GORE BAY—A draft proposal up for consideration among municipalities within the Manitoulin Planning Board would see, among other things, only the affected municipality/municipalities calling for a weighted vote on a land use application within its municipal boundaries.
“This sounds very constructive,” stated Austin Hunt, to a draft proposal-motion put forward at last week’s Manitoulin Planning Board (MPB) meeting.
“All municipalities will have the chance to provide their input,” said Planning Board Chair Ken Noland.
Elva Carter had earlier provided the board with a list of comments that had been provided by municipalities on the proposal for weighted voting, posed by the Northeast Town. Burpee-Mills had indicated in a resolution they are not in favour of it being in place for administration related matters, or if it affects more than one municipality, unless all members of the affected municipalities request the weighted vote. As well, they felt a board member should only call for a weighted vote for proposals solely within their own municipality.
Billings objected to the weighted vote concept and indicated that should it be in effect that the weighted vote would only apply to issues directly related to those municipalities who have a weighted vote.
The Town of Gore Bay commented that it did not feel the current model is a problem and in fact, it has fairly represented the member municipalities for many years with few issues until now and that the town feels changes to board representation or the use of proportional voting would create an unfair advantage for larger municipalities such as the Northeast Town and Central Manitoulin, while other smaller or unincorporated municipalities lose representation and/or voting rights.
Central Manitoulin council approved letting the MPB know that it would be in favour of using the weighted assessment approach to voting when it is requested to be used, but otherwise continue with the one vote-one member per municipality/unorganized township.
As well, Doug Head, appointed member for the unincorporated municipalities, stated in a letter to the board in May, “In conclusion I would reluctantly support the proposal if amended to add the necessary support of at least three municipalities plus the one proposing the weighted vote.”
Mr. Head said, “the whole thing is stupid. It is like the Northeast Town is saying if we don’t do what they want they will act like a bunch of babies taking their bat and ball and going home. This is b.s…. why would they have more votes and everyone else has one vote.”
“I’ve mentioned previously that Cockburn Island council is resigned to this happening, and is in favour of keeping the board together as it is now. Our council is not going to make a fuss,” said Brent St. Denis.
Weighted voting, “could certainly make a big difference on decisions,” said Keith Legge.
However, Mr. St. Denis stated, “my prediction is that if we get a call for a weighted vote once in three years I will be surprised.”
Bruce Wood, the Northeast Town representative on the board, agreed the weighted vote would very rarely be used.
Lee Hayden felt that there would have to be conditions in place as to when the weighted vote could be used.
“If we go with a weighted vote we would have to look at how it is set up. My idea is you could only call for a weighted vote if it affects their municipality only,” said Mr. Noland. “When, for instance, a budget vote is taken, it affects more than one municipality and a weighted vote couldn’t be called for.”
Mr. Wood provided a proposal on behalf of the Northeast Town for consideration. It would proposed the existing voting process staying the same, in effect, unless a member specifically requests a weighted vote either before, or after, a vote; only the affected municipality can call for a weighted voted on any consent to sever within its municipal boundaries; the model for weighting of votes is based on the requisition model as attached; and the option for calling for a weighted vote is open to any member on any issue with the exception of consents to sever as identified previously.
“We have to come up with what changes we want to see,” said Mr. Noland. “I don’t agree with a weighted vote being called after a vote has taken place.”
“Only two municipalities would benefit from that,” stated Mr. Head.
After further discussion, Mr. St. Denis put forward a motion which was seconded by Mr. Hayden that the following be distributed to member municipalities as the draft proposal for weighted voting at the Manitoulin Planning Board; 1-the existing voting process stays in effect unless a member specifically requests a weighted vote before a vote; 2-without unanimous consent for a weighted vote, a requested weighted vote is automatically deferred to be placed on the agenda for the next regular meeting; 3-only the affected municipality/municipalities can call for a weighted vote on a land use application within its municipal boundaries; 4-the model for weighted voting is based on the percent of requisition models; and 5-a weighted vote is adopted if the total vote exceeds 50 percent and has the support of a minimum of three municipalities.”
It was agreed this draft proposal will be sent to all planning board member municipalities for their input and brought back to the MPB.
