Hard to believe as it is, summer is more than half-over already. Soon enough, that lazy August feel will soon turn to that razor-sharp, back to school mentality that inevitably comes with September.
We’re hoping that those with their minds on the municipal election will also snap back into focus. With only a month left to toss one’s hat into the ring, only one candidate -- the long-serving Marg Luna -- has made it official that she’s going to seek another chance  at a councillor’s seat. All other incumbents have played their cards extraodinarily close thus far.
Every time a municipal election rolls around, we hope for some new faces to potentially add to the mix in council chambers, if not to add interest and intrigue to the decisions being made in our town, than at least to add spice to the race.
But choosing to run for council is easier said than done. For one, it’s a larger time commitment than it may appear; it’s not just a matter of showing up on Tuesday evenings for a few hours, but of attending committee meetings and reading up on those you didn’t attend. Then, there’s the public scrutiny that councillors inevitably face; while it’s certainly part of the job, the fact that St. Marys is a small, separated town, can lead to a large fishbowl effect when it comes to how decisions are perceived by the population. Whether it be standing in line at the grocery store or out for an evening stroll, those who choose to serve publicly in St. Marys invariably lose a bit of their privacy.
But perhaps there’s a bit more at play with this election -- or less, depending on how one views it. Look back at 2006; many would-be councillors ran on principles relating to the then-unbuilt Pyramid Recreation Centre. Council transparency and “living within our means” were the catchphrases of four years ago.
Despite the return of Jamie Hahn to the mayor’s chair, plus two new councillors (Boyce and Mustard), three incumbent councillors returned to the chambers, plus one former councillor, Don Van Galen. Not a lot of fresh blood or perspective, for those who craved it.
Going into this year’s election, there is no watershed issue to drive candidates to file their papers -- or even drive voters to the polls. Most of the major decisions made by council have been in deference to the worldwide economic collapse, while other decisions, such as our hospital’s emergency hours and other services, were never in council’s hands, anyway.
The lack of a galvanizing issue could do one of two things. It could increase voter apathy, since things seem to be rolling along reasonably OK (look for another editorial on that later). But the better result would be that this allows potential candidates with other ideas in mind, be they kooky or concrete, the freedom to run with them, creating some real choice and interest when it comes to marking one’s ballot on Oct. 25. --A.M.