Ballot question

Is Council too big?

Slipping under the radar in this election cycle is the question on the ballot. With infrastructure spending, soaring property taxes, crumbling roads, and strong mayor powers dominating the conversation, the issue of council governance lurks beneath the surface. For the second time since amalgamation forged the County of Prince Edward’s current configuration, voters will be asked how the place ought to be governed.

Councillor Chris Braney has long argued that bureaucratic organizations need regular renewal and reform to function well. He maintains that complacency and unchecked bloat result from an institution that fails to rigorously and regularly examine its purpose and performance.

He goes further, suggesting that such examination must go beyond asking questions— to actual mechanisms and processes to ensure organizations remain lean and focused on their role.

Councillor Braney led the council initiative to examine the County’s business, starting with a review of the Planning Department and then expanding to a broader look at the organization.

“The County’s trajectory is unsustainable,” reported Andrea Clemencio bluntly. Clemencio is a principal at Municipal VU, a municipal governance consultancy. “Your ambitions are not aligned with operations; demands to do more are increasing, but there is no corresponding action to do less elsewhere, and strategy gives way to expediency.”

It was a particularly stark assessment of Shire Hall and how far it has drifted from its core mandate. It was evidence, if more was needed, that the municipality is in dire need of reform.

The size of Council is just one part of the question, of course, but it’s an important part.

Almost half of Ontario municipalities manage with just five councillors. Even after including large urban centres, one councillor represents about 4,000 residents across the province on average. In Prince Edward County, each councillor represents an average of 1,800 residents.

This councillor-heavy municipality struggles to make decisions efficiently and properly scrutinise finances and operations. Fourteen members deliberating every matter of County business—one question and a follow-up from each member—is an arduous, inefficient and ultimately unfair way to make decisions.

ONE MORE TIME
Councillor Braney first tabled his proposals for governance review in February 2024. While his initiative failed to gain traction that year, the need for renewal became increasingly evident. By the following spring, governance was back on the table.

“This ballot question supports an overwhelming interest across the County,” said Braney. “County residents expressed their views and instilled their faith that we, as a new council, would undertake a governance review of our current structure with a fresh approach and perspective.”

This time around, Braney’s resolution gained the support of the majority of Council. Public meetings were held during the summer. By the fall of last year, the question had been finalized.

THE QUESTION
“Are you in favour of a third-party review of Council size and related ward boundaries?” Only a yes or no answer is permitted.

The outcome will be binding on Council only if 50 per cent or more of eligible voters exercise their right.

In 2010, the last time the size of Council question was on the ballot, 81 per cent of respondents chose to review council size. Alas, just 44.1 per cent of eligible voters cast a ballot. Council initially resisted making any change, but relented two years later, dropping two council members to the current 14.