Deadlocked, again

Council puts off review of council size indefinitely

The issue still confounds council. So much so that for the first 15 minutes of discussion of the issue last week, no one dared to utter the words “size of council” out loud. But eventually it became clear why councillors were suddenly speaking cryptically and seizing upon rules of procedure to try and head off yet another confrontation.

Alas the confrontation was not avoided. Tempers flared and council once again became deadlocked on the issue of whether to embark on a public process to review the size of council and ward representation.

The latest incident arose from a budget meeting in mid-April. Hallowell Councillor Heather Campbell sought and received $25,000 set aside from the budget to engage a facilitator to begin such a review. Her motion passed by a single vote on April 16.

But last week council met again for the third and final round of deliberations on the budget. Ameliasburgh Councillor Dianne O’Brien, absent for the April 16 vote, wanted the matter put on the table and voted on again. Under normal procedures a decision of council can only be reconsidered after some months have passed or with a two-thirds majority of council.

This caused some to claim O’Brien’s request to be out of order. But as a budget meeting— in which it had been understood by all that the “rules of play” allowed for reconsideration— Mayor Peter Mertens ruled that another vote would be taken.

He cautioned O’Brien to tread carefully.

“Think clearly about what you want to do here,” said Mertens. “This is an issue that is important to people. What is the message this council is sending if we say ‘we don’t want to listen to what 71 per cent of voters have to say.’”

Mertens was referring to the majority of folks who voted to review the size of council on the lone ballot question posed during the municipal election in 2010.

Despite the outcome of the ballot,council has not moved to undertake this review. Some argue that because voter turnout fell short of the 50 per cent threshold required to make the decision binding upon council—they are within their rights to deny the result. In fact some go further, arguing that those who did not cast a vote were in fact voting for the status quo.

Others insist that council has other issues it must grapple with first;—that the size of council is a low priority for the majority of residents— though without a poll result to back up this claim, it is just speculation.

Those who don’t want to see the issue dominate council discussion have managed to push the issue aside for the past few months, but Heather Campbell argued that council could ignore the wishes of the electorate no more.

“It is wrong and inequitable for us not to consider this result,” said Campbell. “We should be demonstrating leadership.”

It wasn’t immediately apparent that O’Brien’s vote would be enough to overturn the previous week’s decision to proceed with a review.

Picton Councillor Brian Marisett, who is opposed to council restructuring, suggested the matter be referred to a special meeting of council to discuss the issue of whether or not to take the issue to the public.

Sophiasburgh Councillor Terry Shortt, another opponent, agreed—though he said he said his position was softening.

“It is an issue we need to address,” said Shortt. “But we shouldn’t be making this decision now. We are deliberating a budget and this isn’t a budget item.”

It had arisen in budget talks because money needs to be set aside to fund the review process. “We have a split council,” said Shortt. “A referral is a compromise.”

The vote produced an eight-eight deadlock— which, in effect, nullified the decision made by council a week earlier.

Afterwards, Shortt blamed supporters of restructuring for not accepting the “olive branch” that had been extended that would have sent the matter to a special meeting of council.

Shortt says council will deal with the issue at the right time. He says that time will come before the end of 2012—even if he has to resurrect the issue himself.