Dear Editor,

Monkey see, monkey do.

I notice that the Township of 91Ô­´´ voters are about to have the same unhappy experience as the City voters just had.

The Township wants to borrow money for a new firehall. They must have a vote to approve the loan, or obtain approval by means of the Alternative Approval Process. They decided not to have a vote. They have posted a notice on page A29 in the July 20, 2023, edition of the 91Ô­´´ Advance Times. This is the minimum notice legally required by the Community Charter.

They also would like to borrow money without having a vote, by means of a bylaw. The notice doesn’t even mention how much money will be borrowed. Unless 10 per cent of voters object to the bylaw, the Township will assume that approval has been granted, and no vote will be held.

I recognize that funds are needed for civic infrastructure. What I object to is that voters are being denied the right to vote on the matter. Some could be in favour of borrowing, while others may feel that these type of projects should be planned for and paid out of the civic budget.

I feel the use of the alternative approval process to circumvent what should be a straightforward majority vote is a cynical attack on the democratic process. I can’t help wondering if this is the new paradigm for municipal financing.

I urge 91Ô­´´ Township voters to oppose this by signing an elector response form available at the Township Civic Facility. You can have the form mailed to you by calling 604-533-6100. I can only guess why they did not mail the forms to the all the voters. Don’t forget to tell your neighbours. The deadline is 4:30 p.m. on Aug. 31, 2023. If the Township wants to borrow money to build a new fire hall, there should be a vote.

Sadly, 91Ô­´´ City taxpayers will not be allowed to vote on the $15 million loan the City has arranged. We will, however have to make the payments.

It feels like the City pulled a fast one on the electors. They decided not to have a vote, and snuck one over on us. I say they were sneaky because the City could have done a much better job of informing electors about the bylaw. All they did to inform the electors was the bare minimum, by posting a poorly worded, obscure notice in the 91Ô­´´ Advance Times, and posting the same confusing legalese on the City website.

It then became the responsibility of the taxpayers to oppose the bylaw. Happily, many did. Sadly there were not enough to force a vote.

It seems bizarre that we live in a democracy where we have to force our elected officials to have a vote on matters that have substantial impact on our lives.

Richard Penner, 91Ô­´´ City

.

• READ MORE: LETTER: City’s alternate approval process feels sneaky

• READ MORE: LETTER: Loan issue shows 91Ô­´´ City needs to rethink spending

.