and the necessity for a local response tocommunity social issues. Without an interest in social planning, local government may beleft in the position of being seen by the community as a major stakeholder in social issuesand perhaps more significantly, as the level of government responsible. A municipal rolein social planning may not stop this from happening but it will enable local government tobe informed of social issues and to be ensured that those responsible meet the community’ssocial needs.The FCM has endorsed sixteen actions to ensure that all levels of government areresponding appropriately to community social issues and to ensure that the municipalfocus is on social policy and planning. Some of these actions include:• encouraging municipal governments to adopt social policy analysis and planning intheir policy-making processes.• working with provincial municipal associations, when requested, to ensure thatprovincial planning legislation requires that account be taken of quality of life in majorphysical planning proposals.• urging the federal government to assess, in consultation with the Federation, theconsequences of changes to federal policies and programs for municipal social policyand planning.• working with provincial associations to urge provincial governments to pay particularattention to, and directly assist municipalities in, the development of social policy andplanning.In British Columbia, such Provincial Government initiatives as the Round Table onthe Environment and the Economy are advocating a municipal role in social planning. The58Round Table has recommended that the Provincial Government amend the Municipal Act“to explicitly incorporate a social planning mandate for local government. “143 Thisrecommendation has also recently been made by the Planning Institute of B.C. (PIBC)’44and the Social Planning and Research Council of B.C.’45 Similarly to the PIBC, the B.C.Round Table states that “a social planning capacity can be useftil in developing communityinitiatives to prevent or respond to problems, reviewing the social impacts of developmentproposals and creating municipal social polices which support well-being.”46 However,the Round Table (a provincial initiative) goes on to recommend that “one key tactic in thisstrategy [of local governance] is to move responsibility and decision-making for thedelivery of many community services from the provincial to the local level, when it isappropriate to the needs and capabilities of the community.”47 This strategy sounds verylike the on-going devolution of social service responsibility to the local level -- whatmunicipalities have been resisting.5.3 Policy Recommendations for the Planning Profession and GovernmentWhat does this research mean to the planning profession: to planners, toeducators, and to professional associations? What recommendations can be made for theconsideration of provincial and municipal governments with respect to social planning?For planners working in both the public and private sectors, this research meansthat social planning skills should be included in the planner’s “tool kit”. As the PlanningInstitute of B.C. brief to the Provincial Government states, “Good’ community planninginvolves more than land use. To be effective, all aspects of the community’s development‘43British Columbia Round Table on the Environment and the Economy, Strategic Directions forCommunity Sustainability, (Victoria, BC: BC Round Table on the Environment and the Economy, 1993),93.‘44PIBC, “Strengthening,” 5 - 8.45SPARC, “Strengthening Community Social Planing in B.C.: A Consultation Paper,” (Vancouver:SPARC, 1993).‘46BC. Round Table, Strategic Directions. 89.147bid., 123.59should be considered in the planning process-- physical, social, economic, andecological.”48 For example, this approach to the practice of planning has beenrecommended to the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) in a recent report onthe implications of social trends for growth management: “If the GVRD wishes to addresssocial issues within its strategic planning process, it will have to find ways of bridging thisgap between strategic social issues and strategic land use and transportation issues.such concepts as “Urban Villages” and “Transit Oriented Developments” can help inbridging this gap.”49Planners require specialized skills to meet the needs identified by today’s socialtrends: trends such as the move to community-based services, the devolution of socialissues and services to the local level, fiscal constraint, the demand for public consultation,and the impacts of population growth. To assist the GVRD in adapting to thesechallenges, a series of “social assessment 150 have been developed for the RegionalDistrict’s evaluation of strategic alternatives for growth management and transportationplanning. These criteria have been developed to assess the ability of a proposed growthmanagement strategy to facilitate:• the integration of land uses and people.• the adaptation of existing neighbourhoods and urban areas to emerging needs.