From the Silver Creek Community Association's Candidate Q&A series, question 2 of 7 When making decisions for the community, which concerns you more: making a decision that is unpopular today because you believe it will benefit the community in the long term, or making a decision that reflects what the majority of residents want today when you have concerns about its longer-term consequences? Why? Please also tell us about an experience from your own life that has shaped the way you approach that kind of decision.
Responses
-
Dennis LaPierre
Not all Board decisions are popular. Boards are guided by policies and legislation and sometimes those overrule popular sentiment. Boards must consider both the short and long-term consequences as well as community sentiment and, where applicable, obey the law. My approach, and my obligation to the community is to carry forward the sentiments and wishes of the community on matters and express them to the Board to feed ensuing Board discussions so that it can make a properly informed decision. Community ideas, wishes and sentiments always weigh on Board decisions. This is also why it is important to sometimes have a community delegation attend a Board meeting to add further information. Here's an example: Years ago I held a public meeting at the Falkland Community Hall over a rezoning application by the owner of the gravel pit a few KM south of Falkland on #97. Alan Hoofslut was then the owner and I believe it was about expanding his footprint on the site. The hearing was well attended and it stimulated a lot of discussion, both for and against, and in the end, I was complimented for my fairness to all concerned, for ensuring all got a chance to be heard and for running an orderly meeting. I delivered details about that public hearing to the Board and gave it a full report on the various perspectives that I heard and how it generally went. I don't remember what the final Board decision on the matter was, but I do remember that not long afterwards the business got sold to the Noble brothers and Alan moved away. I have no idea who owns it now.
-
Jon KozuskaIm not sure there is a scenario where what the people want would ever constitute bad long term the same as id never make a huge decision without asking the people. Id simply lay it out the way I've done my entire life, and id let the people decide. Thats what being a voice is all about, and that is the heart of democracy. So long term sure there could be things however wisdom and conversation should allow enough foresight you could mitigate and do what people want. I was raised to be wise enough to look at everything before making a decision, and then be strong enough to defend it. I rely heavily on those teachings and they have become core principals. Prior to moving to BC its used that same process. I spoke to my dad and brothers, got their take. I spoke to my grandmothers, and got their take, and i made the decision based on wisdom and advice. Had i not done as I was taught, id have talked myself out of it almost certainly. Instead here I am, and it was 1 of the best decisions I've ever made ! Out here I've made some of the best friends I've ever had and discovered a place where I feel home.
-
Melanie BeckettI don't know that my answer to this question will make me any more popular, but I didn't run in the electoral race for that. I would much rather make an unpopular decision because I believe it will benefit the community in the long run. I would do my best to communicate why I believe playing the long game would have it's benefits and ask for lots of feedback. So if someone made a valid argument as to why my thinking might be incorrect, I would definitely be listening. I don't believe myself infallible. To me, the only people that make decisions with short lived gains are politicians that hope they're going to get voted in again next time. They buy votes by making people happy now, but they don't really have the best interests of the community at heart. An experience from my own life? How about just about every time there's a federal election? Usually the party in power at the time is making all these "big moves", desperately trying to prove to people that they should stay in power, and usually within a few months of the election, everything goes back to the status quo. It's just them trying to get people on their side so they get votes, but the reality is that very little usually changes. I think most often, if they had the best interests of the country at heart, they would be making moves to point us in a direction of growth, whether that made them popular at the time or not.