An old debate on whether London's city council should be full-time is about to be reignited at city hall.
Councillor Michael van Holst has penned a short letter going to the corporate services committee on Tuesday, asking members to refer the idea to the governance working group for discussion.
"The corporation employs thousands of full-time people to do its work, yet the chief decision makers are not included among them," van Holst wrote. "According to a recent AMCTO [Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario] report, all comparator cities in Ontario have council members whose primary activity is the advancement of their municipality, yet London has not even engaged in the discussion of whether or not it should follow suit."
The Ward 1 councillor wants the governance working group to review four specific points -- whether the role of councillor should be full-time, if they were to become full-time should the number of councillors be reduced, whether committee meetings should be held during the day, and how much money should a full-time councillor make.
If any changes were to be approved they would not take effect until the next term of council.
The idea of moving away from a part-time council in favour of a full-time one was last pitched in December 2016 by then-Deputy Mayor Paul Hubert. The veteran city councillor had proposed the move citing an increased workload over the years, with more working groups, task forces, and constituent interactions. Hubert also pitched the idea of reducing the number of councillors from 14 to 10.
Hubert's motion was voted down by the majority of his council colleagues.
Former councillor Stephen Orser also continuously pushed to have the position changed to full-time during his two terms on council from 2006 until 2014. His efforts were never successful.
