What to do about the National Capital Commission (NCC)?

[Capital Shaun]

Originally Posted by Fatty McButterpants

When the NCC brings forward municipal infrastructure related requirements that reflect the interest of all taxpaying Canadians, do they also bring with them a bag full of federal tax money to pay for those requirements that are deemed to be of interest to all Canadians?

As I recall, the Federal position on funding for Phase 2 of the rail transit plan was lukewarm and non-committal. It seems the NCC sees Ottawa's transit as "our transit" while the treasury board sees Ottawa's transit as "your transit".

Good observation on "our transit" vs "your transit". I think the cities might be less opposational to NCC involvement if it came with federal funding. (Ex: Western LRT routing.)

[rocketphish]

NCC bureaucrat Mark Kristmanson appointed as new CEO

By Meghan Hurley, OTTAWA CITIZEN February 3, 2014 11:09 AM

OTTAWA — Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird announced Monday morning that Mark Kristmanson will take over as the head of the National Capital Commission.

Kristmanson has worked for the NCC since 2004, most recently as a project leader for several new monuments before he was appointed as the commission’s CEO.

Kristmanson has a doctorate in humanities from Concordia University and a master’s degree in arts management from City University in London.

He has worked for the National Arts Centre, the Cultural Capitals of Canada Program and was the founding executive director of the New Brunswick Arts Board.

The NCC has been without a CEO since August 2012, when Marie Lemay left to become associate deputy minister of infrastructure.

[email protected] twitter.com/meghan_hurley
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/ot...274/story.html

[Dado]

Is Baird trying to make the case to abolish the NCC? Hasn't his government just finished stripping the NCC of most of its cultural-related functions? Why would they bring in someone with those attributes to be the NCC's new CEO?

Originally Posted by Fatty McButterpants

When the NCC brings forward municipal infrastructure related requirements that reflect the interest of all taxpaying Canadians, do they also bring with them a bag full of federal tax money to pay for those requirements that are deemed to be of interest to all Canadians?

As I recall, the Federal position on funding for Phase 2 of the rail transit plan was lukewarm and non-committal. It seems the NCC sees Ottawa's transit as "our transit" while the treasury board sees Ottawa's transit as "your transit".

That is definitely one major problem with the current NCC-vs-City structure in the capital. In general, we have a problem of the City not appreciating the fact that it is a capital city in anything much it does, including especially anything to do with Gatineau, while the NCC doesn't seem to appreciate that a capital city is still a city.

And it cuts both ways, too.

The City frequently regards NCC lands as its own land reserve. After all, the initial plan for the WLRT was to run it along the Parkway (i.e. down the median) all the way from Dominion to Lincoln Fields and on to Baseline. The City has done the same kind of thing for the West Transitway around Moodie and on numerous other occasions for road widenings.

For its part, the NCC doesn't bear the costs of its own intransigence.

Neither party has much of an incentive to act in a responsible way, and the positions they take are often loaded with hypocrisy (e.g. the NCC's newfound love of "access" to the river doesn't jibe with having a four-lane expressway along said river and of having closed down crossings, while the City's position against burying the line through NCC lands doesn't jibe with its position of ... burying the line further west under Richmond).


But if the NCC were folded into a new transportation and possibly planning commission, bringing with it all NCC road and land assets, as well as those of the the MTO and MTQ, plus major roads of the cities and the transit agencies, that agency wouldn't be able to take obstructionist or gratuitous positions for the hell of it without also bearing the consequences.

[S-Man]

Ugh, the NCC and all of its bureaucrats.....

I couldn't agree more with the 'your transit/our transit' view of the NCC and its willingness to spend countless amounts of money on endless, fruitless studies, but inability to make a necessary municipal transit system the world-class, fitting-for-a-capital, monument-for-the-future they want it to be.

If you want changes above and beyond the city's funding envelope, fund that shortfall.

I will also point out that someone on this forum seems enamored with Joanna Chianello!

[rocketphish]

NCC’s new CEO, Mark Kristmanson, brings diplomatic skills to job

By Don Butler, OTTAWA CITIZEN February 3, 2014 8:11 PM

OTTAWA — Mark Kristmanson’s interest in public diplomacy could serve him well as he takes up his new duties as chief executive officer of the National Capital Commission.

