Won’t be fooled again

This is a pivotal week for council. Especially so for two councillors. Their last exit is coming up this Thursday afternoon. Will they carry on their charade and insist on public meetings on an issue that has already been decided? Or will they finally admit they have no intention of reducing the size of council, and thereby save the thin veneer of credibility they have left?

Seven council members, of 16, have made it clear they will not support a restructuring of council to make it smaller, to improve the wild imbalance of representation in population or just to make the group work better.

Seven, including the mayor, say they will support some form of downsizing—but don’t yet agree upon what that would look like. That leaves two.

Both councillors from Hallowell told voters they were in favour of reducing the size of council when asking for their support last fall. But now they have changed their minds.

Councillor Gord Fox doesn’t believe in representation by population. He calls it a numbers game. He believes the current arrangement has served Prince Edward County well, and he sees no reason to change.

Similarly, Councillor Brad Nieman sees the downsizing of council as a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.

Both remain unconvinced by the arguments they’ve heard so far that council size should change.

But here is where it really becomes a numbers game. If neither councillor changes his view, the size of council issue is dead. Dead. Dead. Dead. In fact, even in the event that one of these two councillors has a change of heart and decides to vote the way he told the people of Hallowell he would, the issue will still be dead.

So the question is: Why hold public meetings if the outcome is already known?

What is the purpose of asking folks to come out andshare their views— when council’s mind is already made up?

Most people remember when they were asked to express their opinion on a 2010 ballot question. Eighty-one per cent of those who answered the question made it as clear as they could—they wanted change. But that didn’t happen.

They told their candidates to fix it when they came to their doorsteps last fall. It appears unlikely that it will happen this time either.

Here is the pivotal bit.

Council’s credibility is at a low ebb. People look around and see skyrocketing water bills, craters in their roads, threats to the very nature and character of the community they love. And they see inaction by council. They don’t see council working for them—but working for itself.

Credibility is the foundation of the relationship between council and those it serves. When credibility is eroded, people don’t shout and holler. They tune out. They turn to matters in their lives, families and work that they can influence. They become more cynical about the self-serving nature of those who seek political office—even local council.

Some councillors have tried to persuade their colleagues that the reason few people show up for meetings about the size of council is because most are happy with the way things are. But they know as well as you and me, that people aren’t happy. They know that most residents stopped believing long ago that council had either the will or the ability to fix this problem. They won’t be fooled again.

So we come back to the decision the councillors from Hallowell must make this week.

For the sake of the institution they serve—it is time for both to grow a spine and be honest with themselves and with voters.

If you don’t believe in reducing council size, say so now. If your mind is made up—or even mostly made up—don’t drag residents and staff through nine pointless public meetings. Stop pretending to be interested in the public’s opinion when your words say the opposite.

Your credibility is hanging by a thread—don’t slice that last fibre. You may need it someday.

rick@wellingtontimes.ca