Confusion of roles

I am not concerned about what your concerns are.” With this loud declaration, Councillor Jamie Forrester rather neatly encapsulated his single term on council. Full of bluster and short on articulation, Forrester eagerly wanted to put his hands on $40,000 contributed by a developer on East Lake a few years ago to assuage some residents and politicians who felt their community would suffer by the economic stimulation, increased tax base and job creation the project would produce.

Predictions of doom to East Lake and to the surrounding neighbourhood now seem overstated—but the loot squeezed from the developer remains a captive of municipal bureaucracy as officials work through a credible policy to manage and distribute such funds—today and tommorrow.

But Forrester isn’t a patient man. Nor is he keen on policy— or the hard work required to hammer out consistent and durable rules and implementation guidelines. He is far more interested in pulling the levers of the County business than he is in carefully studying the implications of the choices, bylaws and policies council enacts.

Besides, spreading $40,000 around Athol before an election is just good politics.

Forrester never fit well into the role of municipal councillor—he is far too eager to drive the boat rather than row with others. He is keen to show that he knows how the world works. Better than you.

He is not alone. Mentored on council by fellow Athol resident and Picton councillor Brian Marisett, Forrester and a handful of other councillors have never felt comfortable within the confines of governance. This small group has never fully understood the role of a municipal councillor nor the critical distinction between governing and managing.

“Hell, the taxpayers elected me to make decisions, and I am going to make them,” is a too common refrain of folks elected to County council.

These are dangerous folks. With little training or relevant experience, they want to seize the reins of a $50-million organization, believing they can run the place better. Not in the methodical, consistent and sustainable way that professional managers do—more along the lines of the seat-ofthe- pants, crowd-pleasing justice-dispensing manner of Judge Judy.

The way things used to be.

Many are the same folks who argued for the past four years that the will of electorate expressed in a municipal ballot didn’t matter. Once elected, not only do these folks believe they are unfettered by the limitations of their roles—they believe they are no longer accountable to the taxpayers who elected them.

More than 80 per cent, when asked in a ballot question in the last election, said they wanted a review of the size of council.

These councillors denied, balked and resisted until the third year of their term of council. Then they grudgingly agreed to a process to consider the public’s views. But no sooner had they received the Citizens’ Assembly recommendation for a smaller council, they rejected it.

It was Forrester, too, who brought a council meeting to a standstill late last year—because he was unwilling to allow a fellow councillor to bring this matter to one last vote before time ran out. Residents sat stunned in the pews in council chambers as the Athol representative threatened to shut down the public meeting. He was offended by a vote. Fearful of democracy.

The municipality of Prince Edward has taken great strides in shoring up and rebuilding its institutional workings since 2009. Professional managers with relevant experience and proven track records have come to Shire Hall and have begun creating some order from the chaos that was the County business.

Come October, County residents will have to ask themselves: do they want to move forward or backward. I pray every ward has that choice.

rick@wellingtontimes.ca