Metro Reform
My take on the idea of a separately elected Metro Vancouver board:
Vote reform mulled to directly elect Metro reps
Metro’s council-appointed directors are accountable in the sense their council can rescind their representative’s appointment midway through the term if they’re unhappy with the performance. But a board populated by directors empowered by voters with no restraint from their home councils could turn into a monster.
It might seem more democratic, Price said, but it creates another level of government with much more potential for finger-pointing. “It will eventually desire to expand its powers and it will come in conflict with the local level,” he said.
Reformers could instead try to amalgamate all 21 Metro’s municipalities into a single super city.
Price predicts most voters and politicians wouldn’t want that, fearing a loss of local autonomy. The experience in Toronto and Montreal suggest the supposed benefits of a Metro amalgamation into a super city wouldn’t be worth the trauma, he said. Even a limited amalgamation – say of the North Shore cities – might make sense geographically but would be “a drag out fight.”
Price believes the federation of cities method here has actually worked well even if it seems less democratic than a directly elected super city model. “While you lose something in accountability, you gain something in the consensus building, sharing and knowledge that mayors get by sitting around the same regional table,” he said. “It may not be the case it’s so broken it needs to be fixed.”
The primary reason for amalgamation is to achieve an equitable distribution of the tax base and of the demands for local services.
If a new city were being created, would anyone recommend that there be two municipalities, one with all or most of the industrial and commercial properties and some of the upper income residences, the other with a small commercial tax base and most of the average and lower income residences?
While I appreciate the need for local autonomy, Gordon, until I see an objective evaluation as to how ALL the Metro Vancouver municipalities are addressing future needs and current problems, I fear they may be heading, one day, for forced amalgamation.
How are they all doing on the issues of sustainability, affordable housing, homelessness, facilitating transit, automobile use reduction, etc……?
I believe that the current system engenders parochialism at the basest level. Amalgamation in one form or another is inevitable. Regional goals and sustainability will NEVER be achieved otherwise.
Let’s evaluate them. I’ll bet most aren’t ‘pulling their weight’.