• the provision of and access to community-based services and facilities.• the integration of services and facilities at the local level.• the provision and enhancement of public spaces.• the promotion of community stability.• the provision of equitable access to resources.• the provision for community involvement.148pffl(, “Strengthening,” 7.149United Way of the Lower Mainland, Implications of Growth Management & Transportation Planningin the Lower Mainland, (Burnaby, BC: United Way, 1993), 3.150bid., 2, 23 - 25.60Planners require skills that will enable them to develop alternatives sensitive tosocial issues and to provide assessments as outlined above. The development andevaluation of alternatives that address community social issues requires that planners haveskills in the following areas: land use planning, policy development, policy implications,needs assessment, impact assessment, public participation, political acumen, negotiation,conflict resolution, and consensus building.Schools of planning and professional planning associations need to provide thecourses necessary for the development and ongoing strengthening of these skills. It isparticularly important that the professional planning associations, the Planning Institute ofB.C. and the Canadian Institute ofPlanners, recognize and promote a practice of planningthat includes physical, social, economic, and ecological aspects.Municipal governments, including Planning Directors, Administration andCouncil, need to acknowledge the changing face of local government and how socialplanning can assist in an effective response. Social planning should be integrated with themunicipal planning function in all municipalities. In municipalities experiencing significantgrowth pressures or in large urban municipalities, social planning staff should be.specifically assigned. Local government needs to recognize that the inclusion of a socialplanning function is one way that municipalities can remain aware of and effectivelyrespond to emerging social trends and issues without assuming responsibility for thedelivery of social programs.To facilitate local government action on social planning, the ProvincialGovernment should ensure that social planning is included in the Municipal Act. Thisaction on the part of the Province may legitimize the practice of social planning bothwithin the planning profession and in the eyes of local government. Provincialgovernments should keep local government informed of changes in social policy at theprovincial level. Provincial governments should invite the participation of localgovernment in addressing the impacts of federal and provincial government restraint on61social policy. Provincial governments should not devolve responsibility for communitywell-being to the local level without adequate resources in place. Provincial governmentsshould ensure that social policy analysis and planning are included as a provincial function.5.4 Final WordsSocial planning has played an important role in the operation of municipalgovernment in Canada for twenty-five years. Since the mid-1980’s, social planning hasappeared on more and more municipal agendas in British Columbia. In 1986, theFederation of Canadian Municipalities, the representative association of Canadianmunicipalities, included in a policy statement: municipal governments are “responsible forprotecting and fostering the social and economic well being of their communities.”5’Thispolicy encourages local government to adopt a social planning function.This thesis has shown that it is citizens and citizen groups that continue to take thelead role in ensuring that local government is aware of and responding, in appropriateways, to community social issues. The impacts of both rapid growth and development andeconomic hard times are contributing to citizens’ demands for the involvement of localgovernment in community well-being. The effects of down loading by senior governmentson local communities is pressuring local governments to respond to issues for which theydo not have traditional responsibility. The face of the operation of local government ischanging and as a result, at least in British Columbia, citizens and local government areviewing a municipal social planning function as one way to remain aware of and effectivelyrespond to emerging social trends and issues.151Federation of Canadian Municipalities, “Policy Statement,” quoted in Wharf Communities, 22.62BIBLIOGRAPHYPrimary SourcesFederal Government DocumentsCanadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Rental Market Report: Nanaimo.Victoria, B.C.: CMHC, 1992.Provincial Government DocumentsBritish Columbia Round Table on the Environment and the Economy. StrategicDirections for Community Sustainability. Victoria, B.C.: B.C. Round Table onthe Environment and the Economy, 1993.Lyall Hanson, Minister of Municipal Affairs, Victoria, B.C. Letter to Mayor Frank Ney.Nanaimo, B.C.: Clerk’s Office.Ontario Ministry of Community and Social Services. “Planning.” Chap. in Report of theProvincial-Municipal Social Services Review. Ontario: Queen’s Printer forOntario, 1990.Regional Government DocumentsGreater Vancouver Regional District. Proceedings: Greater Vancouver Social FuturesConference. Vancouver: GVRD Development Services Department, 1991.Municipal Government DocumentsCity ofNanaimo. “City Council Minutes, 1989-JAN-30.” Nanaimo, B.C.: Clerk’s Office.