It is a rare thing for politicians to draw praise. They usually draw fire, so the recent letter to the editor praising the rural directors of Areas B and C certainly deserves attention. Directors Fleming and Macnabb received accolades for their decision not to look at the possible benefits of one municipal government for Greater Vernon.
The writer, Chris Edwards, refers to study completed in 2008 that supports the area directors’ action to ignore this issue. Edwards reported that incorporation was the preferred option. The possibility of another mayor and six councillors added to an already crowded political landscape sent shivers down my spine and was my motivation to obtain a copy of the study, which in fact was a mail-out survey.
From my experience, things are always more complicated than they first seem especially when it comes to politics.
The survey was sent out by the RDNO to more than 5,000 households within the boundaries of electoral areas (B, C, D, E and F). The recipients were asked to respond by return mail to each of following two questions regarding governance.
1. Do you want to change the way your electoral area is governed, either by joining an existing municipality or becoming a separate municipality. Yes or No.
2. If change happens, which option would you prefer? Join an existing municipality or create a new municipality?
Of the 5,709 surveys that were delivered RDNO received 1,103 replies; 19 per cent. To the first question, 20 per cent responded yes and 80 per cent responded no. I will leave it to others to debate the ambiguous and dilemma-producing nature of the initial survey question. To my mind, the structure of the first question was likely to produce a negative response.
Proceeding to the results of the second question, we discover that if change in governance were to be somehow imposed, the respondents were split 49 per cent against joining an existing municipality and 51 per cent for creating a new municipality.
Despite the almost even results to the second question, we do see the source of data that inspired Edwards’ comment about the incorporation of electoral areas.
So where does this all lead?
Well for those who agree with the letter writer, it justifies the end of any consideration of governance changes here in the sunny North Okanagan, particularly when it comes to electoral areas.
Well perhaps not. Remember that we know from experience that things often more complicated than they appear. RDNO fortunately broke the results the down into logical groupings of EAs to illustrate some interesting variances.
The variant results of most interest to residents of Greater Vernon are found in the EA grouping of B and C (Swan Lake and BX). To question one, 75 per cent were not favour of any change in governance. Results similar to the whole survey.
To question two, however, which assumes a governance change: 56 per cent of who answered this question (70 per cent of respondents) preferred the option of joining an existing municipality over incorporating. The total survey results had initially masked the surprising preference to amalgamate by a small but clear majority of respondents in BX-Swan Lake to the second question in the 2008 RDNO survey. Interesting?
This finding is uncomfortable for those who point to this RDNO survey and claim there is no support or interest for looking at governance in the EAs. Certainly in Areas B and C this may not be the case.
Perhaps some of those 56 per cent signed a more recent survey on governance. That would make things really complicated.
Shawn Lee
Vernon