Kristmanson, a largely unknown NCC bureaucrat for the past decade, was on Monday named to the top job by Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird.

Kristmanson succeeds former CEO, Marie Lemay, who left 18 months ago to become a deputy minister in the federal bureaucracy. The job had been unfilled since then, though Jean-François Trépanier, the Crown corporation’s executive vice-president, had been interim chief executive.

Kristmanson’s appointment, which followed what Baird called a “lengthy, rigorous and non-partisan process,” came as a surprise to just about everyone.

“He’s come from nowhere,” said Katherine Graham, who studies and teaches local government at Carleton University. “I don’t even recognize the name. But it’s an interesting appointment.”

At the NCC, Kristmanson was once director of public programming, overseeing events such as Canada Day and Winterlude. That programming role migrated to the Department of Canadian Heritage last year when the NCC’s mandate was narrowed to land-use planning and maintaining official residences.

More recently, Kristmanson has been project leader for new national monuments commemorating the War of 1812, the Holocaust and the Royal Canadian Navy — initiatives dear to the heart of the Conservative government.

From 1982 to 1994, Kristmanson was technical director of the National Arts Centre and served as the founding executive director of the New Brunswick Arts Board before joining the NCC in 2004.

He’s also the father of Kyrie Kristmanson, a rising Ottawa singer-songwriter who has released three albums as a solo artist.

Kristmanson, who has a PhD in humanities from Montreal’s Concordia University, held the 2011 Fulbright Visiting Research Chair in Public Diplomacy at the University of Southern California.

Given the typically testy relationship between the NCC and municipalities in the National Capital Region, that diplomatic expertise “may be just what the doctor ordered,” Graham said.

“If he’s into public diplomacy, maybe he’s the person for the job, because he’s got a few diplomatic fences to mend.”

Kristmanson spoke only briefly Monday — he has scheduled a round of media interviews for Tuesday — but his diplomatic instincts were on display when asked about the recent demand by the mayors of Ottawa and Gatineau for representation on the NCC board.

“This is my first day in this role at the commission, so I’ll be briefed on all these matters,” Kristmanson told reporters. “The one thing I’ll say is I look forward to working collaboratively with both mayors and working together to achieve positive results for the capital.”

Reaction to his appointment was generally positive. Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson said he had a “good chat” with Kristmanson on Monday and looked forward to working with him

“I don’t know him personally, but he certainly has a very impressive resumé and a deep interest in cities, which I think is a great mix for the position he has.”

Ottawa Centre New Democrat MP Paul Dewar, who also spoke briefly with Kristmanson on Monday, was favourably impressed. “From what I’ve seen, at first blush, it’s a good choice.”

Stacy Ingber, assistant director for programming and events at USC’s Centre on Public Diplomacy, said Kristmanson made a very positive impression during his semester there as a Fulbright research chair.

“Mark was an incredibly engaged and thoughtful scholar,” Ingber said. “His work was first rate.” Kristmanson, she said, “wasn’t your traditional academic. He wasn’t removed, he wasn’t cold.”

University of Ottawa professor emeritus Gilles Paquet, who chaired a panel that reviewed the NCC’s mandate in 2006, said it appears the government has “chosen a technocrat rather than a political animal” to head the NCC.

That could be a problem if Kristmanson has been “totally captured” by the technocracy that has dominated the NCC for years, Paquet said.

“When you live in an organization for 10 years, you become part of that culture. The culture has been a technocratic culture — top down, very little attention paid to the communities out there. The will to co-operate is not there to begin with.”

The role of the NCC’s chief executive is political in some ways, Paquet said. “There’s an extraordinary need, if you want a renaissance of this region, for people to come together, to rally, to conciliate.”

The head of the NCC needs to be willing to “persuade, bribe, do anything he needs to for the city,” Paquet said. “These are political skills rather than technical skills.”

Kristmanson, Paquet said, “looks pretty interesting and competent. But if he is doing only that, he’s not doing what the job of the NCC should be, which is to be the agency that will co-ordinate the work and energies and imagination of all these cities that are, for the time being, still entirely ignored by the NCC.”

The NCC “has to start thinking about how the city will look 20 or 30 years from now and make sure the infrastructure is in place to make it possible,” Paquet said.

