Protest proves concerns about weighted votes
Concerns around a new county council structure were clearly demonstrated Tuesday when representatives of smaller member municipalities walked out of council chambers in order to demonstrate the inequities of a proposed weighted vote.
During a discussion about reducing the size of Simcoe County council, members were voting on an amendment to separate the issue of weighted votes, with 17 councillors in favour and 15 opposed. But once the votes were weighted, the tally became 68 for and 80 against, and the amendment was defeated.
That, says Clearview Township Mayor Doug Measures, illustrates the problem with weighted voting.
“This means that the five largest municipalities could carry every vote. It puts all the power in the hands of those larger municipalities and the opinions of the smaller, rural municipalities are not being well represented,” he said.
Measures believes this may be the first time that such a protest has ever occurred at county council.
“Let me be clear, I was not the ringleader but I do think it was a moment of combined brilliance,” he told The Echo. “As soon as we went to break, people started talking and we thought, we can halt the process and clearly illustrate our point.”
If a recorded vote is requested, each municipality is entitled to a minimum of three votes plus one vote for each additional 2,000 electors above 5,000 electors. Larger municipalities, such as Bradford West Gwillimbury, New Tecumseth, and Innisfil, have moreelectors and therefore are allotted more votes in these situations.
Measures and Clearview Deputy Mayor Paul Van Staveren were among the 17 councillors who did not return to the chamber following a recess. That left the meeting two members shy of a quorum, and Warden Basil Clarke was forced to adjourn.
The bylaw being considered would reduce the size of council from the current 32 members to 17. Currently the mayor and deputy mayor from each member municipality have a seat on council, but if council size is reduced, only the mayors would participate. The defeated amendment would have permitted council to deal with the size of council and the weighted vote provision separately.
Speaking in support of the motion, Deputy Warden Jennifer Coughlin, mayor of Springwater Township, asked, “Why would you hire 32 people to do a job that 16 can do?” Coughlin pointed out that by reducing the size of council, the county can afford to pay the salary of a full- time warden and increase councillor salaries to a more competitive level without costing taxpayers additional money. An October report showed salaries lagging significantly behind other municipalities of comparable size.
Judith Cox, deputy mayor of Severn Township, pointed out some of the potential pitfalls of a smaller council, saying “It’s way easier to meet with 16 people and sway them than it is to change the minds of 32 people. It means a small group has a greater chanceof controlling council, and we will lose the benefit of 32 different points of view. I have occasionally come to a meeting intending to vote one way then changed my mind based on the arguments other councillors have presented.”
Penetanguishene Deputy Mayor Dan La Rose told the meeting he hasn’t heard any significant advantages to reducing the size of council.
“If we reduce the numbers, we will reduce diversity, and we risk losing a lot of institutional knowledge,” said La Rose.
He pointed out that a reduced number of councillors in Toronto seems to be working out well, “but each councillor has an office budget in excess of $400,000.”
Innisfil Mayor Lynn Dollin was one of several councillors who argued that representation by population is a cornerstone of our democracy and defended the weighted vote provision.
“Saying every municipality should be equal is a bit like saying P.E.I. should have the same number of MPs as Ontario,” said Dollin, adding 99 per cent of the votes taken by council are not recorded votes so weighted voting is not a factor.
“We agree way more than we disagree, and we are all committed to the greater good,” she said.
Once the amendment was defeated and 17 members vacated the council chamber the warden was left with no choice but to adjourn the meeting. A special meeting has been scheduled to deal with some time- sensitive matters on the agenda including a $150 million grant application for child care.
As for the question of council composition, Warden Clarke said, “We will work with our clerk’s department to confirm options for a path forward related to the council composition process.”
The matter will be back on the agenda for the April 8 meeting, but without some changes, Measures is not confident the deadlock can be resolved.
