Opinion: ‘Political polarization’ threatens local democracy​on February 6, 2025 at 1:00 pm

From the moment I stepped into my role as councillor for Ward 12, I was struck by the challenge of fostering meaningful, collaborative conversations. I entered with an expectation that teamwork would win the day and that Calgary City Hall would be a space for practical problem-solving and dialogue.

This dream quickly evaporated, and I was hit upside the head with the two-by-four of political polarization. The institution that should have been a space for co-operation and mutual respect was immediately mired in the battleground of ideological entrenchment.

My January announcement about declining to run again has left me feeling lighter about my future, but also carrying a deep concern for the future of municipal politics in Calgary and beyond.

Building from my previous experiences, I saw local governance as a space where political divides could be put aside in favour of pragmatic solutions that directly affect residents’ daily lives. After all, municipalities are responsible for delivering essential services — transit, infrastructure, community safety — without the partisan baggage that dominates higher levels of government.

Or at least, that’s how it should be.

Unfortunately, the political climate has shifted dramatically. Today’s elected officials are increasingly rewarded not for collaboration, but for their ability to attack, criticize and grandstand. This trend is not isolated to any one jurisdiction; it reflects a broader, more dangerous movement where ideological purity is valued over practical governance. Municipal councils, traditionally the most accessible level of government, are now succumbing to the pressures of party politics.

This transformation threatens the very foundation of local democracy. Party politics, by its nature, demands loyalty to a platform, a leader and a base of supporters. This dynamic creates an environment where councillors are pressured to vote along ideological lines rather than engage in the give-and-take necessary for effective governance. It discourages the kind of nuanced, thoughtful decision-making that acknowledges the complexity of municipal issues.

Instead, it rewards those who can score political points, even at the expense of long-term progress.

The erosion of trust has been one of the most difficult aspects of this shift. When I first took office, I approached the role with the understanding that differences in perspective were not obstacles but opportunities for growth. When we respect the tensions and allow ideas to compete, we find balanced ways of moving forward. When balance is lost, we collectively witness the erosion of trust in our institutions, elected officials and even the process of governance itself. When decisions are viewed through the lens of partisan gain rather than public good, the very legitimacy of the system is called into question.