5,240 voters in 2013 supported the ward system of municipal governance but it wasn’t enough. Some will say that settles the issue in perpetuity or forever.
The plebiscite was a vote on the ward system to help find one of many solutions to end the disparity between the north and south in such issues like absence of a high school north of the river or the unequal distribution of recreational facilities.
The city council favored the at-large system, and allocated $30,000 to present a side to the issue. They held a townhall information meeting hosted by popular ex-councillor Larry Pimm who extolled the virtues of the current at-large system. Reminding everyone; “To dance with the one that brought you”. No ward system advocate was invited.
Compare city hall, with $30,000 against a few volunteers with no budget, and you have an epic “David and Goliath” situation.
5,240 voters supported it, considering that the majority of school board trustees garnered fewer votes and they believe they represent the citizens.
The vote was held four years ago during an election, and some will argue that settles the matter forever. No matter that about 10% of the population moves every year, and that someone who is 18,19, 20, or 21 now could vote now that could not have voted then.
One suggested that it would be disrespectful of the voters in 2013 if we were to have another plebiscite in the future. Why do we have elections every 4 years? Possibly to bring in new ideas, people and ways to deal with new issues and events, to change course when a current course is not working?
The major is issue was the disparity between north of the river and south of the river. The last school built north of the river was in 1985, the lack of a high school north of the river and the fact that there is only one recreational centre north of the river with 11 south of the river. The ward system was brought up as a possible way to ensure their voice was heard.
Wards versus at large: Niagara Falls (population of 88,071),candidates discuss. If you want to get in the game, some say a ward system is helpful. … Now, more than a decade into an at-large system where eight councillors are elected to represent the entire city, some candidates are calling for a return to the ward system.
It may better represent the city, but some people find it confusing. One political scientist says we should consider bringing back the ward system with the civic election one week away.
A ward system, essentially, has an elected representative from varying neighbourhoods around the city.
Langara College political scientist Peter Prontzos says it’s a little more democratic and things won’t be rushed through council because there are more voices to be heard and more issues brought to the table.
But he warns there are cons.
“It may be a little more confusing in some ways and there may be occasional gridlock on city council, but I think that’s relatively minor.”
He says right now those who run for office are people with money who only represent wealthy neighbourhoods where something like public transit may not be issue.
Issues like no high school or biased distribution of recreational centres, may get on council’s agenda and be heard through a ward system.
Issues like; On the north side we have (1) the Dawe Centre while on the south side we have; (10), the Downtown Recreation Centre, Michener Aquatic Centre, Downtown Arena, Centrium complex, Collicutt Recreation Centre, Pidherney Curling Centre, Kinex Arena, Kinsmen Community Arenas, Red Deer Curling Centre, and the under-construction Gary W. Harris Centre. The city is also talking about replacing the downtown recreation centre with an expanded 50m pool.

The volunteers proposed 4 wards with 2 councillors per ward, and 5,240 voters supported the idea. Others thought not yet and some were totally against it, period. Should the politicians write off 5,240 voters as a non issue? City should be inclusive of everyone, including those not crowding the stage during the discussions on the latest issue of the day.

Jordy Smith was quite eloquent in his defence of the ward system;
“Wards provide direct representation within the city council. They allow anyone who sees an issue in the city to go to their particular councillor and voice their concern. In this situation, the councillor ensures the person’s, and their district’s, voice is heard. If they don’t represent their community well, their constituents can vote for a new councillor in the next election.
In our current system, a person can reach out to some or all of Red Deer’s councillors, but if the issue isn’t prevalent across the entire city, it is unlikely to enter the council meeting. Important neighbourhood issues may take a backseat to other matters in distant parts of the city. This scenario isn’t always a problem in at-large systems, but it often favours certain parts of a city more than others. This issue is especially true when a majority of councillors all live in a similar part of the city.
In Red Deer, seven of our eight councillors live on the South-East side of the river; in fact, many of our past councils have had disproportionate representation from the South-East side. A ward system gives each part of Red Deer direct representation and a voice in council decisions.”
The point is that the “Ward System” is not a panacea to the disparity issue and no one thinks it is but it could be a step in addressing the issue. Many candidates talk about the “Riverlands” as the panacea to downtown issues, but it is not, it is but a step to addressing the issues.
I ask the candidates who have said that the vote should stand and not be voted on again out of respect for the 2013 voters, should we let the federal vote of 2015, where we elected a Liberal government and the provincial vote of 2015, where we elected a NDP government stand in perpetuity? I didn’t think so. That is why we have votes, because we may change our mind. Thank you.

Read more about the Red Deer Municipal Election on Todayville.