By Willy Noiles
Niagara’s regional council, for the first time in its 41-year history, has rejected advice it sought from a local municipality on how to fill a vacant council seat.
Cindy Forster is now the Welland Riding's MPP. Municpal leaders are still struggling over how to fill her vacant seat at regional council.
In this case, the municipality was Welland and the seat was the one vacated by Cindy Forster, who won the the Welland Riding in last month’s provincial election. Forster, along with George Marshall, won the city’s two regional seats in last year’s municipal elections. Former Welland mayor Damian Goulborne finished third in the race.
When Forster’s seat was declared vacant Oct. 27, Regional council asked for Welland’s recommendation on how to fill the seat at the Region. Welland’s council began with a motion to appoint Goulborne, but that motion was defeated by one vote. City councillors then voted seven to six to hold a by-election at an estimated cost to the region of $100,000.
At this Thursday’s (November 17) regional council meeting, many councillors there raised the cost of a by-election as their reason for voting against Welland’s recommendation. The money would have come from the projected $1.2 million unaccounted for surplus from the 2011 budget.
“It’s a waste of money,” Lincoln Regional Coun. Mark Bylsma said. “I don’t think the taxpayers of the town of Lincoln should pay their portion on their regional tax levy. We need to move forward in a financially responsible method to bring our next person up.” He added the Region hasn’t held a by-election once in its history. (He failed to mention that a local council had never before asked for one, an important distinction.) St. Catharines Coun. Brian Heit echoed that. “I have a problem with them (Welland city councillors) spending my money.”
Fort Erie Coun. John Teal pointed out the hypocrisy evident in some councillors’ reasoning noting many of those raising cost as their reason for voting against Welland’s recommendation have voted in previous meetings to forego millions in development charges. “Cost is an irrelevant issue here.”
Marshall said, “Democracy is not cheap…Democracy is expensive.” He implored councillors not to reject the city’s wishes. “We asked for a recommendation and I watched the intensity of that meeting,” he said about the Nov. 1 city council meeting. “To not do it (accept their recommendation), I think, would be a major slap in the face for the people of Welland.”
Some councillors, while stating they respect Welland’s position, questioned their recommendation. St. Catharines Coun. Tim Rigby, while stating he respects Welland’s decision, took issue with the fact they could have appointed any number of people. “They have good people there and they could have sent somebody on to us.” (How can one say they respect the local council when they’re criticizing their decision-making?) St. Catharines Coun. Ronna Katzman called Welland’s decision not to appoint Goulbourne “vindictive politics at its finest.” Lincoln Mayor Bill Hodgson, while also stating he has “great respect” for Welland, said regional councillors aren’t bound to support their recommendation. “Municipal politicians ask for advice all the time…but it’s not always followed or accepted.”
St. Catharines Coun. Bruce Timms said if councillors really “respect (Welland’s) advice” they would be supporting them. “I would hope council would show respect for the recommendation of the local council…Clearly we asked for their advice so we should move ahead with the by-election.” St. Catharines Mayor Brian McMullen perhaps stated it best. “If we were afraid of the answer or didn’t want to do it, we never should have asked them.”
Grimsby Coun. Debbie Zimmerman said councillors should be congratulating Welland, not beating up on them. “Don’t bully the city of Welland because they didn’t do anything wrong. We didn’t tell them they couldn’t do this. So don’t beat them up because of the cost.”
In a recorded vote, council voted against Welland’s recommendation 14-13. With that vote having failed, Bylsma and Heit then gambled by moving a motion to appoint Goulbourne. Calling Goulbourne his “mentor,” Bylsma said by appointing the former mayor Welland would have an experienced, effective representative. But a number of councillors had qualms with the region making Welland’s decision for them. Port Colborne Mayor Vance Badawey suggested that instead of the region making the decision, it should go back to the city for their choice. “I have a real problem with us making Welland’s choice for them,”
Niagara Falls Coun. Selina Volpatti said. “Talk about dictatorship.” Timms noted the Region talks about respect, choice and collegiality, but in this case not only did they not respect the wishes of Welland but now they wanted to not only take away their choice, but also put forward a motion that was the complete opposite of the city’s recommendation. Hodgson said as a sign of respect for Welland, he would rather the issue be sent back to Welland for their appointment recommendation.
