Council ought to have taken the offer. It is about to grapple with some very hard choices about what this municipality does and what it can afford to do (see story page 3). Yet a majority of council has opted to ignore its senior manager’s advice to engage residents in the decision making. Instead these sixteen folks alone will make the choices that may forever alter the structure and function of the County. It is surely a decision they will come to regret.

There can only be a couple of explanations for this cowboy approach—a majority of council either truly believe they have been blessed with near-divine insight into the minds of their constituents; or they have concluded change isn’t needed and will resist restructuring efforts at every turn. There is, I suppose, is a third possible explanation— that some really don’t care what ratepayers think. It wouldn’t be the first time County residents were told to stay out of municipal affairs.

Just last month, council balked for a second time at the demand that it review its own size and structure. Despite an overwhelming vote in favour of such a review in a question posed on the ballot during the last municipal election—a majority of those councillors, elected on the same day, chose to ignore the electorally expressed will of County residents.

The choices this time are likely to be more directly felt throughout the County. Are the standards by which we maintain roads and bridges too high? Can we continue to pick up garbage amd recycling at every doorstep from Long Point to Carrying Place? Did this ever make sense? Can we continue to maintain more than 80 buildings? Manage 120 properties?

The County manager Merlin Dewing contends that by trying to do too much with too little the municipality is doing nothing well. He is not the first to make this observation— but he is intent on fixing it.

He argues persuasively that this community can either make the necessary changes or change will be thrust upon us. The trend is already well-established. Lacking appropriate funding, or in some cases the wherewithal to drive revenue growth, many of our recreational and cultural spaces already limit access. As a result, participation drops off. Fewer funds flow in. And fewer folks are left to defend the original ideas and purpose. Participation dwindles further. This pattern will repeat itself until our public spaces whither and our facilities are no longer relevant to a community that, over time, has moved on.

Deciding what must stay and what must go will be painful. There is no clever or surgical way to make changes like these. No one will be happy with the result. There will surely be a great deal of anguish and disappointment. Folks who have never before engaged in municipal affairs will be offended by the choices that are made on their behalf and will speak out for the first time. The language will reveal anger, frustration and bitterness.

But who will listen? Council has already concluded it knows best. It doesn’t need, or want, any guidance from its citizens.

Digging for answers

The more people know about the wind energy business the less they like it.” This surprising admission is from a communications strategist speaking to the American Council on Renewable Energy last year.

This individual’s experience mirrors many who have considered this issue. People come to the issue of wind energy believing that the fuel is free so the energy it delivers must be cheap, and that it doesn’t emit carbon dioxide so therefore it must be clean. It turns out both these perceptions are wrong—but the facts require a bit of digging, and an open mind, to uncover.

However most folks, once engaged in the issue, tend to come to the same conclusion as the Ontario Federation of Agriculture did last week. The influential farm organization called upon the Ontario government to impose a moratorium on wind energy development in the province.

Farmers are, of course, accustomed to digging for answers.

rick@wellingtontimes.ca