Learned members

Sitting in council meetings can be a painful experience. There are a few reasons for that. For one, the wooden pews installed across from the horseshoe are not ideal for two or more hours of sitting still.

It’s also hard to see those benches empty, with only the usual suspects—a handful of local reporters— filling three or four seats, unless a group takes interest in one issue or another. There is little public engagement.

The meetings aren’t boring—for the most part. Like watching a sport, there is a process and rules that some may feel bogged down by. But the lively debates and the unpredictable outcomes make that process worthwhile.

However, the most painful thing is watching 16 people—none of them professional politicians and few of them experienced in the laws, policies and impacts of running a multi-million dollar corporation—waste time debating minutia or getting lost in the details of a policy instead of making decisions.

Not all municipal councils lack leadership and expertise, but when politics plays out on such a small scale, that is a danger.

And so, while the 18-year-old debate rages on with renewed vigor at Shire Hall, and at the risk of throwing a mere thimbleful of water into the flood of ideas about changing the size of council, here is one more.

Why don’t we elect our representatives based on their expertise, instead of their residence?

Here’s a twist on the size of council idea: we reduce our council to 10 councillors plus a mayor, as many, including a citizens’ assembly have suggested. But instead of councillors representing areas of the County, they represent specialized interests of all residents.

Councillors must sit on active advisory committees, listen to ideas and recommendations and bring those ideas back to the council table for discussion at committee of the whole meetings and then again during council meetings.

Each candidate can campaign based on their specialty, ideas and resume. The public can decide which candidate will best represent them for each specialization. It would make voting more complicated, with 11 different categories on the ballot instead of two, but that just might improve voter engagement.

Here, in a distillation of the County’s active advisory committees, is what those specialties might be: Health and safety, agriculture, environment, finance, planning and policy, heritage, economic development, law and order, recreation and culture and education.

Each councillor can be viewed as the expert on each of those topics in a debate, although all councillors may voice their opinions and concerns, and each may vote, with the mayor serving as a leader and a tie breaker.

It’s a little crazy. And a little too late—three suggestions have already been recommended for further study. But as we watch 16 people fumble with yet another deluge of ideas, frustration and indecision, it’s food for thought.

mihal@mihalzada.com