Question unresolved: Do we really need a Board of Control?

Londoner, March 2006

Faced with a judical shacking from Mr. Justice D.R. McDermid and a legal bill that already tops $100,000 and threatened to climb quickly higher, London city council wisely backed down last week in its petulant fight against an Ontario Municipal Board decision to change ward boundaries.

So this November we’ll go to the polls to elect a councillor in each of 14 wards instead of two councillors in each of seven wards. Well we will, that is, if the provincial government gets off its duff and passes the tiny bit of legislation required to make all this happen.

Mr. Justice McDermid’s ruling was pretty clear that the OMB decision was pretty clear – 14 wards, one councillor each. But the nit-pickers and foot draggers on council were worried someone would interpret existing legislation that there were to be two councillors per ward regardless of numbers and would sue to be part of a council that would rapidly grow to 33 members.

Okay . . . long sigh . . . let’s give Queen’s Park until the end of the month to resolve all this silliness.

Now, what’s next. Remember way back in 2002 when all the fuss about council’s size and structure started? What was really under consideration was a smaller council without a Board of Control.

End of the day we have a council of the same size, although one that should be more responsive to voters. Board of Control remains intact and untouched by all the controversy.

It would be a shame if the incoming council decides it doesn’t have the stomach to bite into this issue again. The question remains unresolved: Do we need a Board of Control or not?

A majority of voters, in the last election, said no we don’t. Granted their views carried no legal weight but morally city council should pay the decision some heed. The discussion last spring, which ultimately and confusingly led to the OMB, didn’t pay heed to anything.

Philip McLeod