Should they stay or should they go?

The municipality of Clarence-Rockland wants to pop the question to its ratepayers as part of the next municipal election. The question could be summed up as: Should our municipality separate from the United Counties of Prescott-Russell?
It’s a big question and one for which Clarence-Rockland is seeking advice from the Ontario Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. The municipality is also stepping up plans to study the impacts of such a split.
Clarence-Rockland Mayor Richard Lalonde has also weighed in on weighted voting at the counties by saying that his municipality deserves more of a say at the counties’ table if they decide to stay. When it comes to being part of the counties, Lalonde argues that what Clarence-Rockland pays in terms of taxes is not bringing enough payback for the municipality.
The hitch with weighted voting is that it is only called into play when a mayor asks for a recorded vote.
If the issue of weighted voting is up for discussion, perhaps the debate should include whether weighted voting should apply across the board. Why introduce new fairness measures that are only used some of the time?
There is no doubt that Clarence-Rockland is not the municipality it used to be. With urban sprawl pushing in from the west and an already-changed population demographic, many of the needs of Clarence-Rockland are not the same as those of its eastern neighbours.
Perhaps Clarence-Rockland’s changing environment should act as an early-warning system for the rest of us -- but most especially for our political and municipal leaders.
As that municipality questions the value of the services it is receiving as it remits 27.6 per cent of property taxes to the counties, it is an ideal opportunity for all municipalities to consider the value of county roads, ambulance and emergency services and social services. We all need and use these services, but it will be illuminating to see if a better deal is available for Clarence-Rockland from neighbouring Ottawa, or if going independent makes sense.
Lalonde’s quest to get the biggest bang for his taxapyers’ bucks is one all taxpayers could and should share.
The challenge of ever-rising demand for an increasing quality and level of service can perhaps be counter- balanced by healthy growth of the tax base. A look around the counties’ council table reveals mostly veteran politicians; it is a safe bet that 10 years ago, none of them anticipated the kind of growth being experienced in Clarence-Rockland. As city meets country and urban dwellers flock to the quality of life we have in rural areas, it is worth asking if we are ready with services and planning for the changes to come. Are we thinking about preserving the best of what we have, while building in what’s required for the growth that seems to be coming our way?
If separating from our regional government is the best thing for Clarence-Rockland because it is not receiving its share of services and infrastructure work from the counties, so be it.
While there are always collective considerations, political leaders must first do their utmost to ensure that taxpayer money is spent to benefit the greatest number.
L.S.