________“City Council Minutes, 1989-NOV-20.” Nanaimo, B.C.: Clerk’s Office.“City Council Minutes, 1990-JAN-22.” Nanaimo, B.C.: Clerk’s Office.“Report on Social Planning and Affordable Housing, 1990-JAN-12.”Nanaimo, B.C. Clerk’s Office.“Report of the City Administrator to Council re: Social Planning andAffordable Housing, 1990-JAN-22.” Nanaimo, B.C.: Clerk’s Office.“Report to City Administrator re: Social Planning Task Force, 1990-FEB-12.” Nanaimo, B.C.: Clerk’s Office.63________•“Minutes of the Council Executive and Policy Committee, 1990-MAR-12.”Nanaimo, B.C.: Clerk’s Office.“City Council Minutes, 1990-APR-23.” Nanaimo, B.C.: Clerk’s Office.“City Council Minutes, 1990-OCT-15.” Nanaimo, B.C.: Clerk’s Office.“Report to the City Administrator re: Rental Housing Strategy, 1990-OCT-15.” Nanaimo, B.C.: Clerk’s Office.“City Council Minutes, 1991-FEB-04.” Nanaimo, B.C.: Clerk’s Office.“City Council Minutes, 1991-MAR-18.” Nanaimo, B.C.: Clerk’s Office.“Job Description, Social Planner (Temporary).” Nanaimo, B.C.: PersonnelDepartment.“Job Description, Social Planner.” Nanaimo, B.C.: Personnel Department.“Social Planning Brochure.” Nanaimo, B.C.: Planning Department.“Report to the City Administrator re: Nanaimo Housing Policy, 1993 JUL05.” Nanaimo, B.C.: Clerk’s Office.City of Vancouver, Social Planning Department. Social Planning: A Tenth Year Report.Vancouver: City of Vancouver, 1977.District of Burnaby. Official Community Plan Burnaby, B.C.: Burnaby, Planning andBuilding Inspection Department, 1987.District of Surrey. Social Planning in Greater Vancouver. Surrey, B.C.: Planningand Development Services, 1989.Surrey Social Planning Task Force. A Survey of Surrey Social Services. Trends. Needsand Gaps. Surrey, B.C.: Surrey Social Planning Task Force, 1989.Social Planning Task Force. Social Planning Task Force Report. Nanaimo, B.C.:City of Nanaimo, 1990.Other Primary DocumentsAssociation for Better Communities. “Priorized Recommendations from the ChildPoverty Forum, June 10 1989”. In City ofNanaimo. Nanaimo RentalHousing Strategy. Nanaimo, B.C.: Planning Department, 1990.64Nanaimo Affordable Housing Committee. “A Brief to the Rental Housing Forum.” InCity ofNanaimo. Nanaimo Rental Housing Strategy. Nanaimo, B.C.: PlanningDepartment, 1990.Nanaimo Community Law Office. “Brief to the Rental Housing Forum.” In City ofNanaimo. Nanaimo Rental Housing Strategy. Nanaimo, B.C.: PlanningDepartment, 1990.Secondary SourcesArmitage, Andrew. Social Welfare In Canada: Ideals and Realities. Toronto:McClelland and Stewart, 1975.Bliss, Michael, ed. Social Planning for Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press,1975.Callahan, Marilyn and Rob Dill. “Report on Social Planning in Victoria”. Report for theMayor’s Task Force on Family and Children’s Services, March 1988. City ofVictoria, Planning Department, Victoria, B.C., 1988.Canadian Council on Social Development. Case Studies in Social Planning. Volume 3:Public Social Planning in Halifax. Ottawa: CCSD, 1972.________Case Studies in Social Planning. Volume 4: Planning Under Voluntary Counciland Public Auspices. Vancouver. Ottawa: CCSD, 1972.Social Policies for the Eighties. Ottawa: CCSD, 1981.Clague, Michael. Regional Social Issues: Considerations for the Livable Region Strategy.Vancouver: GVRD Development Services, 1988.The Social Ouality of Community Life. Vancouver: Greater VancouverRegional District, 1990.____“Five Social Planning Functions.” In Greater Vancouver Social FuturesConference Proceedings. Vancouver: GVRD Development ServicesDepartment, 1991.A Citizen’s Guide to Community Social Planning. Vancouver, B.C.: SPARCof B.C., 1993.Clague, Michael, et. al. Reforming Human Services: The Experience of the CommunityResource Boards in B.C. Vancouver: UBC Press, 1984.65Community Council of Greater Victoria. Our Look Ahead: A Citizen’s Social PlanningResource. Victoria, B.C.: Community Council of Greater Victoria, 1989.Drover, Glenn and J. D. Hulchanski. Future Directions for Urban Social Planning inCanada, U.B.C. Planning Papers, Discussion Papers #11. Vancouver: UBCSchool of Community and Regional Planning, 1987.Dyckman, John W. “Social Planning, Social Planners and Planned Societies” Journalof the American Institute ofPlanners XXXII, no. 2 (March 1966): 67-68.Federation of Canadian Municipalities. “A Municipal Social Policy” in PolicyDevelopment: Task Force Reports and Resolutions. Ottawa: FCM, 1987.________“Policy Statement.” Quoted in Wharf, Brian. Communities and Social Policyin Canada. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart Inc., 1992.Friedmann, John The Good Society. