Wisdom On Public Input Sessions

As one of the Editorial Board members, I had an opportunity this week to meet with someone I consider to be a very wise and practical man. For many years he has quietly served our Township in a volunteer capacity and with little recognition. He has no special interests, and is TRULY only concerned with our community. He has been distressed at our state of affairs and the fact that our community pride has been tarnished with the current political climate.

At one point during our conversations we talked about public open houses and public input sessions. We agreed that public input is necessary and good for our community. But it seems that our current system is flawed in a BIG way. Lately some political leaders are using "public input" as a divisive tool that seeks nothing but to advance their political agendas. The results of these sessions create an "us and them" mentality in the minds of the participants. Even though the groups that turn out represent a minuscule fraction of the real population of a neighbourhood or the ToL as a whole, these people feel they are the majority. This has intimidated many residents that may have opposing views and has resulted in the non-militant people quietly listening to these groups and not speaking publicly. After all, what's the point when it is clear that a couple of politicians are against you and are pandering to the crowd.

This wise man that I know and trust made a very good point. He has observed many of these public processes as have I and has come to roughly the same conclusions. Many of the people that attend do so out of an emotional drive because of some proposed development that will impact their immediate area. They do not read the staff reports or details of the issue and claim to have no time to do so. They rely on their neighbours to provide "the facts" over the fence. Before attending the public input session, they are determined to defeat this development at all cost and believe that Township staff and some politicians have tried to "push this through" or in some way conspired to make their lives miserable.

At the public sessions they bite a donut and drink the coffee. Some may take a cursory look at the story boards, but most would rather give staff hell, ask questions and then not allow staff to answer. But, the bite of the donut and a sip of coffee has suddenly made them "experts" on the issue and they know far more than the engineers and planners. They appear at the council meeting where some politicians smile and glow.

The meeting begins with the sideshow kicking into high gear. Pandering to the crowd now takes priority over any real and meaningful care for our community. Despite the fact that mayor and council are meant to speak with each other during the meeting, that is scrapped in favour of public speeches and the putting down of other councillors that oppose them. The crowd goes wild and cheerful political smiles abound. The Grand Finale is a passionate opposition vote for the subject at hand. Major pandering to the crowd, vocal opposition to those councillors in favour of the issue, etc. Is this community better for all this? You be the judge.

How Not To Obtain Public Input

Opinion

When the Township of Langley lost former Mayor Kurt Alberts, in the opinion of our Editorial Board, we lost a significant piece of what is Langley. Under Mayor Alberts everyone was treated with respect and everyone's voice was heard. People weren't always content with the outcome of the council vote, but most felt their opinions mattered and were taken into account. Of course there will always be the fringe of malcontents that even Mother Theresa could not please, but for the most part community pride and unity was evident.

Public input sessions and open houses are now being used by some Township politicians as a clear device to stir citizen anger, distrust and ultimately community disunity. Neighbour is suddenly against neighbour. People are allowed to act out in the public hearings that are an extension of council. Like a sideshow, the Chair (Mayor Rick Green) allows applause and booing. Disrespectful people are allowed to heckle Township Councillors openly. As the Chair despises these men, he allows this. Anyone wishing to speak against what the pack wants, must now think twice if they wish to speak publicly. After all, who wants to be publicly humiliated when the mayor and some council members condone this behaviour?

Although 160-175 people show up for these Public Hearings, like elections these numbers are far from the majority of Township residents that now number over 100,000. It is VERY clear that the Township of Langley desperately needs a return to civility and tolerance. It is mandatory that Public Hearings not be used to further the political ambitions of a couple and be divisive tools that will divide our community for the long-term.

Public input and involvement is critical to a municipal government. We elect officials to provide governance and direction to staff. We entrust these men and women with decision-making authority. Yet with far too many decisions to call a public hearing on everything, we need to be reasonable people. We need to express our opinion while respecting our neighbours. We need to inform and encourage those around us to make proper decisions, but we must do so without threats and disrespectful intolerance.

The Township of Langley is in desperate need of a new system of public input that draws the majority of residents into the mix and allows for a more complete public input process. The Township of Langley needs leadership that is not divisive and self-serving.