Suburban/rural interests dominate

Re: Council approves urban boundary expansion, big intensification goal

City council’s decision to expand Ottawa’s boundary reflects the serious division between how urban and suburban/rural interests are represented on council.

This follows on the heels of other similar decisions, such as council’s support for the unfortunate addition to the Château Laurier and the mayor’s lack of leadership on sustainable closures of urban streets to provide recreational opportunities during the COVID -19 pandemic.

Mayor (Jim) Watson preferred to leave such initiatives to local councillors rather than taking a citywide approach, leaving Ottawa to languish with Toronto as one of the least progressive urban centres in Canada in this regard.

Coun. Jan Harder’s vote in favour of expanding Ottawa’s urban boundary on the basis that all Ottawans should have the right to the type of housing they desire is another seriously misguided 1950s perception, one that is likely to have long-term negative environmental and economic consequences.

Ottawa cannot afford to continue growing outward and must actively pursue a more coherent and thoughtful densification approach.

Two changes might help remedy the suburban/rural dominance of city council.

Firstly, why not amend the current selection process for committee chairs and membership so that the mayor does not uniquely select those whom he knows are favourable to his own positions?

Secondly, developers are at least perceived to exercise excessive influence on the election of suburban/rural councillors through the electoral funding process.

Let’s develop a new approach that ensures the interests of all Ottawans are properly and democratically represented.