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1979.Guest, Dennis. The Emergence of Social Security in Canada (Second Edition, Revised).Vancouver: UBC Press, 1980.Halsey-Brandt, Greg “Differences and Commonalities in Social Planning.” In GreaterVancouver Regional District. Proceedings: Greater Vancouver Social FuturesConference. Vancouver: GV.RD Development Services Department, 1991.Hum, Derek P. J. Federalism and the Poor: A Review of the Canada Assistance Plan.Toronto: Ontario Economic Council, 1983.Ismael, Jacqueline S. “Privatization and Social Services: A Heuristic Approach.” Chap.in Privatization and Provincial Social Services in Canada: Policy, Administrationand Service Delivery. Ismael, Jacqueline S. and Yves Vaillancourt, eds.Edmonton: The University of Alberta Press, 1988.“Conclusion: Privatization in Comparative Provincial Perspective.” Chap. inPrivatization and Provincial Social Services in Canada: Policy, Administration andService Delivery. Ismael, Jacqueline S. and Yves Vaillancourt, eds. Edmonton:The University of Alberta Press, 1988.Ismael, Jacqueline S., ed. Canadian Social Welfare Policy: Federal and ProvincialDimensions. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1985.Ismael, Jacqueline S. and Yves Vaillancourt, eds. Privatization and Provincial SocialServices in Canada: Policy. Administration and Service Delivery. Edmonton: TheUniversity of Alberta Press, 1988.66Kahn, Alfred 3. Theory and Practice of Social Planning. New York: Russell SageFoundation, 1969.________Studies in Social Policy and Planning. New York: Russell Sage Foundation,1969.Kramer, Ralph M. and Harry Specht, eds. Readings in Community Organization Practice.Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969.Loreto, Richard A. and Trevor Price, eds. Urban policy Issues: Canadian Perspectives.Toronto: McClelland & Stewart Inc., 1990.Moscovitch, Allan and Jim Albert, eds. The Benevolent State: The Growth ofWelfare inCanada. Toronto: Garamond Press, 1987.Moscovitch, Allan and Glenn Drover. “Social Expenditures and the Welfare State: TheCanadian Experience in Historical Perspective.” Chap. in The Benevolent State:The Growth of Welfare in Canada. Moscovitch, Allan and Jim Albert, eds.Toronto: Garamond Press, 1987.Perloff Harry. “New Directions in Social Planning” Journal of the American Institute ofPlanners XXXI, no. 4 (November 1965): 297 - 304.Planning Institute of British Columbia. “Strengthening Social Planning: A Brief to theProvincial Government from PIBC.” PIBC News 35 no. 1 (February 1993): 5 - 8.Rothman, Jack. “Three Models of Community organization Practice.” In Fred Coxet al., eds., Strategies of Community Organization, Second Edition. Itasca,Illinois: Peacock Press, 1974. Quoted in Wharf Brian Communities and SocialPolicy in Canada. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart Inc., 1992.Sills, David, ed. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences XII. Crowell Collierand MacMillan Company, 1968. Quoted in District of Surrey. SocialPlanning in Greater Vancouver. Surrey, B.C.: Planning and DevelopmentServices, 1989.So, Frank S. and Judith Getzels, eds. The Practice ofLocal Government Planning.Washington, D.C.: American Planning Association, 1988.Social Planning and Research Council ofB.C. Proposals to Strengthen CommunitySocial Planning in BC: A Policy Paper. Vancouver: SPARC, 1993.Social Planning and Research Council ofB.C. Proposals to Strengthen CommunitySocial Planning in BC: A Consultation Paper. Vancouver: SPARC, 1993.67“Social Planning in the G.V.R.D.” PIBC News 33, no. 5 (December 1991): 6 - 8.Social Planning Council of Winnipeg. Winnipeg’s Next Decade: The Challenge ofSocial Equity. Winnipeg, MB: Social Planning Council ofWinnipeg, 1991.Stelter, Gilbert A. and Alan F. 3. Artibise, eds. Power and Place: Canadian UrbanDevelopment in the North American Context. Vancouver: UBC Press, 1986.Taylor, John. “Urban Autonomy in Canada.” Chap. in Stelter, G. and A. Artibise,eds. Power and Place: Canadian Urban Development in the North AmericanContext. Vancouver: UBC Press, 1986.United Way of the Lower Mainland. Implications of Social Trends for Growth.Management & Transportation Planning in the Lower Mainland. Burnaby, B.C.:United Way, 1993.Wharf Brian “Social Services.” Chap. in Loreto, Richard A. and Trevor Price, eds.Urban Policy Issues: Canadian Perspectives. Toronto: McClelland &Stewart Inc., 1990.