The lucky 24

So the game is afoot, following a close 9 to 7 vote at council.

Invitations have been sent out to some 5,000 households in the County inviting them to submit their names for a lucky draw to become members of a “Citizens’ Assembly.” From the responses (a 1-in-10 response rate is anticipated, so from about 500 responses), some 24 names will be drawn.

Some manipulation of the lottery process will take place to ensure that an equal number of men and women are chosen, and that the results “match the age profile and geographic distribution of the County.”

There are two gender disclosure choices, which sounds just about right. And the age choices are just three: 18-29, 30-54, and 55 plus. The latter category might be susceptible of some finer differentiation. Responders are also required to identify whether they have lived in the County for less than five, less than 10, or more than 10 years; whether they are year round or seasonal residents; and which ward they reside in.

The prize in being one of the lucky 24 is to be able to exercise bragging rights to having participated in an unimpeachable process that will virtually compel council to accept the assembly’s recommendation concerning the future size of council. The word “size”, however, is deceptive. Very diplomatically, the County’s request for proposals states that “although a ward boundary review is not identified as part of this review process, council would accept advice on how best ward boundary changes should be addressed, either as part of this review or as a stand-alone component.” It also notes that the subject of ward boundary changes has been “extremely contentious, both on council and in the public,” and was the subject of an application to the Ontario Municipal Board in 2009. No question: to consider size takes the assembly down the rabbit hole of ward boundaries and forces it to consider the finer equities of rep by pop.

(By way of background, and as outlined in the request for proposals, the County was non-consensually, amalgamated in 1998 into a single municipality from a motley group of 10 townships, villages and a town to create 10 wards represented by one, two or three councillors. In 2008, council struck a committee to look at the size of council, and after considering its report, decided to put the issue of public consultation on council size on the ballot in 2010. More than three quarters of the ballots cast were in favour of a public consultation process, although not enough total ballots were cast to make the result binding.)

The catch, as there always is, is that participation requires a commitment of three precious Saturdays in July (the 27th) and August (the 10th and 24th). So which weekend golfer is going to sacrifice his or her time normally spent bending before tin cups to ensure that the views of County golfers are represented in the assembly? I hope that the results are not going to be questioned because they were stacked in favour of tiddleywinks addicts who can pursue their passion year round.

There is no question but that, for about three months, assembly members will be the most popular people in the County. The invitation letter states that assembly members will not be paid but will be given “refreshments and lunch.” I just hope that assembly organizers will be able to see through any attempt to influence members through the catering contract, so that no one is seduced into voting ‘10 councillors from Hillier!’ immediately after having ingested a large slice of pie from the Hillier Women’s Institute Kitchens. I said above that bragging rights would come if the process were “unimpeachable”, but I would add “unimrhubarbeable”, and “unimraspberryable” and “unimcoconutcreamable” to that.

The corollary, of course, is that after they deliver their recommendation, assembly members will quickly become the most unpopular people in the County. Their will be bound to exclude some people’s pet favourites and select others’ pet peeves. Joining the assembly will not be for the faint of heart.

And speaking to the faint of heart, one of the biggest challenges for the assembly—and Mayor Peter Mertens—will come at the back end; and that will be to persuade our notoriously (on this issue) faint of heart council to deal with the assembly report decisively, so that it can implement a decision before the next municipal election.

I was one of the lucky 5,000 who received an invitation. I thought about accepting, but decided that I already have a podium (i.e. this column) from which to state my views, and that I have already made them known (council is already too unwieldy; it doesn’t make sense to have created an efficient administrative structure while leaving in place an inefficient governance structure; and to heck with old representations about how many councillors a particular area should be entitled to forever—it’s more important to find something that works best for all).

Nevertheless, I encourage would-be assembly members to drop any cynicism and go for it. You have until July 4 to throw your hat in the ring. The assembly is a quite unusual exercise and if it smacks of anything, it’s democracy, which is hardly a bad thing. And remember, only 24 of you will get the T-shirt—and the catered lunches.

dsimmonds@wellingtontimes.ca