There is a better structure for local governance for Ottawa-Carleton than the mega-city and tri-city structures currently being discussed. It is based on a concept of twin core cities and three satellite cities with a regional government. This concept addresses the fundamental flaws of the mega-city and tri-city structures and would create a more effective, efficient, and workable governance system.

The "mega-city" concept advocated by the regional government and the city of Ottawa is unlikely to receive endorsement from the other municipalities and would be inefficient and unwieldy in practice. For instance, it doesn’t make sense to have a councillor from Cumberland involved in making land use decisions in Kanata when they may know little about that community. Nor does it make sense to have a councillor from downtown Ottawa involved in making decisions for rural areas, when there are fundamentally different issues at stake.

Local services, such as community planning, development control and local street infrastructure are more efficiently delivered locally and better decisions are usually made when people close to that community are making those decisions.

The tri-city model also has some fundamental problems. A three-city region would have each city awkwardly split in half by the greenbelt or Rideau River. It is unrealistic to expect people from Orleans to identify with Gloucester’s communities or for those in Kanata to feel they are part of Nepean because of these significant geographic barriers. In addition, the Tri-City Authority could be dominated by one municipality (Ottawa) in regional decision-making.

The region has a clear geographic structure defined by the Ottawa River, the Rideau River, and the greenbelt. Using these natural features as an organizing framework, the region can be divided into 5 logical and distinct municipalities: two "core" cities within the greenbelt and three satellite municipalities beyond - one to the east, west, and south. This reduces the number of municipalities from 11 to 5, yet retains a manageable set of administrative units and the heritage of each region.

Two cities are better than one for the "core" area, as this avoids having a single dominant city in the region. We suggest that the Rideau River be used to delineate the urban core into eastern and western halves, or "twins", to provide a balanced system.

We also believe a regional government should be retained but with its responsibilities clarified. One role of regional government is to deliver services that cross municipal boundaries in a more efficient manner. In B.C., municipalities can opt-in or out of services delivered by regional districts as a check to ensure the regional government is delivering those services efficiently. This could be considered for our region.

The number of local elected officials can be cut from about 90 to 50 by reducing the number of municipalities and by having all the mayors and designated councillors comprise the regional council, with only the chair being directly elected. The council would have equal representation from the core and the satellite cities so that one subregion can’t dominate regional decision-making. A similar form of indirect representation used in B.C. has proved to be quite effective, is less costly, and ensures "buy-in" and communication between the municipal and regional governments.

For electing local politicians, we suggest using a hybrid ward and at large system. Each municipality would be divided into wards, roughly along the lines of the existing communities, with each ward represented by a councillor. For instance, Vanier, Bell’s Corners, and the rural townships would be defined as wards to ensure that they retain a voice in the local municipality and on the regional council. The city mayors would be elected at large to ensure that they truly represent their full jurisdiction.

We believe our proposal provides a significantly improved framework for local governance and that it warrants closer consideration by local elected officials and the public. Instead of wasting considerable tax dollars on self-promotion of the Mega-City and Tri-City concepts, we also urge that some of those funds be redirected to conduct an independent assessment of alternative concepts.

Without knowing what the full-range of alternatives are and how they stack up against each other, how can residents and elected officials make informed choices? We should not have politicians deciding the future governance structure of our region behind closed doors.

Editor’s note: Dr John Walker is a geospace consultant and Lyle Walker has a Master’s degree in planning and works for the Capital Regional District in Victoria. Further information on the above concept can be found at the http://home.istar.ca/~jwalker/ web site.