Council rejected appointing Goulbourne in a 15-12 recorded vote. Badawey and Zimmerman then proposed sending the issue back to Welland asking for their opinion on whom to appoint, but this time a by-election was off the table. This vote carried 16-10 in another recorded vote. Bylsma was not there to vote having walked out after his motion failed.
Welland Mayor Barry Sharpe’s anger and frustration with the course of events was evident. “This has been as far from a democratic process as I believe anyone could envision in a fictional depiction of what a regional council and upper-tier level of government could engage in.” Welland city councillors, staff and residents in the audience applauded his comments. Zimmerman agreed, calling regional council’s decision “totally unfair” to Welland. “We sat here tonight and had two votes, when the mayor had given us specific direction to respect the city of Welland’s decision and we didn’t vote for it. We put them in a terrible predicament…He asked us to vote to support the decision of a by-election so don’t go pounding your fists on the table when you voted no.”
In an interview following the votes, Sharpe, who had voted at the city level to appoint Goulbourne but voted his council’s wishes at the regional level, said the Region has put Welland in a “difficult position.” The supported vote asks for Welland’s recommendation by Dec. 8, but Welland’s city council doesn’t meet again until Dec. 6. And Sharpe’s unable to call an emergency meeting sooner because he’ll be away. In addition, Sharpe noted the second vote effectively rules out the chances of Goulbourne being appointed because it would require Welland city councillors to vote to reconsider their previous decision. A two-thirds majority is needed for a reconsideration vote. Considering how split Welland councillors were, a two-thirds reconsideration vote seems unlikely. And if Welland councillors did somehow vote to reconsider their decision and name Goulbourne, a similar reconsideration vote would be needed at the Region.
Two Welland residents who were runner-ups in the last municipal election had indicated they would run for the regional seat in a by-election: former Welland city councillor David Alexander, who placed second in the race for Mayor, and Larry Lemelin, who was a runner-up in one of the ward races.
Willy Noiles is a Niagara journalist who has spent years covering regional affairs and is a contributing reporter for Niagara At Large.
(We invite you to share your views on this post below. Please remember that we only post comments from individuals willing to share their name and we reserve the right to reject views that may be defamatory or overly insulting to other parties.)
Niagara At Large 
I see this as yet another insult to democracy. Profit over people.
LikeLike
Funny, when councils proceed quickly, people say it’s boring … and don’t vote. When things get messy, they throw up their hands in despair … and don’t vote (only 49% in this past Ontario election, 31% in the 2006 Welland election).
Too bad people don’t realize why we went to the Cenotaph on Remembrance Day – to honour the veterans who fought to give us freedom: the right to Vote, and change our kings Peacefully.
Three cheers for the councillors who were so eloquent in explaining the cost of democracy to their colleagues and the public.
LikeLike
Weltland Council should promote one of their members to Regional Councillor, and then appoint the next in line can date from the last election to City Council. It is simple, and standard practice in situations like this. The introduction of Goulbourne into the mix is the problem.
Simple, democratic and cost effective. Anything else is either all politics or too expensive.
LikeLike
Welland City Councillors did not run for Regional Council in the last election, Goulbourne did. He campaigned, knocked on doors and advertised for the position. Why should it be acceptable to appoint the next in line to replace a city councillor but not acceptable to appoint the next in line from Regional Council candidates?
LikeLike
The City of Welland made it’s choice , the Region should mess out of their decision, do we need any proof what a club the Region really is? the Municipal Act gives two choices they made one so live with it. Councillors terms used to be 3 years and before that 2 years, there are 3 years left so let Welland have an election. I have never seen much brain power at Region so what makes them so special anyway.