________Communities and Social Policy in Canada. Toronto: McClelland &Stewart Inc., 1992.Wharf Brian with Novia Carter. Planning for the Social Services: Canadian Experiences.Volume Five in a Series of Case Studies in Social Planning. Ottawa: CCSD,1972.Yelaja, Shankar A., ed. Canadian Social Policy (Revised Edition). Waterloo, Ontario:Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1987.Young, Raymond. City of Vancouver: Social Change and Municipal Response. The PastDecade. Vancouver: City of Vancouver, Social Planning Department, 1976.Zink., Marilyn. “Housing Forum Hears Options.” Nanaimo Daily Free Press, 1989-JUN-20: 3.68APPENDIX 1 SOCIAL PLANNING iN NANAIMO: AN UPDATEThe following information provides an update on the on-going evolution of theCity ofNanaimo social planning program over the period May 1991 to June 1993.As described in Chapter Three of this thesis, although the municipal social planningprogram in Nanaimo, B.C. began in January 1991, it was not until May that temporarysocial planning staffwas hired and the Social Planning Advisory Committee began tomeet. Initially the social planning program had a community development focus,establishing the “system” for social planning in Nanaimo. In March 1992, when the SocialPlanner staff position became both fi.ill-time and permanent, the program began to take onan expanded role, focusing on the mandated planning work of municipal government.Throughout this time, the goals and objectives of the Nanaimo social planning programhave remained unchanged.Nanaimo Social Planning Goals and ObjectivesThe work of the Social Planning Task Force provided the original goal andobjectives for the City ofNanaimo social planning program. The goal of the socialplanning program is stated to be “the development of a safe, convenient, people-orientedenvironment which ensures access to all community amenities by all citizens regardless ofage, income or other factors”.’52 The objectives to meet this goal as identified in the TaskForce Report’53 include community cooperation and collaboration, citizen participation,and a community response to social needs and issues.The Task Force Report established the focus for the work of the new SocialPlanning Advisory Committee as setting “out an overall action plan for Social Planning inNow in 1993, in the final year of the Committee’s three year term, themembers of the Social Planning Advisory Committee are reviewing the original mandate‘52Cfty of Nanaimo, “Social Planning Brochure,” (Nanaimo, B.C.: City of Nanaimo, 1992).153 Social Planning Task Force, Task Force Report. 5.‘54Ibid., 33.69set out for them. The original goal and objectives for social planning are not beingchanged; however, the specific activities to undertake this work are being refined.’55City ofNanaimo Social Planning FunctionsAlthough they remain complementary, the functions of the Social Planner and theSocial Planning Advisory Committee have increasingly separated since the inception of theprogram. The staff position has grown to focus increasingly on the aspects of socialplanning that relate to addressing the impacts of other types of planning. The SocialPlanning Advisory Committee and its related advisory groups continue to focus onplanning for the provision of social services. Both the staff and committee functionsemphasize citizen action and participation.(a) The Social PlannerThe functions attributed to the initial social planning position related to the factthat the position was of a temporary nature and that the social planning program was new.The first set of staff functions emphasized the work required to establish the socialplanning “system”-- establishing the advisory committee and its advisory groups. Muchof this work involved community development activities such as getting to know thecommunity, organizing collaborative meetings, establishing the framework for action, andsupporting the system once it was in place. In addition to this organizational work, thestaff mandate included the implementation of the recommendations in the Social PlanningTask Force and Rental Housing Strategy reports. 156When the social planner position became a permanent part of the PlanningDepartment, the staff functions were amended to reflect the position’s new status. The jobdescription was re-written to include the duties carried out by all planners within the‘City of Nanaimo, Social Planning Advisoiy Committee, “Draft Terms of Reference,” (Nanaimo, B.C.:Planning Department, 1993)t56Nanaimo, “Job Description (Temp.).”70Department, with an emphasis on the ongoing development of the municipal socialplanning program.’57Since the permanency of the social planning program was established, it has beenthe objective of the Planning Director to ensure that the social planning function isintegrated within the land use work of the Planning Department. To this end, the focus ofthe Social Planner’s work has shifted to an emphasis on the impacts side of social planningwork, as described by Kahn and others. This refocussing translates into work in the areasof housing policy, affordable housing initiatives, community needs assessment,community impact assessment, accessibility guidelines, and local area planning.Community development work continues to be an important component of the Stafffunction with a focus on neighbourhood liaison and citizen participation.As the social planning function is located within the long-range section of thedepartment, “social planning” is increasingly being included in long range and policystudies. As well, social planning has played a significant role in taking policy work and“translating” it into forms useable by the development community and current planningstaff An example of such work would be the development of guidelines for achieving thegoal of housing mix promoted in the City’s Housing Policy. Social planning is no longerbeing viewed as separate and apart from planning but rather as an integral part of theDepartment’s work.