If it ain’t broke

Comparing council and policing costs

Nearly two years after voters told council, by way of question on the ballot, it wanted to look at options regarding the size of council and the imbalance of between wards, council has agreed it may finally consider such a review.

Council will convene a special meeting on November 19 to consider how it will proceed. Some continue to argue that,despite the fact that 80 per cent of those who answered the ballot question said they wanted a review of council, the majority of residents are happy with the existing arrangement. Since turnout for the last municipal election fell short of 50 per cent the result isn’t binding upon council—which means they can ignore the wishes of these voters.

But some are finding it harder to do so. Yet others will try to run out the clock—kicking the issue to another council to deal with.

Regular letter writer and reader Ralph Margetson shares the view that council put it energies toward managing the issues before it rather than churn up another divisive debate over the size of council. He argues that the potential gains are too slight for the pain such an overhaul of municipal representation would cause.

He points to the comparative costs of policing and governing the municipality.

As the accompanying chart illustrates County residents pay more than 10 times for its policing services at $5 million than it does to fund council and compensate 15 councillors and one mayor at a comparatively paltry $466,175.

Margetson says he hasn’t seen a police vehicle on Melville Road in over a year. But then again—he hasn’t seen his councillor in a while either.