LikeLike
One way or the other this should be WELLAND’s Choice not the bloated regional Government !!!!!!!!
LikeLike
I agree. This elephant in the Niagara Room is a total farce. Bloated only begins to cover it. How many Exempt employees are there at The Region, making obscene salaries that most of us can only gasp at? How many Managers? And, what/who do they manage?
The NEDC is a joke –albeit a supposed arms length part of the Region. Communication with taxpayers is to laugh at. Always has been, for decades.
Someone I know was once hired as the Communications person at the Region. What can that person tell us about communication with the regular guy, the local families, the disenfranshised, I wonder. If the NHS is despised, as it rightfully is, the Region is next on that list — what a waste. This is just straight laugh-track area.
LikeLike
It’s too bad that a bylaw can’t be passed that anyone who gets elected should spend a designate length of time before they change political careers this would solve the problem and also dictate the way a person elected should be appointed, elected to fill the vacant seat and this should be a Regional wide vote by the citizens.
LikeLike
In the 41 year history of the Niagara Regional Government there has never been a bi-election to replace a vacated seat on Regional Council.
In its 41 years the replacement has always been chosen from the DULY ELECTED NEXT IN LINE. To choose someone who has not faced the rigors of an election WOULD BE a mockery of democracy.
The demand for a $130,000 bi-election is predicated on the fact that the next in line is out of favour with Welland City Council.
But how many elections would have to be held to garner the desired results of installing of a candidate more to Councils liking?
The charge that without a SECOND ELECTION the process is somehow flawed is not only bogus but Fallacious.
3 Questions:
1. Would the Welland City Council be in favour of a bi-election if the city had to pay for it?
2. Will this precedent mean future demands from our 12 municipalities for bi-elections?
3. Why has it taken 41 years to find a remedy for this simple situation?
LikeLike
Logical conclusions Preston, except that you’ve chosen one Part of history, and ignored others.
1. Somewhere in the 1950’s, there was a change in term for municipal governments from 1 year to 2.
About 1990, this changed from 2 to 3 years.
About 2006, this cahnged from 3 to 4 years.
ALL of these changes occurred for REPRESENTATIVE governments that canNOT Fall or be Recalled.
2. The term of munici[pal governments is not the same as for our Provincial and Dominion parliaments which are RESPONSIBLE – they can Fall if/whenever the government loses the confidence of the majority of MP’s.
3. Three years remain in the term of Welland’s 2nd Regional Councillor (the Mayor is the 1st). This term is 3 times longer than the original term of councillors 60+ years ago.
In short, conditions have changed for replacing a vacant councillor. If only 1 year were left in a term, appoint someone – but even then, would the person who came next 3 years ago, still be interested or available?
Perhaps, given the longer term, perhaps councils should create rules to avoid this in future, but remember that existing rules were created to allow councils to evaluate local conditions in each unique situation. Has that changed?
LikeLike
The best choice for this seat would be Alexander certainly NOT Goulbourne….
LikeLike
Alexander did not run for Regional Council in the last election, Goulbourne did.
LikeLike
In the 41 year history of the Niagara Regional Government there has never been a bi-election to replace a vacated seat on Regional Council.
In its 41 years the replacement has always been chosen from the DULY ELECTED NEXT-IN-LINE. To choose someone who has not faced the rigors of a full election WOULD BE a mockery of democracy.
Why in 41 years could our Regional Council not plan and prepare for this simple situation?
The demand for a $130,000 bi-election is predicated on the fact that the next in line is out of favour with Welland City Council.
Sure, but would the Welland City Council be in favour of a bi-election if the City of Welland had to pay for it?
And, how many elections would have to be held to garner the desired results and the installing of a candidate more to Councils liking?
The charge that without a SECOND ELECTION the process is somehow flawed is not only bogus but Fallacious.
Question:
Will this precedent mean future demands from all 12 municipalities for bi-elections?
