Well, it finally arrived. I received my ballot for the transit referendum. Now the truly hard part begins: Which box do I tick? The only thing ticked off up to now has been me.
I think every one of the Community Comment columnists has shared their opinion on this - yes, no, or no then yes. I haven't decided, I'm still weighing the pros and cons of both sides. I'm not convinced the whole Greater Vancouver area is going to come to a screeching halt with a "no" vote.
Why might I vote "yes?" Mainly because any additional funds we, as a region, contribute will likely be matched by other levels of government. I don't think that anyone believes for a second that we don't need a more robust, comprehensive and expansive transit system. I like it when our tax dollars are put to good use.
Why might I vote "no?" This sets a terrible precedent. As soon as we agree to any additional tax, there will be a chorus of people and organizations that want more money demanding a referendum to increase taxes - just a little bit - in order to fund what they feel we all really need. Before you know it, we are dealing with five per cent GST and 8.73 per cent PST. I'm also very aware of the old adage that a politician never met a tax he didn't like.
The part that I think will have the longest lasting effect is the case study that public relations students will have to learn from. This has been a gong show from the start, and continues to stumble its way along to the finish line.
It started with Jordan Bateman from the Canadian Taxpayers Federation firing the first salvo, and made a pretty powerful impact. By painting TransLink as unworthy of additional funding due to mismanagement, he got a lot of people questioning the referendum from the start.
I'm not sure the "yes" side really knew what hit it until it was too late. It wanted the referendum to be about funding, but despite all arguments to the contrary, Bateman has made this about TransLink. If you believe otherwise, I've got a great deal on some swampland you might be interested in.
I read in the paper that the new CEO, Doug Allen, has been holding internal town hall meetings to restore morale to the employees. That's great, but if he really wants to fix this problem, morale has to be restored with the public. Face the music, get in the media at every opportunity and take the heat.
Don't let others speak for him.
People will respect him for doing that, and his employees will follow him because he is a leader willing to stand up for them. Admit the mistakes and talk about solutions, and he might convince me to vote "yes."
I'll never forget Brian Burke during the dark years of the Canucks. He was on the radio every week speaking with the fans that were still fans. He listened, took responsibility for mistakes and made the changes that needed to be made. That was real crisis management. That was real leadership.
There is still time to change the outcome, but this situation must be treated like the crisis it is.
My ballot is waiting to be ticked.
