It Doesn't Take Long for Promises to Break!

Councillors Kubek and Siklenka managed to break major promises at their very first regular council meeting on December 15th by voting IN FAVOUR of adding water cut-offs to the actions Council could take against those homeowners/suite owners who will not obey an order to shut down an illegal dwelling or suite.

I spoke out against this motion during the election campaign as did both of these candidates, but their tune changed as soon as they became councillors and were persuaded by staff to change their position.

Luckily for all concerned Councillors Bryson, Olsen, Garrison and Mason kept their promise to vote against this terrible plan. Cutting off water will not be in the toolbox in Central Saanich.

Too bad some of our new councillors are so quick to change their positions.

How Do Our Councillors Rate?

We have to start thinking about rating our Councillors’ performance. So from first to worst here are my observations after 6 years of regular Council attendance (they are listed alphabetically where tied) :

Do they make sure we can see how they voted on every issue or do they go out of their way to hide this most important information, including trying to change procedures to eliminate any sign of how they voted; do they actively try and make the votes more transparent?

1. King
2. Bryson
3. Graham, Mar
4. Garrison, Mason
5. Thompson


Do they sincerely care about the environment or are they just greenwashing their own and our District’s record (this includes doing research, making proposals, finding funding and proposing tougher bylaw & OCP wording vs watering down, creating loopholes and refusing to reconsider when a bad decision has been made)?

1. King
2. Bryson
3. Graham, Mar
4. Garrison, Mason, Thompson

Did they provide a welcome atmosphere for citizens coming to council with ideas and problems, or did they whine about too many citizens showing up or that the same ones show up regularly (this includes placing letters at the end of the agenda and finding other ways to muzzle citizens; interrupting, being rude, rolling their eyes, belittling in the media etc)?

1. Bryson, King
2. Graham
3. Mar
4. Garrison
5. Mason
6. Thompson

Are they only interested in their own ‘perspective’ or are they actually listening to the community?

1. Bryson, King,
2. Graham, Mar
3. Thompson
4. Mason
5. Garrison

Special mention needs to made of Councillor Bryson’s reminders that applause and scornful comments may intimidate some of the speakers at Council and that is undemocratic. His wise and thoughtful comments on many issues are very helpful.

Councillor King is far and away the most concerned about our environment and although the vote is almost always against him he never gives up trying to put forward ideas that are for the benefit of our community. He is also the champion of citizen participation and inclusiveness as he encourages people to bring their thoughts, ideas and concerns to Council and to participate on both citizen-initiated and council committees.

I find Councillor Graham and Mayor Mar to be sincere and hardworking, willing to listen to what citizens present for the most part and willing to stand up and be counted on difficult issues. I don't always agree with their decisions, but I do respect them.

Almost all the Councillors have had a 'shining moment' at some point, but this list is meant to be reflective of the general state of affairs.

Someone spoke to me the other day about their anger over part of the new draft Official Community Plan. I pointed out to them that it is a draft only at this point and there is still plenty of opportunity for input and change. Councillors did not make all (or even most of), the suggestions that went into the draft: staff, citizens and the consultant have all added pieces to the document, so saying the Council should be thrown out because the document contains bits you don’t like is quite unfair.

It's interesting to note (see the articles below, especially that on the Civic Leagues and one called 3 Unfair Motions and Their Implications from September 2007) that the sense that Councillors' are hiding the votes so we can't know who stands for what is quite universal in the region, and in fact, in Guelph, Ontario citizens got the Council to buy a voting machine to record the vote as it is cast and project it on the wall for all to see. Knowing how they voted is fundamental to any democracy. Without it we have only a sham.

I guess we need the machine too.

Accountable Voting

In the recent vote on the Vantreight Proposal a great deal of confusion was caused by the fact that our elected officials don't have to publicly state how they are voting. Many people thought Councillor Mason voted against the motion, thus supporting the Vantreight Proposal when in fact she voted with the rest of the Council making the result unanimous.

The trouble lies in the voting procedure. If you are voting for a motion you do not have to raise your hand or signify your intentions in any way. By doing nothing you are assumed to have voted for the motion.

To vote against the motion you need to raise your hand, but your hand can easily be missed.

To abstain you need to make a statement to that effect.

In any case the vote itself is not recorded only the result (passed/failed/referred etc). Unless a Councillor specifically asks for their vote to be recorded no notation is made.

As a result our Councillors can easily hide contentious votes and we the citizens are deprived of a very basic democratic right.

Our MPs and MLAs votes are available to all, but our Councillors are not held accountable. It's time for a change. Democracy only works if the process is transparent. Councillors should have to raise their hands for each stage of a vote (yea, nay or abstain) and raise them high enough for everyone to see.