Born, raised, and educated as a banker in Switzerland, André emigrated to Canada at the age of 21. André found his “niche” when he was hired in 1970 as secretary-manager for the Hamlet of Fort Simpson, Northwest Territories. For the next 35 years his career was dedicated to local government administration in small communities in the Northwest Territories, the Yukon, and British Columbia’s Kootenays. As an adjunct to his career, André participated in a CIDA-funded program working with rural district councils in Zimbabwe from 1990 to 2000. He has been guest lecturer for over ten years at Capilano College’s Public Administration Program. His book “Citizens’ Hall: Making Local Democracy Work” was published by Toronto publisher Between The Lines in 2001. André is retired but remains actively involved in local politics as a regular contributor to Kootenay Cooperative Radio’s program “By The People.” and as a writier with "Audi Alteram Partem" a column on political topics of local interest published bi-weekly the Nelson Daily News. André and his Northern Canadian wife Sue have two children. They are delighted by the addition of their grandson Matthew to the family.

…to whomsoever the community entrusts this power of government, whether one or a few, they have an interest in misusing them. — James Mill

Majority rule is a sine qua non of democratic governance. Every decision made by a municipal council rests on the support of a majority of council members. The Community Charter imposes on every member of council an obligation to vote; fence-sitting is not allowed. If a council member refuses or is unable to decide, the Community Charter decides: a member of council who remains silent or pretends to abstain from voting is counted as having voted yes. There are no tie votes in local government and no tie-breaking votes by the mayor (contrary to popular belief). Whatever the resolution before council may be, silence on the part of a council member (including the mayor) carries the same weight and has the same consequences as an enthusiastic and resolute yes vote. If yes votes thus counted do not add up to a majority of council members present, the motion is defeated.

The facts fairly and honestly presented; truth will take care of itself. — William Allen White

Information is essential to democracy: an uninformed or ill-informed citizenry cannot be responsible for its own governance. Legislators realized the need for laws to pry information out of the hands of governments and their agencies long after other aspects of democratic governance, such universal suffrage, were taken for granted. Today’s freedom of information laws, which have been adopted around the world, follow a generally similar form; for example, they all have security and privacy exemptions. Many jurisdictions, unfortunately, administer their freedom of information laws in ways that frustrate the law’s intent. A promise of freedom is hollow when access to that freedom is encumbered by rigid protocol, unreasonable delays, and fees.

There is danger in reckless change; but greater danger in blind conservatism. — Henry George

Democracy is based on the principle that society shall be governed by the will of the people. Why should municipal councils, having been democratically elected to a position of power and authority, be reluctant to accommodate a citizens’ call for a referendum to determine the will of the people on controversial issues? An election is a democratic process by which citizens consolidate their individual preferences into collective decision. Does a referendum not serve the same purpose? Why would a council not want to know where people stand on controversial issues? The reason is easy to see from the politician’s point of view: elections put decision-making power in the hands of politicians; referendums leave that power in the hands of citizens. One gives power to politicians, the other takes it away.

If you truly wished to find out what is best for the country you would listen more to those who oppose you than to those who try to please you. — Isocrates

Major land use decisions leave permanent marks on communities; their effects often stretch beyond the term to which the council making such decisions is elected. It is in keeping with democratic principles that citizens be actively engaged in such decisions. The decision-making process is political, and politics (to quote Bismarck) is the art of the possible. Laws do not engender politics; politics engender laws. A public hearing should be a political process. Why then are public hearings, forums intended to engage citizens politically in land use decisions, legislated? The answer is that citizens and councils function on separate planes: citizens have rights; councils have power. The public hearing process is legislated because, absent a compulsion to hear citizens, councils could be seduced to make land use decisions that have long-lasting effects without consulting citizens. To that end the Local Government Act requires that public hearings precede the adoption of land use bylaws.