Traditionally, municipal elections have the lowest voter turnouts in the land.
Despite the fact that the issues being decided at this level are often more consequential in our day-to-day lives than those being debated provincially or federally, the public has a hard time dragging itself off the couch to vote for a mayor, council or school board.
Sometimes, that lack of interest can come back and bite a community. Just ask the city of Surrey, B.C.
The story begins five years ago, with the victory of Doug McCallum as mayor. Campaigning, in part, on a pledge to end the city’s contract with the RCMP and build a new municipal police force from scratch, Mr. McCallum argued the new arrangement would better serve the needs of the city. A lowly 33 per cent of Surrey’s residents turned out to cast a ballot.
A year later, the city got provincial approval to move ahead with its plan. A new municipal police chief was hired to oversee a broader recruitment drive. Meantime, the RCMP continued to provide Surrey with the same level of policing it had for decades.
Fast forward four years. There is a new civic election – turnout, a measly 31 per cent – and a new mayor elected: Brenda Locke. She’s voted in on a promise to – wait for it – stop the transition to a municipal police force and maintain the status quo.
Ms. Locke claimed a municipal force would be 70 per cent more expensive than the RCMP. Few, it seemed, had the time to question the veracity of her numbers.
Today, the entire affair has turned into a complete disaster – for Ms. Locke, her Surrey Connect party and, most importantly, for the city of Surrey itself.
The provincial government believes the transition to a city police force is too far along to reverse course. It has a point: the city has already spent $100-million on the project and hired more than 400 officers and staff. The government’s analysis shows that a municipal force would cost $30-million (about 20 per cent) more annually than the RCMP – not the 70-per-cent hike Ms. Locke has been suggesting. Also, going back to the RCMP would cost $72-million in severance for those already hired for the new municipal force.
Last month, Ms. Locke used her party’s majority on council to approve a 12.5-per-cent property tax increase – the largest in Metro Vancouver. This was down from the 17.5-per-cent increase originally proposed, which incited a citizens’ revolt. Of course, most of the increase is because the city is currently paying for two police forces at an extra cost of $8-million a month.
The NDP government ultimately has the trump card in this saga, and is playing it. It has laid down so many conditions for Surrey to revert back to the RCMP, as Ms. Locke desires, that it has rendered the idea almost impossible. For instance, the RCMP would need to hire more than 160 people to occupy unfilled positions in Surrey and the province has stipulated that it would not allow the national force to prioritize the hiring of more officers there over police needs elsewhere in the province, especially in rural B.C. where there are hundreds of vacancies.
The provincial government, which is represented by seven NDP MLAs in the important Surrey district, has also promised to hand the city $150-million over five years to help with the extra costs that come with a municipal force.
So it seems there won’t be any going back to the RCMP, despite the force’s insistence it is going ahead with its plan to fill 161 vacant positions in Surrey.
This has to be one of the bigger screwups in municipal government history.
It’s still far from certain how this is going to finally end. Ms. Locke is still insisting the city will revert back to the RCMP despite the province’s position and despite the enormous price tag that route carries. Meantime, city residents are wondering what the heck is going on and how it got to this point.
The whole sorry episode is a cautionary tale for other cities and towns in the country, both from a voter turnout perspective but also for communities planning to move on from the RCMP to a municipal police force. This would include several communities in Alberta.
Which is fine, as long as everyone is aware of all the potential pitfalls. That is not an endorsement of the status quo. Rather, it’s a warning: pay far more attention to what your politicians are planning to do if elected. It’s easier than complaining about it afterward, when it’s too late.