Hugh Mackenzie
Huntsville Doppler
CHERRY PICKING.
At a recent Muskoka District Council meeting members received a staff report on reducing the size of this august body which is presently composed of 22 members plus a Chair. It presented options for a Council of 18 or 12 members, plus a Chair. The Report came as a result of a motion put forward by Lake of Bays Mayor Bob Young, who is frustrated at the lack of reform of District Government and thought that perhaps the way to kick-start the process would be to knock off one issue at a time.
District Council kicked the staff report around before they sent it back, many of them appearing to favour the option of a Council of 12 members. My own view is that it will be a cold day in Hell before this actually happens because too many Councillors around that table enjoy the status quo and the double stipends they get for sitting there.
As much as I understand the frustration of Mayor Young and others who feel as he does, I believe that cherry picking specific issues in isolation of a complete review of District Government in Muskoka is a mistake. There are simply too many issues to be resolved and in many ways they are interconnected.
For example, if District Council were to be reduced to 12 members plus a chair, how are they to be chosen and what area municipality would they represent? At present, each of the three towns in Muskoka have more representation on District Council than two of the three townships, which effectively allows the towns to call all the shots. The argument for this is that the Towns by far represent the largest permanent population. On the other hand, the Townships, represent the majority of seasonal residents and therefore have a higher assessment base. We need to ask ourselves about the fairness to the township municipalities, who pay the majority of the taxes in Muskoka, but do not have an equality of votes at the District table with the Towns, who have the larger permanent population. If the Council is reduced to 12 members this could be easily resolved by having two representatives on District Council from each of the six municipalities. The problem of course, is that this will never be approved by District Council as the Towns control the majority of votes.
There are other issues as well. As long as District Councillors also sit on local Councils, do they have to be directly elected? Perhaps we should go back to having area municipalities appoint their District representatives. If it was treated as all other committee appointments, perhaps it would eliminate the need to double down on stipends. Or possibly, District Councillors should be elected only to that office and be booted off local Councils.
As for the Chair of District, why could she or he not be selected from among members of District Council for a one or two year term and then rotated? Direct election across the entire District would be a huge mistake. It would create a “Super Mayor” with a constituency far larger than any local mayor and at a huge expense in terms of election costs. It could well sound the death knell for local municipalities in Muskoka.
As it stands, District Government in Muskoka is just too big and too bureaucratic. Recently they appointed a Chief of Paramedic and Emergency Services as they take direct control of ambulances in the District, creating yet another candidate for the Sunshine List. And I would take a small wager that with this new bureaucrat in place it will not be long before a move is made to snag all local fire departments under this umbrella as well, as they, too, are sometimes called upon to perform emergency paramedic services. Just watch.
District roads are another example. Why cannot area municipalities look after roads within their own jurisdiction? Recently Huntsville Council indicated a wish to reduce the speed limit on Brunel Road, a District road, because of increased vehicle and pedestrian traffic. Does it really make sense that they have to depend on the vote of someone from Honey Harbour or Severn Bridge to accomplish this in their own town?
All of this is to say that District Government in Muskoka needs a serious and full review. The issues cannot be cherry picked. They have to be looked at in the full context of efficient local government, which, in my view, should be primarily delivered at the grass-roots level where accountability is most effective. Others may disagree. However, the status quo with increasing bureaucracy, duplication and power grabbing is not an option.
Cherry picking reform issues at District Council will not be effective and certainly has the potential of turning into a delay tactic that will ensure that nothing gets done. Serious questions need to be addressed and they cannot be properly addressed by those who have a vested interest in the outcome. What we need is an arms-length review of government in Muskoka and both District and local Councils should petition the provincial government to appoint an independent commissioner to get on with it, but don’t hold your breath.
Don’t miss out on Doppler! Sign up for our free, twice-weekly newsletter here.
We are the most over governed district in Canada. Six Mayors, 45 councillors and an unelected chair for a permanent population under 80,000. FYI New York has 57 councillors and an elected mayor, the population is 23 million. Ontario has a population of approx 19 million just to put things into perspective. How can Muskoka survive financially without making changes to their existing form of Governance? Everyone knows that the status quo is neither affordable nor sustainable and yet nothing is being done. The Province has downloaded operating costs to the district level since its creation. Policing costs alone have spiralled out of control forcing all levels of government to make difficult choices. More local families are moving north to avoid additional costs of living in the District of Muskoka. Can we really afford to do nothing?
There will never be a review of District government unless it is instigated by the Province. The notion of a self review Is a joke unfortunately . It would never happen if we’re seen as a risk to those requesting it.
The best way forward could be to reduce the salaries presently paid to councillors to a very modest honorarium. This would seriously sort out the ranks of council to those wishing to hold office for ultruistic reasons rather than those wishing to augment their pension income. Hand in hand with this should be term limits for council and chair. With the present very long terms, one would be long enough, certainly two at most.
The size of council requires more thought but the rep by pop concept must be maintained. I would not favour super councilors with more than one vote. Doesn’t pass the smell test.
One fact is certain; Muskoka is vastly and obscenely over governed and has far too many highly paid staff for the size of the body if taxpayers struggling to pay for it all.
None of the above is intended to be insulting (I have many friends in the system) rather a statement of the obvious.
Perhaps we need to think about the benifits of having one level of government to do the entire job with about half the number of people involved and the private sector much more heavily involved in providing the services.
Probably my next move should be to find a high tree and climb it !
You raise some excellent points, Hugh.
Like Mayor Young, I am frustrated by the lack of reform. Unlike Mayor Young, I think it is most inappropriate to treat the debate of District services as a buffet table where one picks and chooses which services or issues they want to discuss.
Twice during this term, I and other councillors have put forward resolutions calling on District Council to meet in open committee of the whole to have a full discussion of all governance matters. On both occasions, Mayor Young has discounted such a process as too cumbersome. He has joined others in voting down a much-needed debate that could address the broader issues of governance and offer a way forward.
As municipal government continues to grow in Muskoka, the days of simple solutions move ever further away. If ratepayers want municipal government reform, they need to be asking their District representatives, myself included, where they stand and what action they plan to take.
Unless the level of ratepayer and council engagement improves, history will most assuredly repeat itself and reform will be non-existent.
Hugh,
Thank you for your insights. Part of me wants to readily agree with your “cold day in hell” judgement but there is another part of me that must remain optimistic (perhaps for my own sanity). Because of the contentious nature of the issue of downsizing the District Council (and my belief that 2 Councillors from each Municipality is appropriate), I have decided to focus on the bigger elephant in the room – equal representation for all Municipalities in Muskoka at the District table. Without this, any other discussion is academic – the Towns with their absolute veto can steer any decision to their sole advantage. Therefore I am approaching the first effort based on another section of the Municipal Act whereby a Councillor can have more than 1 vote. Therefore my ask will be that every Municipality pass a resolution allocating two votes each to the Mayors of Georgian Bay and Lake of Bays thereby giving every Municipality 4 votes each but leaving the composition of the Council as it currently is at 22 members. Then we can move on to a meaningful discussion of Council composition.
Hugh
With all due respect, Muskoka has been down that road at least twice since the Patterson Report, remember Harry Kitchen/ Gardner Church, and in no instance were recommendations acted on in any meaningful way. What has changed in Muskoka to suggest another study would be any more successful ? Am I missing something ?
My only fear of a commissioner appointed by the provincial government is the person in charge of the provincial government. She does not have a very good record of saving taxpayer dollars.