Ward Boundary Review - Next Steps
I’ve got a secret. We here at ScaleDown think that Windsor’s Ward Boundary Review will have a lasting and remarkable effect on the future of our city.
I know - not much of a secret.
If you’ve been following the saga, through all the pixels and radio-waves we’ve devoted to the topic, you will know that we’re pretty keen on getting the way we elect our ward representatives brought into the 20th, let alone 21st century. It’s been over 30 years since the city has re-evaluated this issue, and a lot has changed in Windsor in 30 years!
This Monday, June 15th, the consultant who has been working on the ward boundary review will be making his final presentation to council (see item 7, General Manager, Corporate Services). This is also the time for you to take the next step in the process and let our politicians know exactly where you stand on the issue. We’ve been involved at every step so far - including getting a public information meeting downtown when they were just planned for the suburbs - and this is the money-shot, folks.
So, read the consultants final report and prepare your statements for council. I think you know where I stand - I really favour the 10-ward proposal with one councillor per ward. If only for accountability sake this be the chosen option, it would be worthwhile. Yet it goes further in providing an even split between urban and suburban land uses, while preserving our current number of ward councillors. This is something the other options do not provide. Five of the ten wards have BIAs within their boundaries, ensuring fair representation for local, independant business (unfortunately, the DWBIA would only be represented by one ward councilor in this option) and offering a counterbalance to the big-box phenomenon.
So, examine the consultant’s report and disseminate it here. Are there nuances or details that counter the arguments I’ve made above? Share them with us. I know that a lot of citizens have some great insight into what would make our community run a little better (see M.O.M.’s critique, and the incredibly well laid-out proposal laid out by Windsor resident Alan Hall) Let’s lobby for the best all-around option for our city. Let’s attempt at reaching something that is foreign on council - consensus - and move forward with a unified voice.
Again - I urge you to register as a delegate (contact council services by Friday June 12 @ noon) to speak before council on this issue. Some members of our current council may see my listing as a delegate (I will be speaking to the WBR) as being self-serving, as it is rumoured that I will be seeking a council seat in 2010 (I wonder how THAT happened?) and my remarks may not be weighed as heavily as others.
It’s YOUR city! Reclaim it!
Tags: City Council, Ward Boundary Review
Post Feedback
“(I wonder how THAT happened?)”
I recall someone having a freudian slip during their last appearance before council, and introducing themself as a councilor of Ward 3. I just took the ball and ran with it.
On a serious note, I may just decide to register as a delegate - though I’m not sure how effective I would be, public speaking is note my forte.. Either way, I hope more people from SD will make their case before council soon.
Tim - I would highly encourage you to register as a delegate. Believe it or not, the slicker and more polished the delegate, the less effect it has on councilors and the viewing public. It is the individual citizens who get before council, are visibly nervous but passionate, that has the biggest impact. It shows that the issue at stake is big enough that you (or anyone in the same situation) are willing to venture outside your comfort zone and speak in public to it. This is something that’s commonly considered one of the most difficult and scariest things a person could do.
That’s Passion!
When someone is really good at speaking, they could be construed as a “lobbyist” and less tied personally to the issue. Same goes with someone who continually goes before council.
I hope to see you listed with me!
There is one flaw in the 10 ward system that councillors may use to maintain the status quo.
Downtown will be only represented by 1 councillor in Ward 3 from the current 4 - as you’ve pointed out.
What does the DWBIA think of this?
I prefer the 10 - ward system myself - 10 independent voices on council offering more input, more diversity of opinion and perhaps improved public policy.
It’s my hope that since half of the ten wards have a BIA within their boundaries, they will have a good shot at passing local-business-friendly policy and by-laws. This should benefit the downtown, as well as Sandwich, Riverside, Walkerville…
But, then again, we currently have 6 out of 10 councillors with BIAs in their wards and have witnessed the continued bleeding of municipal resources out to the ‘burbs.
I guess we need to look at this as one tool in the toolbox, that combined with a clean-sweep of councillors in 2010, will move us further down the road to recovery. Keep your fingers crossed…
Maybe I should attend and advocate for the status quo. LOL
Everytime I speak, council does the opposite!
Tim, by all means, register and attend as a delegate. The more voices Council hears from the harder it will be for them to vote for a status quo 5 ward system. I’m with everyone else in favouring the 10 ward system and will be at Council to advocate for it.
