If London City Council and its operations could be said to have a deep end, then last night I was chucked into it. I went in to the Council chambers shortly before 5 p.m. with just the rough agenda sheet that I had downloaded from the City of London website. Once the Mayor entered the room and we all rose and then sat down after she smacked her gavel three times, the proceedings got underway with a couple of presentations of a certificate given to the London Junior Knights and a plaque received from the Communities in Bloom National Committee.

Councillors then declared whether they had a conflict of interest with any of the items to be considered at this session, the minutes of the previous meeting from three weeks ago were confirmed and signed, there was a quick round of communications and petitions, of dotting the ‘i’s and crossing the ‘t’s on motions of which notice had been given and then we were into the main body of the proceedings, as Council dealt with the recommendations from the Board of Control, the Environment and Transportation Committee, the Community and Protective Services Committee, the Planning Committee, the Committee of the Whole and the Audit Committee.

It was at this point that I went quite dizzy with the speed of operations as whole lists of items, identified only by numbers, were dispensed with in quick votes. I then managed to snag myself the hefty stack of coloured pages in which the reports of the various committees are numerically outlined, and I finally attained some sense of where we were and what we were dealing with.

To enable a three quarters-filled gallery primarily comprised of residents of North London to get out of City Hall in time for supper, an Environment and Transportation Committee (ECT) recommendation to not go ahead with a proposed widening of Colborne St. was dealt with early on. The original proposal would have seen on-street parking eliminated and a bike lane added to facilitate quicker flow along the north-south corridor which is becoming more popular with commuters seeking to avoid congestion along Richmond and Wellington. These residents feel that their street is already busy enough and didn’t want to see the situation become any worse. In addition to turning out in force as Council deliberated the matter, the group of concerned neighbours had also sent more than 50 letters to the ECT protesting the move. They also proposed – and Council noted – that the City needs to do a better and more timely job of notifying residents when such neighbourhood-altering changes are proposed. Council acceded to their wish to go ahead with reconstruction of the road but leave its width and function as they are, winning a standing ovation from the gallery and prompting Councillor Caranci to comment that here was proof that, “The official plan is not written in stone.”

I could see the clear divide on City Council within half an hour – the pro –business, anti-taxers and those who want to keep programs and institutions going no matter what, or at least want to be seen to support them though whether they’d be prepared to bump up taxes to pay for them is another matter.

The greatest amount of time, well over an hour, was spent on the proposal, which ultimately passed quite handily, that Council and the Mayor should make their displeasure known to the province regarding the closing of schools and the devastating impact such closures can have on neighbourhoods.  A lot of brave and lofty sentiments were voiced until Councillor Miller stood up – her own political spurs having been earned as a school trustee – and pointed out that Council calling for a moratorium on school closings was a meaningless gesture; that basically, this wasn’t Council’s battle; this was the bailiwick of the school boards and their trustees as they struggle to respond with diminishing student enrolments and the budget squeezes imposed by the province. Deputy Mayor Gosnell said that by sending such a message, Council and the Mayor would be “telling the Province to be irresponsible with our tax dollars. Sure, we want to keep everything open but that’s just irresponsible.”

I was also disappointed to see a further extension of the 17 -year long standoff between Tyson Akkila, the owner of Zone Auto at the corner of Adelaide and Piccadilly, and the Piccadilly Area Neighbourhood Association. Councillor Orser went to bat for Akkila, who has laid out a cool $100,000 in upgrades, improvements and landscaping to accommodate the concerns of neighbours who claim his garage is “not the right fit” for the neighbourhood and don’t want to see him install an additional fourth bay and build an office addition to his auto shop. Orser urged his fellow Councillors to bring an end to this long turf war by going against the Planning Committee’s recommendation and approving the site plan application. Councillor Caranci pointed out that in addition to trying to woo major employers to London, Council also needs to support the aspirations of smaller employers like Zone Auto. He also reminded Councillors that the business in question fronts on Adelaide Street – a major, commercial road where businesses of this kind are not out of place.

What impressed me the most last night? The amount of homework that each of the councillors should undertake before they even sit down at that table. Some were obviously more prepared, more conversant with the situations under consideration than others. During the discussion surrounding an Environment and Transportation Committee recommendation that the Mayor correspond with the Ontario Premier to request the development of comprehensive legislation to regulate the ownership and care of exotic animals (prompted by the mauling death in early January of a Southwold man who kept a tiger on his 80-acre property) Councillor Armstrong repeatedly asked if such legislation would preclude visiting circuses, causing many of his colleagues to roll their eyes in exasperation and Councillor Miller to quip that it wouldn’t affect “exotic dancers” either. But there’s a formidable amount of material for a conscientious Councillor to digest prior to a Council meeting.

Also, this time out, at least, I was impressed with Council’s political professionalism, the lack of any trace of animosity when a position that has been passionately argued for is shot down and they all must immediately move on to the next item of business. We hear the government did this, City Council decided that, and it feels so definitive, so monolithic, if you will. But before last night I’ve never appreciated so acutely that the government isn’t one integrated body that rules in some collective wisdom but is a body of constituent parts that only votes this way or that way after issues have been thrashed out around that horseshoe table. I’m reminded of the old adage, ‘If you enjoy eating sausage then for goodness’ sake, don’t ever watch one being made.’ Up close the process isn’t so clean and tidy or unified as one naively supposed. I feel like I grew up a little bit last night and gained a new respect – whether I agree with each one of them politically or not – for the amount of work and effort that most of our Councillors put in to their jobs.