Is the OMB Stifling Democracy?

I’ve said before that the Ontario Municipal Board is broken, and the process needs an overhaul. The best I can come up with is a jury system that drafts residents, business owners and employees in disputed areas to ad hoc committees for a given period (three months? six months?) to hear arguments from both sides — that means the poor, downtrodden residents (oh, please) and the diabolical builders (oh, please again) both.

In the Star this week, Martin Regg Cohn says the OMB stifles democracy. He says that the OMB second-guesses democratically elected representatives, and he’s right — but so someone should. Our elected officials are bias-holding, fallible, flip-flop-able human beings, and it’s impossible to get to know all their quirks, frames of reference, and personal histories before electing them to city council. Once elected, not one of their decisions should be treated like it was handed down from Mt. Sinai. As the saying goes, democracy needs to be more than two wolves and a lamb deciding what they’ll have for lunch.

Democracy is not a state of being, it’s a process. Elected officials should be second-guessed regularly, and I applaud any citizen who gets involved, whether to bring concerns to the OMB or to picket the Prime Minister. Election is not a get out of jail free card — it doesn’t mean that, once seated, you represent the citizens who elected you without any further input.

The Ontario Municipal Board, like all government or quasi-government agencies, is bloated and mired in red tape. (Why do you think politics are appealing only to left-brainers as a career? Why are our politicians almost all lawyers and business people? Because the artists, writers and musicians are too busy creating, the chefs too busy cooking, the carpenters too busy building to put up with it.)

The OMB’s Waterloo Region ruling that granted developers access to more prime farmland than they likely should have under the provincial Places to Grow Act is indeed suspicious, and may be an indication that bloat has turned into rot. The OMB shouldn’t be able to trash the province’s long-term vision.

Premier Kathleen Wynne said this month she’ll make the OMB more accountable to the public, and so she should. There isn’t a government body in Canada that shouldn’t be transparent and accountable to the public.

Sadly, the fact is that most of us don’t pay much attention to politics, period, let alone municipal politics. Without a horse in the race or an avid interest in the subject, most residents aren’t going to get worked about the OMB. Municipal Affairs Minister Linda Jeffrey told the Association of Municipalities of Ontario conference in Ottawa that the public has said that the rules “can sometimes” be too complex, and the delays and appeals can be frustrating. They ARE too complex, and the delays ARE frustrating. So fix the process. She said they would fix it, by “making it simpler and more effective.” Now, there’s a thought. Simple and effective government. Why didn’t we think of that?

She said her ministry would begin a consultation process this fall to “enable municipalities, community groups and stakeholders to provide feedback on this issue and help us develop solutions.” Aren’t we all stakeholders in this issue?

NDP MPP Rosario Marchese is pushing a private member’s bill to exempt Toronto from the OMB. It has passed second reading in the legislature, and would give the City authority over zoning bylaws. But without some iteration of the OMB, who’s going to watch-dog the city? Oh yeah, I forgot, second-guessing elected officials stifles democracy.

Toronto city council last year voted 34-5 for exemption from the OMB, which should surprise no one. Who likes to be second-guessed? City councillors, not the most ego-free, Zen bunch in the first place, are bound to get their backs up at the mere suggestion that their actions should be questioned. Just about everyone I know under the age of 70 gets their back up when their decisions are questioned. But umbrage has no place in governance.

The biggest criticism levelled at the OMB is that it favours developers over neighbourhood activists who lack the resources to hire lawyers and planners. It’s said that the OMB too often does an end-run around city planners.

Cohn rightfully says it “seems only fair to allow for a locally run, arm’s-length appeals mechanism to guard against errors of law or lapses in due process.” He also says “substituting the often arbitrary judgment of outside OMB appointees for on-the-ground assessments by local councillors leaves us all going in circles,” but judgments, no matter how they seem, are never arbitrary, and these “on-the-ground” assessments will have biases of their own.

We take pains to ensure that a criminal trial and its decision-makers are as unbiased as possible. Heck, even poetry contests are blind-judged. If we get the government we deserve, didn’t we also get the OMB we deserve? The only way to fix it is to get involved, and let your duly elected officials know how you think it should be fixed. After that, we need to stay involved. That’s not stifling democracy; that’s making the most of it.