Council does not know best

Rules matter. So does process. These are not social niceties. These are the things that separate us from more primitive groupings of mammals. And when these mechanisms don’t satisfy our personal needs or short-term desires we aren’t allowed simply to toss them aside.

Yet a majority of council seems prepared to do just that. For the second time this fall, council is preparing to turn a deaf ear to the large majority of voters who said they wanted to talk about the size of council.

It is a dangerous path upon which council is walking. At best they are naively ignorant about the question at hand; at worst they are manipulating the levers of the system to avoid a result they may not like.

First, let’s be clear, the only question currently at hand is whether or not to hold a public meeting to consider alternatives. The question is not, “do you want to uproot the current ward and council system?” but rather: “do you want to talk about it?”

Four out of five voters answered yes to the ballot question in the municipal election last fall—an election all consider to be free and fair. That result cannot be ignored or wished away—or worse manoeuvred out of view by ham-handed council tactics.

My personal views have not changed. I believe another debate on the size of council and ward representation is likely to be as fruitless and divisive as the first couple of go-rounds, only it will entangle more folks. But this is no longer about what I believe. I had my opportunity to vote—I was among the 19 per cent who voted to leave it alone. My view didn’t prevail.

In a democratic society, we have to live with the result of a free and fair vote.

Some on council don’t agree. They say that because fewer than 50 per cent of eligible voters answered the question, they can ignore the result. This is because provincial rules that govern such matters say council is only compelled to act if participation rate is above the 50 per cent threshold.

The fact is 88 per cent of voters who showed up to cast a ballot for mayor, councillor or school trustee took the trouble to scroll to the bottom of the ballot to anwer the question. The vast majority of those who participated in the election said they wanted to discuss the issue.

Council believes it can sidestep this rule by using what amounts to a legal loophole. I believe it has grossly miscalculated. Morally and ethically council must listen to the majority. Likely legally as well. For a challenge of council’s inaction will surely be tested again at the Ontario Municipal Board. It will be nigh on impossible to persuade an objective adjudicator that council has been honest, faithful and diligent in its pursuit of this process.

It promised the OMB last time it was working toward a solution—to give it time. That argument won’t fly next its lawyers stand before an OMB panel.

Others suggest that those who did not vote would have voted no. How they are able to peer into the minds of folks to glean this certainty is mystifying on its own, but slips into the absurd when you recall that just 47 per cent of the eligible voters chose the current council. In only four of 10 wards did a majority of eligible voters show up to cast a ballot.

Using this logic a failed candidate in Picton might now stand up and claim the seat, arguing that the 53 per cent who didn’t vote, would have voted for him or her.

Some consider this an issue of leadership— clinging to the antique notion that democracy occurs only once every few years. At all other times we should leave the business to the adults we elected to look out for our interests. How far does this go? Do we stand by as council ratchets up taxes and decimates services? How about when council sets it sights on annexing Napanee? Leadership is, after all, about bold moves.

More thoughtful folks worry about the slippery slope—that once the issue enters the public consciousness, the County will slide inexorably toward some form of unhelpful restructuring. They worry a small group of folks might unduly influence the debate and foist change upon a population that was happy the way things were. It is, indeed, a risk.

Yet council must have more faith in the wisdom of County residents. It must give a bit more credit to the people of this community—that we are mature enough to join in the discussion about the future of this place. We need all be afraid when governments decide they no longer need to listen to the people—but rather act as if it knows best.

At the end of the day, either you believe in democracy—or you don’t. There is no middle ground. Some things are just that simple. Either a free and fair vote matters or it doesn’t.

It is no longer up to council to dither on whether the public should be consulted on this issue. They must act upon the wishes of the 80 per cent majority as expressed by a free and fair vote.

They have no other democratic alternative.

rick@wellingtontimes.ca