Graham said the new CEO doesn’t have to become “Captain Capital,” but needs to develop a bit of a public profile.

“The NCC is somewhat faceless at the moment. It may be helpful if he can create some sort of a visage for the NCC,” Graham said, adding that Kristmanson can’t just be a behind-the-scenes diplomat. “He’s got to provide a profile for the NCC that hopefully will be positive.”

[email protected]">[email protected]

twitter.com/ButlerDon
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/busines...741/story.html

[Dado]

Originally Posted by S-Man

I will also point out that someone on this forum seems enamored with Joanna Chianello!

Says the guy who started an entire thread on Ken Gray...

Ken Gray: NIMBY watch

[McC]

Point!

[Fatty McButterpants]

Does the province of Ontario have a Provincial Capital Commission? Shouldn't all municipalities in Ontario be given a voice when it comes to how provincially owned land in Toronto is handled? Shouldn't we have a redundant level of bureaucracy comprised of representatives from across Ontario who, in all reality, don't care about what Toronto does as much as the government thinks they do?

Of course not. That would be just plain stupid.

[Kitchissippi]

Because Ontario is not a "union of municipalities", it's a province divided up into municipalities. Big huge difference. Municipalities are provincial creations that can be altered, dissolved, merged at the whim of the province (which is how we got amalgamation practically forced on us). Ontario can do whatever it wants with Toronto as a capital — why else do you think they get most of the infrastructure money down there?

[Fatty McButterpants]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

Because Ontario is not a "union of municipalities", it's a province divided up into municipalities. Big huge difference. Municipalities are provincial creations that can be altered, dissolved, merged at the whim of the province (which is how we got amalgamation practically forced on us). Ontario can do whatever it wants with Toronto as a capital — why else do you think they get most of the infrastructure money down there?

Thanks for demonstrating how a relatively simple and pragmatic observation can be convoluted by factoring in some suffocating jurisdictional issues.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by Fatty McButterpants

Does the province of Ontario have a Provincial Capital Commission? Shouldn't all municipalities in Ontario be given a voice when it comes to how provincially owned land in Toronto is handled? Shouldn't we have a redundant level of bureaucracy comprised of representatives from across Ontario who, in all reality, don't care about what Toronto does as much as the government thinks they do?

Of course not. That would be just plain stupid.

Originally Posted by Fatty McButterpants

Thanks for demonstrating how a relatively simple and pragmatic observation can be convoluted by factoring in some suffocating jurisdictional issues.

Ok, how is anything you wrote earlier either pragmatic or an observation?

It was more like a series of rhetorical questions.

The fact is, as Kitchissippi wrote, that the Province can do pretty much anything it pleases to make Toronto or some area around the Provincial Legislature it's own urban planning lab. It has the power to carve out a petty municipality that it can rule as its own private fief. It can zone the place however it sees fit. And that's before it touches on its expropriation powers.

Constitutionally, the Federal government doesn't have the same ability to do the same in Ottawa. Anything the Feds want to do in regards to capital-building they have to do either through municipal/provincial cooperation or through direct expropriation and land purchase. The NCC's "problem" in the last few decades has been that it was never too good at cooperation and it doesn't have the funds to do much of the latter, but it does sit on many important tracts of land so it can (and often does) obstruct more day-to-day city building.

Moreover, a national capital is a fundamentally different beast to a provincial one anyway. Provincial capitals don't host foreign legations, or even legations from other provinces. They're not subject to state visits. There are no military headquarters to worry about. They don't tend to host a coterie of museums (typically just one). So the need for a provincial capital commission is a lot less than for a national one. Nevertheless, some provinces do in fact have provincial capital commissions, such as Quebec, Saskatchewan and BC. It's notable in all three cases that the provincial capital is not the province's major metropolitan area. The BC commission might be dissolved this year.

[Fatty McButterpants]

Originally Posted by Dado

Ok, how is anything you wrote earlier either pragmatic or an observation?

It was more like a series of rhetorical questions.

The fact is, as Kitchissippi wrote, that the Province can do pretty much anything it pleases to make Toronto or some area around the Provincial Legislature it's own urban planning lab. It has the power to carve out a petty municipality that it can rule as its own private fief. It can zone the place however it sees fit. And that's before it touches on its expropriation powers.