LikeLike
I’m going to place this cow pie firmly on the lap of Regional Council first, then Welland. Tradition is one thing, but when terms for municipal Councillors went from two to three and now finally four years, absolutely nothing has been done to reform succession procedures. With longer terms is it merely good enough to persist with a 41 years model of tradition?
The haughty intransigents who roam the hallowed chambers on St. David’s Road can make decisions to spend our money with mercurial speed, yet when it comes to governance- nothing- Nada.
I find it distasteful that from the Welland side it has boiled down to personalities. As an ex-resident of Welland, I am no fan of Damian Goulbourne, but my feelings about the gentleman or anybody else’s are irrelevant. Had the third runner-up been a likable sort, would this controversy even been an issue? I somehow doubt it.
Make a decision, pass the appropriate Bylaws and be done with it. We’ve had a rare glimpse of what a farce our local governments can be when dealing with difficult issues. I hope now more people will pay more attention of what goes on so to be able to make informed decisions about who we want to represent us three years from now.
We have enormous challenges facing us in Niagara and this shouldn’t be one of them.
LikeLike
Welland should be willing to bear the cost of an election to replace its councillor.
LikeLike
Damian Goulbourne should have been appointed as the replacement for Welland. He ran for Regional Council because that was the position he was interested in winning. He spent his money on being elected and received thousands of votes. Now people are coming out of the woodwork to just be appointed without going through an election. Welland City Council should have appointed him and when they didn’t Regional Council should have.
LikeLike
The problem with Damian Goulbourne is that he has been rejected not once, not twice, but three times. In reverse order: he was rejected as regional chair (which went to Gary Burroughs), he was rejected in his bid for regional council in 2010, and was essentially rejected in the 2006 mayoral election. In that election, 2/3 of the pitiful few who bothered to cast a vote voted for someone else. Mr. Goulbourne only won because, with so many running to unseat him, the vote was so split he was able to pull through.
It isn’t that Mr. Goulbourne was out of favour with council. Council recognised that he was out of favour with the people of Welland.
Regional Council asked Welland for a recommendation, and when they didn’t get the answer they wanted, tried to impose it themselves. If a byelection was not an option, they should have said so up front-but that would have contravened the Municipal Act. I am in full agreement with Angus Scott’s recent editorial in the Tribune. Mayor Sharpe should go back to council and tell them in no uncertain terms, that Welland has made its recommendation, and expects it to be carried out.
LikeLike
They appointed Tim Rigby in St. Catharines when Peter Partington took the chairman job. Not everybody was crazy about Tim Rigby, but he ran and came in seventh place. So, obviously Goulbourne does have some support. Or does the City of Welland really want to run a $130,000 by-election?
LikeLike
Many good ideas have surfaced in this blog.
How about this ‘compromise’ idea:
* Welland will conduct an Online Poll (many newspapers do these now), listing anyone who registers with them to run for Regional Councillor, and giving any Welland citizen the right to ‘vote’.
(This will Not be a full legal ballot according to the Municipal Election Act, but should strive to be reasonably correct; it will be only be an Unofficial Poll to guide Council in appointing a replacement Regional Councillor.)
* Then Welland Council asks Regional Niagara Council to appoint the ‘winner’ after the close of ‘voting’, assuming this poll can run effectively.
OTOH, here are a few obvious problems to solve to maintain the “Integrity of the Vote” before proceeding (Integrity & Trust & Secrecy are the the core reasons our democratic voting process works):
* How to determine that only Welland citizens ‘vote’, not just anyone with a computer?
* How to determine that ‘voters’ will be over age 18, Canadian citizens, etc?
Here’s a not-so-obvious problem:
* It’s easy to prevent people from voting more than once – most web votes record the IP address of the voter’s computer and won’t allow subsequent votes. However, wouldn’t this mean that Someone could do a computer survey and learn how a person ‘voted’?
What say you? Can it be made to work? Suggestions to make it work please? Other suggestions?
LikeLike