Electoral review heads to committee
After hearing some agreement from the public about the need for a review of Clearview Township’s ward system and its number of elected representatives, Council formed a committee Monday night that will hold further discussions with ratepayers, review the results of a request for proposals from consultants, and report its findings at the next Council meeting on Monday, August 12.
The Electoral Review Committee, consisting of Councillors Brent Preston, Thom Paterson and Deb Bronee, will meet on Tuesday, July 30 at 5 pm and Tuesday, August 6 at 9 am in the Clearview Council Chambers. According to Paterson, the first meeting will focus on the make up of the committee, the terms of reference, and a communication plan. The second will review the responses to the request for proposals, which was to be issued this past Tuesday. In forming the committee Monday night, Councillor Preston expressed his hope that members of the public will not only attend the meetings – as all meetings of committees of Council are open to the public – but that the terms of reference will also allow ratepayers to participate in the discussions as they happen.
About 25 people sat in the audience during Monday’s initial public meeting on the subject, and six of them – Dave Huskinson, Maureen McLeod, Rowland Fleming, Doug Mills, Paul Ruppel and Chris Raible, all from the Creemore area – stood to speak.
The consensus was that an electoral review was justified, 20 years after amalgamation, but opinion on whether or not the ward system should be abolished was split. While Huskinson and Ruppel both spoke in favour of an at-large system, McLeod and Raible requested that the wards be kept intact.
“There is a great mix of people in Clearview Township, and part of that mix is a geographical one,” said Raible. “If we are to have appropriate, balanced representation on our Council, it is essential that we continue with a ward system.”
Concerns were also put forth about the need for any terms of reference to include improving the efficiency of Council and improving accountability to taxpayers, and some expressed doubt that a consultant is actually 
necessary to guide the process.
While Councillor Preston wondered if a consultant might not be needed for the preliminary work, he did agree with Clerk Pamela Fettes that one would be required to redraw ward boundaries and complete any other technicial work, mainly because, should the outcome of the electoral review be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board, the Township would need the consultant to testify as an expert witness.
Preston, who made the initial call for an electoral review, agreed that the ultimate goal is to make Council more responsible and accountable, but noted he is not looking at the exercise as a money saving opportunity. “Any money saved by reducing the size of Council, in my opinion, should be reinvested to make Council more effective,” he said.
In their comments after the public portion of the meeting, most Councillors said they would lean toward keeping the ward system. All agreed, though, that more feedback was needed from the public.
Crossing Guard Changes
Following the institution of a new crossing guard policy and the observation of several potential and existing locations throughout the Township, Council made several decisions on the subject Monday night.
In Creemore this September, there will no longer be a crossing guard on Mill Street at Caroline Street, after that location failed to meet the criteria (based on number of students and breaks in traffic) set out in the new policy.
Two other locations in town, despite not quite meeting the criteria, will receive crossing guards. Collingwood Street will have a crossing at Johnston Street, right in front of the NCPS senior site, and County Road 9 will have a crossing at the western entrance to Jardine Crescent. The latter crossing will be evaluated for one year before it’s made permanent.