Constitutionally, the Federal government doesn't have the same ability to do the same in Ottawa. Anything the Feds want to do in regards to capital-building they have to do either through municipal/provincial cooperation or through direct expropriation and land purchase. The NCC's "problem" in the last few decades has been that it was never too good at cooperation and it doesn't have the funds to do much of the latter, but it does sit on many important tracts of land so it can (and often does) obstruct more day-to-day city building.

Moreover, a national capital is a fundamentally different beast to a provincial one anyway. Provincial capitals don't host foreign legations, or even legations from other provinces. They're not subject to state visits. There are no military headquarters to worry about. They don't tend to host a coterie of museums (typically just one). So the need for a provincial capital commission is a lot less than for a national one. Nevertheless, some provinces do in fact have provincial capital commissions, such as Quebec, Saskatchewan and BC. It's notable in all three cases that the provincial capital is not the province's major metropolitan area. The BC commission might be dissolved this year.

Pragmatic in the sense that I am trying to convey an inferred observation that the NCC is seeking to be the champion for an interest group that realisically has no real interest. Did I present that in the form of questions? Yes. Did I answer my own questions? Yes. Is it all rhetoric? Yes. Are there any unanswered rhetorical questions? No.

[Fatty McButterpants]

The NCC champions the interests of a broadly dispersed, geographically removed and generally disinterested group and imposes those exagerated interests onto a small localized region. Because it's only fair.

The Commissioner of Official Languages champions the interests of a geographically concentrated demographic minority and imposes those minority interests onto the rest of Canada. Because it's only fair.

I guess fairness really is a two-way street after all.

[S-Man]

Let's all have a nice decaf...put our feet up....

[McC]

Buvons-tous un déca... reposons-nous un peu...

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Dado

That is definitely one major problem with the current NCC-vs-City structure in the capital. In general, we have a problem of the City not appreciating the fact that it is a capital city in anything much it does, including especially anything to do with Gatineau, while the NCC doesn't seem to appreciate that a capital city is still a city.

This, in a nutshell.

The city itself (and often the feds) don't try and make Ottawa a world-class capital, and the NCC always likes to imagine things for a narrow and fantastical perspective. It's also unfortunate that the bulk of what the NCC tries to do is from a car-oriented perspective and anything involving trees and grass.

[Luker]

[QUOTE=Dado;6436298]
Constitutionally, the Federal government doesn't have the same ability to do the same in Ottawa. Anything the Feds want to do in regards to capital-building they have to do either through municipal/provincial cooperation or through direct expropriation and land purchase. The NCC's "problem" in the last few decades has been that it was never too good at cooperation and it doesn't have the funds to do much of the latter, but it does sit on many important tracts of land so it can (and often does) obstruct more day-to-day city building.
[QUOTE]

This...

[Dado]

Originally Posted by Fatty McButterpants

The NCC champions the interests of a broadly dispersed, geographically removed and generally disinterested group and imposes those exagerated interests onto a small localized region. Because it's only fair.

If they're "disinterested", or even generally so, then they don't have an interest. Generally.

I think you meant "uninterested".

[Capital Shaun]

Originally Posted by Fatty McButterpants

The NCC champions the interests of a broadly dispersed, geographically removed and generally disinterested group and imposes those exagerated interests onto a small localized region. Because it's only fair.

The Commissioner of Official Languages champions the interests of a geographically concentrated demographic minority and imposes those minority interests onto the rest of Canada. Because it's only fair.

I guess fairness really is a two-way street after all.

Terrible argument. There's millions more francophones in Canada compared to the population of Ottawa-Gatineau.

[rocketphish]

Q&A with NCC chief executive Mark Kristmanson

By JOANNE CHIANELLO, OTTAWA CITIZEN February 4, 2014 9:01 PM

OTTAWA — The new National Capital Commission boss might not be a household name — not yet, anyway — but Mark Kristmanson has been the unseen talent behind many beloved events, from Winterlude to the Parliament Hill sound-and-light show.

