VOTES submission to Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing who have called for public input into review of Municipal Elections Act, 1996

Please note...click title to submit your own suggestions to minister





Hon. J. Watson, Minister
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
13th floor, 777 Bay Street
Toronto, ON M5G 2E5

Dear Sir

RE: Review of Municipal Elections Act 1996

Below I have enumerated a number of changes to be considered by your ministry as they review and revise the Municipal Elections Act, 1996. I have brought some of these suggestions to your attention in the past and have been assured that consideration would be given under this upcoming review. Some of the suggestions below are new but all have been precipitated by the City of Oshawa’s determination to revert to the “at large” or “general” vote which has proven very unsatisfactory to Oshawa in the past but does serve the politicians to secure their council seats until their death or resignation. Integral to all of the suggestions I have made below is the most basic democratic principle that, “the political system should serve the people…not the politicians.”

Oshawa City Council has voted to revert to the general vote for the election of the 2010 City Council. At 160,000 population, this would mean that the constituency of each local and regional councillor for the city would be about twice the size of our Provincial and Federal Politicians. This makes no sense for a government that is supposed to be closest to the people.

Bill 130, as it stands, allows all municipalities in Ontario to introduce the general vote unilaterally without possible appeal to any independent body as long as ward boundaries are not altered. Oshawa city council voted to revert to the general vote but to keep, but not use, their existing wards thus avoiding an OMB appeal. This was in all likelihood an unanticipated action by the drafters of Bill 130.

Oshawa’s experience with seven General Vote councils prior to 1985 was:

A) Vast areas of the city became unrepresented on council as all political power became concentrated in a few of the richer areas of the city (half the politicians lived in one defined ward while 1/5 lived in one polling subdivision in a second ward)

B) Because of the concentration of political power to specific communities, city council became less inclusive, less representative and less diverse

C) The general vote produced huge ballots (the last 11X17 inches with close to 100 names) making it impossible for voters to make informed choices. Because of the impossible task of making informed choices, voters tended to vote for the names they’d seen before…the incumbents. As a result, all change in political leadership over Oshawa’s 7 general vote councils came as a result of death or resignation of incumbents and not one incumbent was defeated out of the 107 possible seats over that period. Half the city was not represented in any of those general vote councils.

D) Because political leadership could not be changed by the vote, an aging city council became less responsive and less accountable to voters and suffered from the lack of fresh leadership. Eight aldermen out of 14 were defeated under Oshawa's first ward vote.

E) Name recognition, rather than service to the community, was basic to getting elected so grandstanding, backbiting, bitching and bickering became the method by which politicians tried to grab the press to enhance their name recognition. Council became a dysfunctional rather than productive place at the expense of the city’s health.

F) Politicians tended to deflect their interests away from serving individual constituents instead favouring the interests of large groups with the hopes that these groups would encourage their city-wide membership to support the “friendly” politicians They also tended to favour the interests of potential political donors to help them fund their expensive political campaigns.

In light of the foregoing, we would ask the following:

A) That Oshawa’s change to the general vote be rescinded and that every municipality in the province in excess of 40,000 population be mandated to elect their councils by ward vote.

B) That failing the mandating of ward voting for large municipalities, that legislation should be drafted allowing for the formation of municipal political parties including

• Political party fundraising and reporting legislation

• Political party approval and submission of slates of candidates to carry the party banner

• Provision to have political candidates identified as independents or with a party on municipal ballots

• Legislation allowing for private caucus meetings for party incumbents

C) That Legislation be introduced limiting municipal politicians to two consecutive terms to allow for the introduction of fresh ideas and fresh leadership

D) That municipal communication requirements be more rigidly defined to insure that voters are sufficiently informed re the ramifications of any plebiscite question being asked by a municipal council

E) That municipal political campaigns be publicly funded consistent with the vote success of candidates as only incumbents at present are able to secure political donations. All such private donations should be prohibited and past surplus monies raised by politicians and kept by the clerk should be folded into city revenues or returned to the donors.

F) That consideration be given to eliminating local councils and local civic administrations where the municipality is part of a regional government. Elimination of this redundant administrative duplication would generate significant cost savings to the municipal taxpayer with the upper senior tier easily accommodating the existing minor responsibilities of the lower tier

G) That in the event that lower tier civic administrations are not eliminated, that local councilors in these administrations be eliminated as redundant.

I would be pleased to attend and provide input or testimony at any meeting or session where the issue of ward vs general vote is being considered or discussed or where further input is requested for any of my suggestions.

In support of the above requests, we have provided links below my signature to some important supporting information appearing on our website www.oshawaspeaks.ca

Sincerely,
Bill Longworth
Chair VOTES (Vote To Eliminate Self-serving politicians)
159 Spirea Court,
Oshawa, Ontario
L1G6S8

905 579 3971 (home)
905 809 1875 (mobile)








Links to Additional Supporting Information

• Bill Longworth, Feb. 5, 2007 presentation to City Council arguing for retention of ward voting in Oshawa

• Bill Longworth, April 30, 2007 city council presentation re. problems with the general vote

• Mayor explains City Council has no duty to inform voters of plebiscite details

• Open Letter to Premier

• Letter to Canadian Civil Liberties Association

• VOTES files complaint with Ontario Ombudsman re Oshawa General Vote plebisite process

• Letter to Editor of 250 Ontario newspapers explaining the need for change

• Letter to J. Gerretsen and Premier McGuinty asking for legislative changes to allow for municipal political parties if Oshawa’s General Vote Bylaw is allowed to stand

• Letter to J. Gerretsen quoting parts of 1985 OMB finding (M840053-March 21, 1985) directing ward vote to be implemented in Oshawa

• Council votes to deny providing information to public about general vote

• Bill Longworth argues for disbanding Oshawa Civic Administration and complete integration of entire Civic Administration into Durham Region to dismantle a redundant level of government and its unneeded expense to city taxpayers

• Why ward system is best and why then did city council vote for the general vote

• Letter to Premier suggesting Province employ Oshawa’s “NO COST” plebiscite process to provincial electoral reform question

• Council gets stymied by its own plebiscite-type question—the type of question they insisted was easy to understand and couldn’t possibly confuse the public

It's Hard To Keep Up While Marching Backwards

Too bad we don’t have forward thinkers among our political leaders to implement ways to encourage participation rather than discourage it.

