Now that we’ve passed the halfway mark, it’s time to give a preliminary assessment of the relative merits of electing local governments for four years instead of three. That was the change that took effect in B.C. two years ago. So what has been the result?
While all local governments have their challenges, their wins and losses, one common feature we’ve identified with the longer term in office is a lack of urgency.
The District of Sechelt is a stark example. While it might be argued that the last council acted as if it was operating on steroids, the current group appears to have switched over to tranquilizers. Sure, they’ve kept the machinery of civic government grinding along and added to the district’s inventory of public art, but on the big issues that have landed on their plates, from Seawatch sinkholes to derelict vessels to affordable housing, leadership and imagination have been about zero.
Then there is the fact that, more than two years into their term, Sechelt council has been struggling to retain key senior management hires. While the public does not know exactly what the problem is, council must be aware. If we were under the old three-year system and it was now less than a year before the next election, perhaps there would be a greater sense of urgency on council’s part to identify the problem and deal with it, however that scenario might unfold.
Over at the Sunshine Coast Regional District (SCRD), again we see individual directors working hard and tending to constituent concerns in their respective areas, but the quality of collective regional governance has not been what we would call inspired. This was most plainly evident after the summer of 2015 water emergency, when the public clamoured for the SCRD to revisit its water management plan and elevate the pursuit of new water sources above everything else, including water meters. Instead of hearing out the public in an open and impartial way, the SCRD fell back on its consultants’ report, pointing out that the public had had its chance for input before the plan was adopted. Never mind that much of the public felt the plan was outdated due to changing circumstances, attitudes and information available. But it was still early days of a four-year term; there was no political urgency, no need to truly respond.
The same could be said for Gibsons council, whose members committed themselves before the election to negotiate the height of the George in a downward direction. After they got elected, the George grew a few feet taller – and council accepted it, because the developer’s considerations took precedence over the wishy-washy pledge given to voters, who, after all, had four years to forget they ever heard it.
The latest exercise in unresponsiveness is the chipsealing of some Gibsons roads. Chipseal is a common road surface in rural Alberta, and it’s good for hay balers, tractors, and the odd herd of cattle that breaks loose. But, even in counties with the most kilometres of chipseal, the residential subdivisions are paved. One reason is that homeowners sometimes like to sell their homes, and who will pay top price to live on a chipseal road? Oh well, there’s still almost two years to fix this one.
When four-year municipal terms were floated in Alberta, many of the serious doers on county councils declared they would not run again if the change went through. Three years was plenty of time to “git ’er done” and then get back to their farms and businesses and families. They had no interest in becoming professional pols or backdoor bureaucrats.
Is that what we can look forward to with four-year terms?