Considered a surprise choice as the new chief executive, he’s been a well-known and respected entity around the NCC since arriving a decade ago. And no wonder: At 53, Kristmanson boasts a CV as varied as it is impressive. His background includes everything from theatre work to a PhD in Canadian studies (his thesis on nationality, culture and state security in Canada in first half of the 20th century). He founded a provincial art agency in New Brunswick where he grew up, and has studied the international relationships of cities as a Fulbright scholar at the University of Southern California.

Although he has an international pedigree — his master’s in arts administration is from City University in London — he’s lived in Ottawa for more than 30 years. (His favourite piece of urban architecture is the Moshe Safdie addition to the old city hall building.)

Kristmanson sat down with Joanne Chianello for his first official interview as the new CEO of the NCC to discuss everything from the commission’s light-rail dispute with the City of Ottawa to developing LeBreton Flats. While he doesn’t have many immediate solutions, Kristmanson did make one promise: the birdfeeders can come back to Gatineau Park next year.

Q: The most recent issue first: Should the mayors of Ottawa and Gatineau get to sit on the NCC board of directors?

A: I think you heard the minister (Ottawa West-Nepean MP John Baird, who’s responsible for the NCC). My own views will no doubt evolve as I’m briefed more on this and I have more of an opportunity to have discussions. There is already a good working relationship between the NCC and the cities, but it’s obviously not good enough. Changes that are being discussed would take months or years to enact and we need collaboration sooner. From my own work, I know the international competitiveness that we face as a region, so while we debate these things, other places move ahead. We need that close collaboration going forward.

Q: And the second controversial file is whether the LRT’s western extension can run along the Sir John A. Macdonald Parkway. Your thoughts?

A: First of all, I think Ottawa has a pretty good transportation system. I think it’s not said enough, and I’m speaking now as a user and a citizen. The evolution of the transportation system will create hopefully densities that bring positive cultural changes to the core area. So the NCC has an interest in this beyond just that one stretch of parkway. And I can’t really comment on that yet — it’s a complex file — and it’s not as if the NCC has put any brakes in front of the city. It’s obviously a key piece of federal land, and it’s a debate and a process we’re going to have to go through to resolve.

Q: Much of your background was in things the NCC doesn’t do any more. How does the NCC reposition itself when it’s no longer in charge of as much programming?

A: I think the answer goes back to the core mandate, which is that we are the stewards of federal lands in the capital. And why do we do it? So that the capital has national significance for the seat of government. For us to be doing it, it means it must be adding somehow to the symbolic character of the capital. Otherwise another agency could do it, or the cities themselves could do it. The crucial value-added is that the commission creates this signature capital as a green space, as a heritage space, as a space for advanced urbanism and design, and a place that people look to with pride as their nation’s capital.

But there’s’ no question that the overarching stewardship of the capital has been focused by the recent mandate change. The move of the animation and promotion of the capital to Canadian Heritage in a sense allows for a refocusing of our very strong mandate, which is over a century old. And we need to reconnect the public with all the results of that in the green spaces, in Gatineau Park, in the Greenbelt, in some of those very long-term decisions that were taken for the benefit of the capital.

Q: Minister Baird recently told the Citizen that Le Breton Flats was not among the NCC’s best work. What will happen with that disappointing development?

A: I don’t think the minister would take issue with me saying that he encouraged me to think of innovative solutions for LeBreton Flats, to really apply ourselves. There’s a fiscal reality in the country right now and we need to come up with approaches that will be inspiring and create great urban places but that can be done realistically, that are not planning exercises that get pushed off indefinitely. It’s a priority area.

Q: You were referred to as a technocrat in the press this week, which is hardly ever meant as a compliment. Hardly anyone outside the NCC knows who you are. What are your plans to reach out to the general public?

A: I said to the executive team this morning that we need to get out there. If we’re invited to go and speak, we need to accept. I’ve been reaching out systematically to all the elected officials, and I’ll keep doing that as they’re available. But I don’t want that just to be a first round of contact — we’ll keep going with a stronger government relations program. I also want to get out and meet some people in the communities. I want to meet the stakeholders in Gatineau Park. I think we can put a moratorium on taking down bird feeders, for example. The bird feeders can go back up next year, and we’ll look at that on a year-by-year basis.

[email protected]">jchian...awacitizen.com
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/ot...431/story.html