Improving Local Democracy

[UrbanWaterloo]

Improving Local Democracy
What ideas do you have to improve the local democratic process?

[UrbanWaterloo]

Region-Wide

Webcast Meetings
J. Smola noted the issue of webcasting of Council meetings and that the technology is in place for broadcasting, as has been done by the National Hockey League. He encouraged Council to consider this issue in order to allow the community to connect with Regional Council. Regional Council - May 5, 2010 Minutes (http://www.region.waterloo.on.ca/web/region.nsf/8ef02c0fded0c82a85256e590071a3ce/c89f513f0329f68d85257720004a7118!OpenDocument)

City of Kitchener

Posting Agendas Further In Advance.
Both the Economic Development Advisory & Property Standards Committees are meeting in less than 24 hours, yet neither of their agendas have been posted.

City of Waterloo

Separating Packets Into Topics
Similar to the ROW or the City of Kitchener.
Using Original Documents Rather Than Scans
This would make it easier to copy and paste the information, enabling the data to be discussed more easily.

[IEFBR14]

http://news.therecord.com/App_Themes/TheStar/images/recordlogo_print.jpg

Weak candidates, amateur campaigns plague local elections, expert says (http://news.therecord.com/News/Local/article/815847)
Local elections will draw higher turnouts when better candidates run better campaigns on better issues, political scientist Rob Leone says.

“I think people take an interest in politics when they have something that excites them,” he said. “You need real choice and you need competition.”

Leone does not see voting by internet, more referendums or a lowered voting age as solutions to poor turnout, estimated at 32 per cent in our Oct. 25 municipal elections. He contends more people will vote if:

Credible, recognizable candidates with communication skills offer real competition.

Candidates run professional campaigns. This includes knocking on many doors, to create personal connections, and tracking supporters to ensure they vote.

Candidates present clear choices on issues that people talk about at the dinner table.

Leone reviewed the latest municipal election in speaking to the Confederation Club Thursday. He teaches political science at Wilfrid Laurier University.

He points to the mayoral race in North Dumfries as a strong competition. Candidates split over twinning an ice pad, a clear issue that resonated with voters. Incumbent Kim Denouden was defeated by Robert Deutschmann. Turnout reached 49 per cent.

By comparison, incumbent Doug Craig did not face strong, professional competition in Cambridge. He was re-elected mayor. Turnout was 29 per cent.

Leone figures referendums on water fluoridation and merger talks helped boost Waterloo turnout to 41 per cent. But he does not advocate more referendums, saying candidates can achieve the same result by presenting clear yes/no choices on key issues.

Leone explained that voter interest in local elections is dampened by:

Too many choices on municipal ballots.

Public confusion over who does what.

Lack of cues to help guide voters, such as political parties.

Incumbents who coast on name recognition rather than taking a stand.

Busy commuter lifestyles that dissuade civic involvement, and a lack of public interest.

“People find politics, and particularly municipal politics, boring,” he said.

[IEFBR14]

Letter to The Record editor: A loud minority hijacked the agenda (http://news.therecord.com/Opinions/LettertotheEditor/article/815852)
I am concerned about the direction the City of Waterloo has taken with respect to the recent vote on the fluoridation of water. This, to me, is an example of the tyranny of a minority and an abuse of the democratic process. We have an election where only 41 per cent of the voters cast a vote. While the vote to stop fluoridating the water was barely won, in fact it represents only 20 per cent of the eligible voters. This is ample proof that municipal councils need to look at a long-term policy related to the results of a vote on any given issue. Otherwise, as we see in the case of the fluoride question, a loud, well organized minority can hijack the agenda, vote as a block and impose its view on the whole population.

Surely it would be reasonable to have a policy which required a minimum portion of the vote, such as 60 per cent with a minimum of 50-per-cent of the electorate casting ballots, before the results would be binding. Otherwise, we face the ridiculous situation which we see in Waterloo where a minority of the voters impose their views on the whole population, overturning a practice which has been in place for decades.

The council of Waterloo Region, by giving in to this result, is simply displaying a lack of leadership, giving in to a minority at the expense of the whole community.
Note that while the letter writer is talking about the fluoridation referendum, the same concerns apply to issues like the LRT. There probably won't be a referendum on this, but local politicians are already basing their support (or lack thereof) of an issue with extremely long-term implications on what they heard at the door while campaigning during the last election.

[DHLawrence]

I can think of a great way to improve local democracy. In the next election, turf out all the incumbents and ban them from running for four years. Give the local system a total reboot with completely new faces and names. If nothing else it will make people want the old candidates back.

[David]

I can think of a great way to improve local democracy. In the next election, turf out all the incumbents and ban them from running for four years. Give the local system a total reboot with completely new faces and names. If nothing else it will make people want the old candidates back.

Would anyone be in favour of term limits?

[Greg Moore]

Would anyone be in favour of term limits?
Term limits of two electoral cycles followed by one mandatory term of ineligibility would be my preference for all levels of government. Career politicians end up uncreative and ineffective at governing for the people.

[mpd618]

Term limits of two electoral cycles followed by one mandatory term of ineligibility would be my preference for all levels of government. Career politicians end up uncreative and ineffective at governing for the people.

One of the good things about the two-tier municipal system here is that none of the councillors are career politicians.

[Spokes]

I'd have no problem with a two term limit. Guaranteeing that the cities would see new faces and ideas would be nice. It would suck though if you had someone that was GREAT, they'd have to take 4 years off after their second term

[plam]

I can think of a great way to improve local democracy. In the next election, turf out all the incumbents and ban them from running for four years. Give the local system a total reboot with completely new faces and names. If nothing else it will make people want the old candidates back.

We had that after the RIM Park incident, didn't we? Did that really help?

[DHLawrence]

Couldn't tell you; I live in Cambridge. Thanks for the condescending attitude though!

[plam]

Couldn't tell you; I live in Cambridge. Thanks for the condescending attitude though!

I meant that if term limits actually help, then they should have helped after all the councillors got booted in Waterloo after RIM Park.

[KayDubya]

One of the good things about the two-tier municipal system here is that none of the councillors are career politicians.One of the problems with it is small minded politicians who easily cave to the demands of loud minorities can shape policy for 500,000+ people.

I think term limits are a good idea. I'd also like to see or elected representatives put in a position that forces them to be leaders.
After this past election I fear some politicians feel all they have to do is hold a referendum on the big issues and avoid making the decisions on their own. Even worse, it appears many of them are making their decisions based simply on the number of emails phone calls or letters they receive for or against an issue.
While you can't do much to stop a politician from making a decision based solely to appease those who sent the most emails to his office you may be able to steer them away from holding referendums on every issue by making those referendums binding.
Perhaps they don't decide to let an uninformed or misinformed public to shape or future if they know that the public's decision is binding and can't easily be reversed.
Perhaps they educate themselves and make the decisions that they feel are best for our future.