Last night’s council meeting was a marathon session that went past 11pm.  Bernadette Mason did an excellent presentation on traffic calming devices that I‘ve been talking about for years. You can see it here.

I actually wanted to talk about something else. 

I attend every Council, Planning Committee and Community Services Committee meeting, provided that I am not traveling.  For half of the meetings this year, I actually had to get baby sitters so I could attend.

In addition, I sit in the Transit Advisory Committee and Halton’s Inter-Municipal Committee on Sustainability. I attend both those meetings as well.  In addition, I’ve attended most public input sessions. 

Candidates should attend for following reasons:
1 – To learn. You don’t want to be a rookie councillor with no idea on how to handle the job
2 – To demonstrate that you care – If you cannot even bother to attend meetings when you are trying to impress voters, what expectations can they have from you when you are already elected?
3 – If you win, you’ll vote on issues that are discussed. If you haven’t been attending these meetings and did not participate in the debate, how will you vote?

A number of candidates have attended 0 meetings, 0 public info sessions and 0 open houses. I know my opponent hasn’t been to any meeting. I am not mentioning it as a ‘negative campaign’, I am saying it because I live in Ward 8 and would like to be represented by someone who actually cares about the community (even if it’s not me).  Someone who lives nowhere near ward 8 and is completely uninvolved isn’t the right choice.

Next four years are tricky for both Milton and ward 8.  The issue of education village will come up, construction in and around ward 8, further Tremaine expansion, Milton Heights neighbourhood that potentially has an impact on ward 8, hospital funding and expansion, library issue and so on. 

Vote, and vote carefully. 

You may want to read Christina Commisso’s excellent article on candidates using social media to campaign before reading further.

Candidates really have a lot more social media presence this time around, but all presence isn’t equal.  Simply creating facebook and twitter accounts, and registering a blog isn’t enough.  If they are not engaging in a meaningful two-way conversation then they might as well have no presence. 

Many candidates use social media sites purely for marketing, and not to form connections and start dialogues.  Those candidates are not getting it. 

Earlier this week Mayor Gordon Krantz announced that he’d seek re-election.  Two days ago on hawthorne villager a long-time Milton resident, Marshall Horner, threw in his name as a Ward 7 candidate for the local council.  He plans to announce his platform and more background information after he is nominated on Jan 4th.  For now he said: “If I am elected, I will stay in touch with my constituents and, any other resident of Milton who asks for my help.” 

Stay tuned.

Back in May the Town of Collingwood decided to continue the at-large system where councillors run in the entire town, instead of just their wards.  In addition, they also decided to demolish historic wards. 

Let me first explain what a ward is. A ward system divides a municipality into sections (called wards, obviously).  Councillors are elected by residents in their wards.  The at-large system sees councillors elected by all voters.  At-large systems are an exception for councillors.  For Collingwood residents it means that each resident will vote for 7 Councillors, 1 Mayor and 1 Deputee Mayor.  That’s an awful lot of votes to cast in a single election :). 

This got me thinking … what makes a ward system better than an at-large system.  Here are my thoughts :

• Every area of the town / region deserves representation.  Without wards a single segment of town population, a special interest group or a densely populated part of town may be able to elect all councillors, leaving others with no representation.  In case of Milton it means that all candidates could just appeal to residents of Hawthorne Village and nearby (new) communities, and completely ignore older parts of town
• Running in a ward makes councillors more accountable to neighbourhood voters.  Imagine if all Councillors came from the same part of town
• That leads to this point: the ward system prevents (or at least greatly minimizes) the undesirable possibility of having all councillors come from the same area of town
• Wards can represent the diversity of the town (old Milton vs. rural Milton vs. new Milton.  Farmers vs. commutors), allowing each ward to elect its own representative.  Without it a homogenous group of councillors can be elected to represent an otherwise heterogeneous town
• Wards make it much simpler to judge candidates.  Imagine having to select 7 councillors out of 20 candidates, instead of 1 out of 3. 
• Election debates are unworkable in an at-large system
• Citizens who need help know exactly who to contact and can hold them directly accountable at election time.  This is one reason why I did not even like how Milton picked two Councillors from each ward.  I like one ‘butt-in-line’
• Printing election materials and lawn signs for the entire town is cost prohibitive, not to mention highly confusing (imagine if you had to cast 11 votes)
• Your councillor likely lives, drives, walks, and shops in your neighborhood. This gives councillors a better understanding of neighbourhood issues and allows them to be proactive in dealing with neighbourhood problems
• Wards allow new blood to enter the race.  Incumbents often have a lot of advantage, having gotten a lot of name recognition during their tenure.  At-large system penalizes new-comers who often do not have the resources to market themselves town-wide