When we elect a mayor and councillors, we give them significant responsibility. They make decisions about taxes, housing, public safety, transportation, parks, infrastructure and the future of our neighbourhoods.

We elect them to lead.

But leadership does not mean shutting the public out, burying decisions in lengthy reports or telling residents that consultation occurred without explaining what changed.

Democracy cannot mean voting once every four years and then standing on the sidelines while City Hall makes decisions behind closed doors. Residents deserve genuine engagement, clear explanations and measurable results.

In Victoria’s 2022 municipal election, 27,452 of 72,284 registered voters cast a ballot, a turnout of 37.98 per cent. That result gave council the legal authority to govern, but it also created a responsibility to keep engaging the many residents who did not participate directly in the election.

The quiet majority matters too.

That includes the nurse finishing a night shift, the parent caring for children, the senior who is uncomfortable using an online portal, the renter who is unsure whether council will take their concerns seriously and the small-business owner who cannot leave a store or restaurant to spend an afternoon at City Hall.

Too often, municipal government communicates through hundreds of pages of technical material, complicated procedures and meetings that can last for hours. Most residents do not have the time to study every report, attend every meeting or determine how one amendment affects the final decision.

That does not mean they do not care. It means government must do a better job of communicating.

Public engagement must be more than a checkbox.

Victoria already uses surveys, public hearings, workshops and online engagement. During the 2025 budget process, for example, the City conducted a random telephone survey of 700 residents and held discussions with eight local equity-seeking groups. Those efforts are worthwhile, but consultation is meaningful only when residents can see what changed because of it.

For every major proposal, the public should receive clear answers to five basic questions:

What problem are we solving? 

What options were considered? 

What will it cost? 

What did the public say? 

What results should we expect?

After consultation, City Hall should publish a plain language “What We Heard and What We Changed” report. It should identify which recommendations were accepted, which were rejected and why.

After council votes, residents should receive a simple decision record showing how each councillor voted, what the decision will cost, when it will be implemented and how success will be measured.

The Crystal Pool referendum shows both the value of direct public choice and the challenge of public participation. Voters were asked whether the City could borrow up to $168.9 million for a replacement facility and which site they preferred. Of the ballots cast on borrowing, 58.71 per cent supported the proposal, while 60.57 per cent of those voting on location chose Central Park North.

Council then directed the project to proceed using the location preferred by voters and committed to quarterly public updates. That is a positive example of a clear question, a measurable public response and a visible connection between the vote and the decision.

But only 21.18 per cent of registered voters participated in the referendum. A decision involving authority to borrow nearly $169 million was therefore made with fewer than one in four registered voters taking part.

That does not invalidate the result. It should, however, push City Hall to ask why participation was so low and whether residents received information in a form they could easily understand. Major proposals should clearly explain total cost, financing, risks, alternatives, expected tax impacts and the consequences of doing nothing.

The same principle applies to the City’s annual budget.

Victoria’s 2026 financial plan includes approximately $394.1 million in total expenditures. Required property tax revenue increased by $14.185 million over 2025, producing an overall tax increase of 7.28 per cent. Residential properties were allocated an average increase of 9.34 per cent, while business properties were allocated 4.78 per cent.

Residents deserve to know not only where that money is being spent, but what it is achieving.

Are housing approvals becoming faster and more predictable?

Are approved homes reaching construction and occupancy?

Are major projects being completed on time and on budget?

Are downtown streets safer?

Are local businesses experiencing less vandalism and disorder?

How many people have moved from homelessness into stable housing, and remained housed?

These are not unreasonable or hostile questions. They are the basic questions that any responsible organization should be able to answer.

Victoria should create a clear public results dashboard for every major priority. It should show the promises made, targets established, money spent, progress achieved, deadlines missed and corrective action required.

When results are good, council should report them.

When results fall short, council should say so honestly and explain what will change.

Some confidential meetings are necessary for legal, labour and property matters. But closed meetings must remain the exception, not become a way to avoid difficult public discussion. Council should explain why a meeting was closed and release information as soon as confidentiality is no longer required.

Strong leadership and public engagement are not opposites.

A good council must sometimes make difficult or unpopular decisions. But strong leaders do not fear scrutiny. They explain the trade-offs, show the evidence, disclose the costs and report honestly on the results.

We elect council to lead and look after the needs of our community. In return, City Hall must remain open, understandable and accountable.

The decisions should be clear.

The spending should be traceable.

The results should be measurable.

And the public should never be left outside the door.