With the municipal election approaching, I believe voters deserve to consider not only what candidates promise, but also how our current elected representatives have responded to residents who have raised legitimate concerns.
For the past two years, I have corresponded extensively with the Municipality regarding concerns about our Home Occupation provisions and the Municipality’s new Bed and Breakfast bylaws. I have asked questions, requested clarification, provided information, and given our elected representatives multiple opportunities to discuss these issues publicly.
To date, not one sitting councillor has responded to me directly.
I find that unacceptable.
I am not suggesting that councillors must agree with my position. They don’t. Elected officials are entitled to disagree with constituents. But when a resident repeatedly raises concerns about municipal bylaws and asks for nothing more than a public review of those bylaws, I believe the appropriate response from elected representatives is to engage in the discussion—not simply remain silent.
Instead, my questions and concerns have effectively been directed through municipal staff, the CAO and municipal lawyers. I have been given explanations about how the Municipality interprets the bylaws, but I have not seen our elected representatives step forward and publicly address the underlying policy questions.
That is what I find particularly disturbing.
My request has never been for Council to automatically rule in my favour. My request has been for Council to review the Home Occupation provisions and the new B&B bylaws publicly, consider whether they are achieving what they were intended to achieve, and determine whether changes or clarification are warranted.
That seems like a reasonable request in a democracy.
Bylaws affect everyone in our community. They establish the rules under which businesses operate, determine what residents can and cannot do on their properties, and can have significant implications for neighbourhoods and the character of our municipality. Those rules deserve public scrutiny, particularly when questions arise about how they are being interpreted and applied.
What concerns me most is not simply the particular issue I have raised. It is the precedent.
If elected representatives will not engage directly with a resident who has spent two years asking questions and requesting a public policy review, then what exactly is the role of an elected representative?
Residents should not have to navigate layers of administration and legal interpretation simply to have their elected councillors acknowledge and discuss a legitimate policy concern.
The upcoming election gives voters an opportunity to ask every candidate a very simple question:
Will you listen to residents, engage with difficult issues, and be willing to publicly review municipal bylaws when legitimate concerns are raised?
I believe accountability requires more than attending Council meetings and voting on agendas. It requires being accessible to the people who elected you, being willing to hear criticism, and having the courage to engage when an issue is uncomfortable or contentious.
I hope voters will keep that in mind when they cast their ballots.
Because municipal government is supposed to be government by the people—not government at arm’s length from the people.
Kevin Carson
