Councillors Should Have to State 'WHY'

Coldstream Councillor Richard Enns was the only hold-out Monday night when Council voted to allow construction of the next phase at Coldstream Meadows,  The Terraces.

Lucky seniors indeed who choose to age in these future Coldstream Meadows homes...

The Morning Star story on Coldstream Meadows stated that Enns declined to give a reason why he voted Nae on the development.

Why is it that councillors are not required to state a reason for their vote?

There's a 29-page publication by Staples, McDannold Stewart entitled "A Handbook for Municipal Councils under the Community Charter and the Local Government Act", November 2008.
Under "Voting Rules (123)", page 15, there is no requirement for a councillor to state a reason for their voting either YAE or NAE.  Even a non-vote by a councillor is deemed to have been a vote. 

So much for knowing whether a councillor shares a taxpayer's view on a topic.

A resident may have personally been against a topic, but without knowing WHY the councillor voted against it, how do you know if his reason would be considered by YOU to be valid?
i.e. logical in your opinion to warrant a check-mark beside his name on the ballot at the next municipal vote.


"But provincial legislation does declare local government a 'natural person', grins Kia.

...as though that's important...

So much for transparency...