County councillors split on cutting their size, oppose direct
election
Posted October
2, 2012
A September 13 report to Simcoe County's Governance Committee, whose
recommendations will be tabled at a special meeting of County council
October 16th, concludes the mayors and deputy mayors of the 16
municipalities who make up the 32 member upper tier government system,
can't agree on changes to reducing the size and composition going
forward.
However, they do mostly agree direct elections to County council are
not a good idea, that the committee structure is broken, and that the
Warden should be a four-year, full-time position, elected by County
councillors.
Those are the conclusions drawn from "one-on-one interviews with
members of County Council to obtain feedback regarding governance
matters specifically addressing the position of Warden and the size and
composition of County Council as highlighted in the Berkeley Report,
based on questions discussed by the Governance Committee at its meeting
of April 10, 2012," according to the report prepared by Doug White,
Chair, Governance Committee, Rick Lloyd, Vice-Chair, Governance
Committee, and Brenda Clark, County Clerk.
Below are the three possible options that were presented and the
results of each from the interviews:
Status Quo: 32 members.
17 members (mayor of each member municipality, plus the
head)
23 members as recommended in the Berkeley Report (mayor of
each member municipality, plus 7 directly elected)
14 respondents support a 32 member council;
13 respondents support a 17 member council, two of which
indicated they would prefer the members to be directly elected;
Two respondents support a 23 member council as recommended
by the Berkeley Report;
One respondent supports a smaller council, but "details
need to be worked out."
"Notwithstanding their opinions regarding the size of County Council, a
majority of County Councillors who responded .... indicated support for
a flexible approach to allow the local municipalities to appoint a
council representative to the upper tier council," according to the
report. "In considering the composition of County Council, the need for
the member municipalities to be represented on County Council was
clearly stated during the interviews. In order to help ensure effective
communications and liaison between the county and the member
municipalities it was also regarded as important that the members of
County Council serve on the councils of the member municipalities. As
such, there was little support for direct elections to the upper-tier
council."
As a result, the status quo is the recommended option for both size, 32
members, and composition, the mayors and deputy mayors.
The role of Warden, and the term served, currently two years, is also
poised to change as a "clear consensus among County Councillors that
the position of Warden should be a full-time dedicated position at the
County. The expectations of a full-time head of council would be such
that he or she would only serve on one council and no other." What
isn't, is the method in which the head of council is selected,
currently by secret ballot by County councillors.
"The results of the interviews did not suggest a desire to change the
method of selecting a Warden, in that they wish to continue to elect
one from among themselves as Warden. However, four (4) respondents
noted their support for direct election."
To change the length of office in time for the 2014-18 new council
term, notice must be provided, and a public meeting held, and changes
enacted by Dec. 31, 2013.
The report recommends a four-year term served by a "full-time Warden to
be elected by County Council. The candidate need not be a member of
County Council in order to be elected Warden, but should they be a
member, they would be required to vacate their seat on local council."
And the other significant change being proposed is to replace the
system of standing committees with a committee of the whole system.
Members question the effectiveness and efficiency of the
current system whereby matters discussed at length at a Standing
Committee meeting are repeated at length at County Council;
Frustration was expressed with the current system which
makes this inefficiency inevitable given only a third of members
participate in each Standing Committee discussion;
While most members have confidence with their understanding
of the responsibilities of their Standing Committee, they would prefer
greater input into how decisions are made by the other Standing
Committees;
While members understand the length of meetings is
unpredictable, many believe there should be regularly scheduled breaks
to minimize the number of people who leave and re-enter the room
mid-meeting; and
Members are displeased with colleagues who arrive late,
depart early or otherwise threaten quorum, a scenario that rarely
occurs at local councils.
The committee of the whole system allows all members of council to
partake in discussions, including moving motions and recommendations,
currently not the case with the three key separate standing committees
- Human Services, Corporate Services, and Performance Management.
The report recommends "a Committee of the Whole system be implemented
to replace the current Standing Committee structure, and that staff be
requested to prepare a report to the Governance Committee recommending
a process and the procedural requirements associated with implementing
this change."
At this post, it was not confirmed whether these changes being proposed
at the County council level will be circulated to each of the member
municipalities for comments, and or a public meeting held prior to a
final vote by council.