Oshawa politicians by their policies and practices prove they believe Oshawa citizens are unworthy of engaging or of providing input. Council discourages citizen input by requiring citizens who want to speak on an issue at council to send requests to speak before committee and council agendas are made public. If you don't know what is coming up at Council, that certainly is a blockage to public input and turning to the general vote also isolates city politicians further from the people

Some organizations like Smart Growth BC see citizens as an asset and actively try to engage them. You can read the full policy here of an organization that sees people as a basic asset to community development and thus encourages citizen involvement and input into decision making…quite the reverse from Oshawa.

Even a huge administration like Montreal city council which has a system of party politics and a council comprised of 78 ward representatives has community councils and by policy provides for a public question period at every city council meeting.

Many large cities actively provide for public input. You might read descriptions of some models of community input by clicking on the highlighted text.

Smart Growth BC sees people as Assets and believe:

1) Citizens are the best experts about the places they live and how those places might best grow and progress--Oshawa wants to take away local representation with the general vote!

2) Informed citizen participation improves development processes and the communities in which we work, learn, and live--Oshawa Council refuses to provide background information on the general/ward vote systems and any rationale or benefits from the change thus continuing to keep the public in the dark and uninformed!

3) A true smart growth vision must include meaningful engagement of the people who will feel the long-term social, environmental, and economic impacts--Oshawa has proven it doesn't want public input by an informed public. Without an informed public, democracy is dead!

4) Smart Growth BC created a policy on Early and Ongoing Community Engagement to outline the many benefits of high quality community participation and a series of actions that can be taken by government, developers, and citizens to make these benefits a reality--Smart Growth BC believes citizen input is integral to healthy decision making. Oshawa believes in one way communication outward from city hall on selected items that promote the politicians and the city...but no communication on the change of election systems which is by far the most important issue council will face in affecting the long term health of Oshawa.

According to Smart Growth BC, Citizens deserve a role in advocating for smart growth. They believe that Effective community involvement requires:

1) Education: Local governments and developers must provide accurate, transparent, and timely information. Citizens must commit to accessing this information and making educated judgements.---Oshawa politicians keep information close to their chest...witness the lack of info provided regarding the very important change to the general vote. Information would have promoted public debate and thought about the issue before the plebiscite vote. Democracy requires an "informed public." The general vote will make it impossible for voters to become informed about the huge number of candidates they will see on the ballot. Oshawa politicians therefore do not really believe in democracy because they do not believe in ward voting where voters are able to make more "informed choices" of candidates they select to represent the interests of their local neighbourhood.

2) Broad Viewpoints: Smart growth decisions affect the environment, property taxes, commuting, housing options, and many other issues. Diverse people must participate to represent all these issues...Oshawa's change to the general vote will result in a council comprised only of richer individuals able to afford the $30,000-$40,000 general vote election campaigns. The general vote will result in a council that is not at all diverse or representative of the makeup of this city or of its neighbourhoods. All council members will come to reside in a few areas of Oshawa leaving most of Oshawa unrepresented at the decision making table. Oshawa will come to be governed by an "elite group" of residents.

3) Looking Outward: A smart growth approach must look beyond the needs of an individual or group. One town may need to defer to broader regional interests. The challenge is to achieve community or regional interests while respecting local and individual needs...Oshawa reverting to the general vote centralizes all decision making to the "rich" people who reside in a few "high income" areas of Oshawa, hardly representative of the diverse populations we have in Oshawa.

All in all, Oshawa seems to be taking a route opposite to the enlightened leadership found in most areas in the rest of the country. It's hard to keep up when you're marching backwards!

Smart Growth BC even provides toolkits to encourage citizen involvement in municipal decision making.

The advice from Smart Growth BC to the people is:
1) Follow your local council activity on development and planning issues
2) Talk to your neighbours and friends about smart growth
3) Write a letter to the local newspaper or call a local radio talk show
4) Question your politicians and candidates at election time
5) Get involved with community groups that are concerned with community or sustainability issues – or, form a new one

If our Oshawa political leaders followed ideas on the Smart Growth BC website, they may be able to harnish citizen ingenuity, creativity, intelligence, experience, etc. to develop plans to improve our pathetic downtown.

Instead our politicians are too busy looking inward to their own self interest and too busy figuring out how to preserve their council seats that in the end will only result in stale and stagnated leadership for Oshawa. They're too busy manufacturing issues like a change in election systems that don't exist in the real world.

Everywhere down the line, the thinking and action of Oshawa City Council is contrary to the best practices common throughout the country. This is Oshawa. "Prepare to be amazed," Canada.

Why not share Oshawa’s “smart growth” with your BC cousins. You might start by writing about how Oshawa City Council is reducing political accountability and removing ward representation to serve the self-interest of the politicians. This would make Oshawa famous as the laughing stock of progressive communities everywhere.