(b) The Social Planning Advisory CommitteeThe functions of the Social Planning Advisory Committee have changed since itsinception. The first, or inaugural, Committee had the responsibility, like the SocialPlanner, to institute the social planning “system” outlined in the Task Force Report. Aswell, the Committee had the responsibility to implement the recommendations of theNanaimo Rental Housing Strategy and to identilj and prioritize community social needs.‘57City of Nanaimo, “Job Description: Social Planner,” (Nanaimo, B.C.: Personnel Department, 1992).71The challenge of the Social Planning Advisory Committee was not in theidentification of community social needs (as the advisory group structure enabled quickidentification) but rather in the prioritization of these needs. As a result, the Committeespent much of its first year writing letters of support for specific community-basedservices. This focus on the “social service planning” side of social planning becameincreasingly frustrating for the Committee. This was due to its advisory role andmunicipal focus and that the responsibility for social services is a provincial matter. Thisfrustration forced the Committee to review its terms of reference and to develop a clearerunderstanding of its role and its limitations.The Committee’s draft terms of reference continues to include needs assessmentand community development work. The Social Planning Advisory Committee is seen as aprovider of advice to City Council and a catalyst in the community’s response to socialissues. The Committee has had a Sub-Committee on Housing since its inception and it isthis Sub-Committee which has been most closely connected with the work of the PlanningDepartment. It has recently been recommended by Staff (June 1993) that this SubCommittee be disbanded and a Housing Advisory Committee (that would report directlyto Council) be established.’58 This recommendation is supported by the Social PlanningAdvisory Committee.Both the staff and committee components of the Nanaimo social planning programaddress the characteristics included in the definition of “social planning” outlined inChapter Two: research, advocacy, citizen participation and community development.(c) The Relationship to Other Planning FunctionsThe specific activities of the Nanaimo program outlined above, illustrate that theNanaimo program includes the four basic functions of a municipal social planning programidentified in the previous chapter:• Identifying the social impacts of physical developments.‘58City of Nanaimo, “Report to the City Administrator re: Nanaimo Housing Policy, 1993-JUL-05,” 1.72• Developing social policies and providing information regarding social issues.• Coordinating with providers of social and community services to ensure adequatepolicies, services and programs.• Facilitating citizen involvement in local decision-making.The first function is primarily carried out by Staffwith some involvement of theSub-Committee on Housing. It is through this function that most of the integration withother Planning Department functions occurs. Activity in this area includes involvement inthe departmental review of development applications, encouragement of affordable andspecial needs housing projects, involvement in the development of long-range plans, andthe development of planning tools related to social policy. This work contributes to theintegration of social planning within both the Current Planning and CommunityDevelopment sections of the Department.The other three functions listed above are undertaken by both staff and thecommittee. The social policy/issues function has integrated with other municipal planningwork through involvement in the development of City policy addressing, for example,culture, housing, and liquor licensing. In addition to this, the Social Planning AdvisoryCommittee provides advice direct to City Council on community social issues.The coordination function provided by Staff has occurred both internally andexternally to City Hall. This work has tended to focus on issues affecting the socialwelfare of the community. Such work has included the initiation of a communitycommittee to address the needs of homeless persons, community development support toneighbourhood associations and joint work with architects, developers and housingadvocates on an innovative federally-funded housing project. The Social PlanningAdvisory Committee plays a coordinating role through its work with its advisory groups.The facilitation of citizen participation has occurred through both of the socialplanning committee structures (the advisory committee and advisory groups) and throughstaff neighbourhood liaison work and the sponsoring of healthy communities projects.73


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items