One of the first duties of B.C.'s new transport minister, Mary Polak, is to decide who runs bus services in the Greater Victoria region. Polak was appointed last week when her predecessor, Blair Lekstrom, indicated he would not be running in next May's provincial election.
At present, bus and HandyDart services are operated by a free-standing agency, the Victoria Regional Transit Commission. The commission has a $100-million budget and a strong record of competitive pricing.
But for several years, there have been conflicting views about the wisdom of this arrangement. Directors of the Capital Regional District think it makes no sense. They believe transit should be integrated with other regional services under the CRD's control.
On the other hand, some community groups, such as the West Shore Chamber of Commerce, want to keep the transit commission. Chamber members feel the CRD is too remote and doesn't adequately represent them.
This is the dispute that Polak inherited. And she certainly has her work cut out for her.
In one respect, the CRD's critics are wrong. All of the local municipalities are fairly represented on the CRD's board of directors. With five appointees, West Shore municipalities have as loud a voice as anyone.
Yet that's by no means the end of the matter. The CRD's guiding function is to co-ordinate the activities of its member municipalities. Its governance structure reflects that mandate.
Of the 23 members on the board of directors, only three are elected directly by the voters. The remainder are municipal councillors appointed by the local governments that make up the region.
That's fine, as long as most of the work is planning and co-ordinating. Yet running a $100-million bus service is a major operational task.
Voters should have a say in such important matters as routes, fares and capital expenditures. And the responsible politicians should have to answer for their decisions when elections come around.
This doesn't mean the CRD shouldn't run services. But it does raise serious questions about how the agency should be governed if it does wish to go this route.
In particular, the voters should have a much stronger voice than they do at present. If 10 of the directors were chosen at the ballot box, instead of only three, the agency would be much more responsive to public views and opinions. That would still leave 13 seats for member municipalities, giving each a vote.
No doubt other arrangements could be tried. But the emergence of transit services as a governance issue only underscores a long-standing problem with regional authorities like the CRD.
For purposes of planning and co-ordinating, unelected boards of directors work well. They offer a collegial environment for ironing out difficulties between municipalities.
However, when the task moves toward the delivery of major programs, a different governance system is needed.
Perhaps this day was always going to come. The CRD has progressed a long way since its inception almost 50 years ago.
But a dividing line is now in sight. Either the agency should leave service delivery to its member councils, and focus on co-ordination, or its governance system must be changed.
This is not a choice that should be left to the CRD's current board of directors. They have too much of an investment in the status quo.
Ultimately, the province will have to rule on this matter. But that brings us back to Mary Polak.
Realistically, with just a little more than eight months left in her government's mandate, this is not the time for a major rethink of regional governance models.
If Polak is wise, she will draw attention to these issues, invite a broader discussion and let things stand until a new government is sworn in.
The transit question has persisted for years. It can wait a little while longer.