FYI: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/business/22flint.html?_r=1
One thing I realized lately, in one of those sleepless night spent analyzing my subconscious use of words, is how we would have a much stronger democracy if we were more interested in the innocent pursuit of truth rather than trying to forward our own beliefs and selfish interests.
The power play, that I believe, poisons our political environment can help explain why most of us get seduced by civic apathy. As a powerless individual voter, we will always lose so why even try.
I hope that Monday when reviewing and voting on the ward boundary review our leaders can suspend the power play and look to find the truth. That would greatly improve our democracy.
I feel sorry for those in the poor wards if and when a 10-ward system could be voted in. They will be ignored and have to fend for themselves.
I also see a city council that will be of individual self interest only and not work towards a common goal for any area of the city.
Knowing how this city works and the BS it creats on a daily basis I don’t think I amthat far from reality. Of course this is my opinion only but who knows maybe it will work. I just don’t see it.
Ignored and have to fend for themselves? Do you really think that?
They are hardly ignored. During this municipal strike, more and more managers and non-union employees are being pulled to work in Social Services to keep up with the demand.
And why is fending for ones themselves a bad thing? Isn’t that something we should be encouraging in people? What is stopping those in the “poor wards” to group together and be heard?
Vincent, the problem is that with our political representatives often more involved in the power play of politics, rather than trying to step-up for their constituents and digging to find the truth, the individual voter is powerless in such a system. Unless the issue becomes or is made galvanizing enough to where our representatives get involve. Such a system fuels civic apathy and is ripe for manipulation by special interests.
I think, Dave is suggesting that by having two councilors per ward an individual voter might be able to use the power play between councilors to on occasion get heard. That is a band aide solution to a failed system.
Let’s get to the root-cause of the problem and try to fix that. When we have to resort to a type of democratic polygamy to be heard, SOMETHING IS ROTTEN IN THE STATE OF DEMARK.
Horatio:
He waxes desperate with imagination.
Marcellus:
Let’s follow. ‘Tis not fit thus to obey him.
Horatio:
Have after. To what issue will this come?
Marcellus:
Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.
Horatio:
Heaven will direct it.
Marcellus:
Nay, let’s follow him. [Exeunt.]
Something is rotten in the state of Denmark
http://www.enotes.com/shakespeare-quotes/something-rotten-state-denmark
Anyone know what the report says on the two councilors per ward issue? I think, always export knowledge built over decades, centuries, or sometimes-even millenniums should form the jumping-off point for any creative analysis of something.
Having said that, wow Dave. I just realized something on the possible implication of the two councilors per ward issue. If you use the simplistic framework of democracy I suggested above, you are arguing that instead of a democracy built on trying to find the truth. A type of “democratic polygamy” is the solution. I think we all, including you, have a moral or ethical objection to such a form of democracy.
The term polygamy is used in related ways in social anthropology, sociobiology, and sociology. Polygamy can be defined as any “form of marriage in which a person [has] more than one spouse.
Is there any validity to my lunatic rant about how to strengthen our democracy? Or is this a Shakespearean moment of comic relief? What do you think (Yays or Nays please)?
I think it is very valid Edwin. YOu are correct with your “democratic polygamy” as well as it being our civic duty to enforce proper democracy. But in this failed state (city) I just don’t see that happening.
There is too much CYA in today’s politics and not enough “do”. I guess the cynic in me wins out in this battle. I feel too old to know the real outcome and how it will be played in this city. I really do need to look at the more positive side of things but it is truly difficult (and getting increasingly worse) in this city with the way politics are played.
The city electoral map remains unchanged.
Dave, I guess the cynic in you won last night again.
Big Love In Windsor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tP7AANhx0l0&feature=player_embedded
That stunt for the promo of the show was really cool. Something like that about the role of political games in our democracy would be really powerful. Ya’cha think?
Here is an article from the Star about the Ward Boundary Issue.
Windsor’s ward system needs revamp, says Dilkens
http://www.windsorstar.com/news/Ward+system+whack+Dilkens/1784503/story.html
I think, we need a ward boundary review of the entire Windsor and Essex region. We have too many municipal level politicos period. And the distribution is totally out of whack. We need to invite professor Williams back to re-draw the map of the entire Windsor and Essex region.
How many municipal level politicos do we have in the entire Windsor and Essex region?
And how many people do municipal level politicos represent in towns like Lakeshore?