A plebiscite will not be among the avenues available for public comment on the SmartCentres development.

City council on Monday voted against holding the plebiscite which, for council and the attending public, packed to standing room only, appeared to be as hot an issue as the development itself.

Coun. Alan Harrison said he introduced the motion to hold a plebiscite in order to give everyone in Salmon Arm an opportunity to express their view on the matter.

“I heard a plebiscite would be a forum for the loudest voices, not the most, and I don’t understand that because everyone has one vote in a plebiscite,” said Harrison.

“At public hearings, the loudest voices do get heard, and it’s the loudest voices that are the most confident, and they deserve a voice too, but not more than one. To me a plebiscite would get around that.”

Harrison noted the results of the plebiscite would be non-binding on council, and he said he expected debate and amendments to the motion. The plebiscite would have asked Salmon Arm residents if they were in favour of a regional shopping centre on the SmartCentres property at the west end of town.

For those councillors amenable to the motion, it was not the question that was an issue but the recommended process. At a cost of $7,500 to be taken from the Council Initiative fund, the plebiscite was proposed to take place on Jan. 9 at the SASCU Recreation Centre, from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.

Coun. Ken Jamieson said he was opposed to the plebiscite, but stressed that, if it should pass, it be conducted as a municipal election to ensure all residents have only one vote. The projected cost of such a format, as pointed out by administrator Monica Dalziel, is about $20,000.

Mayor Marty Bootsma said the matter did not justify a plebiscite – that a public hearing, by law, has to be held.

“There’s the argument this will give those who are uncomfortable at a public hearing, as Coun. Harrison pointed out, an opportunity to be heard. And this might be the only valid reason to hold a plebiscite,” said Bootsma.

“But, for the past two years, and especially in the last year, I have had lots of input from all sorts of people, and I’m willing to bet most of council has. And nobody has been shy about sharing their views, believe me.”

Bootsma agreed with Jamieson that if a plebiscite were held, it be conducted under the same guidelines as a municipal election.

“So, I guess the bottom line is, I’m not willing to spend up to $25,000 asking for an opinion that, up to this point, everybody has been giving me for free,” Bootsma commented.

Though unsupportive of the plebiscite as presented, Coun. Kevin Flynn said he agreed everyone needs to be heard and that he may be in support of a properly held plebiscite. Flynn’s preference, however, was for a survey conducted by an independent professional pollster.

“Pay them to do a statistically valid questionaire or poll, and take the results of that as just one more piece of information instead of paying for something line this that wouldn’t necessarily be statistically valid,” said Flynn.

Coun. Chad Eliason was the must supportive of a plebiscite, though not as presented by Harrison. He proposed an amendment to have three locations, increase the hours to 12, and follow the same process as a municipal election.

“We’ve got a lot of information. I’m not afraid of sitting through another 30-hour public hearing again – I’m not looking forward to it at all mind you,” said Eliason.

“People send us e-mails, people give us phone calls… but if we really want to get the public’s opinion, this is one way of doing it.

“If this is passed it would be most effective, most efficient with an expanded scope and scale.”

Harrison said he was in favour of the amendment, as he would limit the voting stations to just the recreation centre.

“Council is quite aware, and probably most citizens, that I’m not big on spending city money – in fact I’m probably one of the tightest people up here,” said Harrison. “And so, certainly that’s where that original motion came about. I agree with what I’ve heard as far is if we’re going to do this, we need to do this properly.”

Coun. Debbie Cannon, also opposed the plebiscite, arguing that reducing polling stations to one may impact who gets out to vote.

“I really think that yes, we are elected to make tough decisions and this is a tough one… There are so many surveys out there that I think a plebiscite would just be another thing that will be out there in our community,” said Cannon.

“I just picture all the signs and propaganda out there, the Walmart greeter happy face right over all the different signs, and I really think plebiscite is not a road I want to go down.”

The final amendment was approved, with all but Harrison voting against the plebiscite.