Local resident Gary Mooney employed a housekeeping motion at Committee of the Whole meeting December 11 to voice his opposition to a possible third party review of counsel size and related ward boundary changes.

Tabled at the meeting was a motion to accept a staff report from clerk Catalina Blumenburg. The aim of the report was to update council matters relating to the upcoming municipal election- Voting locations, processes and key dates as well as a draft ‘lame duck’ bylaw should a threshold of new councillors be met following the October 26, 2026 election.

Ms. Blumenburg’s report also outlined a proposed timeline and explanation of a proposed plebiscite, asking the public for guidance on a potential review of council size. Providing a comment on the motion from the audience, Mr. Mooney said there were a handful of reasons not to bring a bylaw to put the size of council question on the 2026 municipal ballot including cost ($75-100,00) public apathy, a high threshold of voter turnout to make the result binding, and the fact the question’s sponsor has indicated he won’t be running in the next election.

A recent series of Size of Council meetings didn’t generate much interest or drive extensive discussion. In nearly all cases, there were more councillors in attendance than members of the public and the sessions barely eclipsed 30 minutes in length.

“Even if the threshold was reached, the councillor who pushed the downsizing through this term of council stated he won’t be running again, so he won’t be available next term to follow through on this project,” Mr. Mooney said. “Then there’s the issue of potentially obligating the next council on a project, not of their own choosing, thereby incurring expenses and using a valuable time, even if they don’t see this as a priority.”

Simply Asking the Question

Councillor Chris Braney is the largest proponent of a structure of governance review and took issue with Mr. Mooney’s comments.
“What is your fear?” Councillor Braney wondered. “I’m very confident. I know what my residents and residents right around the county have told me and that is they want this review. Furthermore, I think that this ballot question is going to bring a huge turnout that could be very much well over 50 percent, which is also very encouraging for the democratic process.”

“Me deciding not to run in the 2026 election should not have a bearing on any outcome.”

Mr. Mooney responded his main concern was the unintended consequences of a resize of council would lead to the ruination and erasure of current Communities of Interest.

He harkened back to his previous involvement with the size of council challenge launched by Lyle McBurney and Jim McPherson. In that iteration, Mr. Mooney recalled the Ontario Municipal Board Member reasoned maintaining Communities of Interest should be a main tenant of a resizing exercise.

“At the time we were focused on the representation of population adjustment to be more balanced. In their report, the member said that wasn’t the main issue, the main issue was Communities of Interest. That was burned into my mind and that’s been my position ever since.”

A motion to enact a 2026 municipal ballot question is expected to come to Shire Hall in January. In order to have the question on the ballot, the bylaw must be passed before March 1, 2026.