The Community Council Stands Up for Inclusivity, Perhaps

The Provisional Community Council of Point Roberts held its second meeting (at least that I’ve been to) this past week. At the end of the previous meeting, you may recall, a decision was made to place an announcement in the local paper inviting any of the many groups on the Point to send a representative to the April meeting. The result was not impressive, alas, although a couple more people showed up. At the end of the second meeting, the decision had been made to write a letter to all the groups on the Point inviting them to send a representative to the next meeting of the Provisional etc. (Isn’t there a Provisional Council in Star Wars??? Readers, please enlighten; perhaps we could work it in.)

Which would seem to be no progress. But only seem, because actually writing a letter requires deciding who will receive a letter. And on this issue, there was genuine if not unanimous progress. As near as I can tell (and being there is all you get for proof), the decision was that, for a group to be eligible to send a representative, the group must be in Point Roberts, involve volunteer efforts, and the voluntary effort must be on behalf of the interests of the community. Thus, I was obliged to argue, the P.R. Quilters Group was eligible because we have made numerous quilts for the community itself or for local groups to raffle in an attempt to raise funds for community projects, but that the gentleman to my left’s poker group was not eligible because, although in Point Roberts and voluntary, NO apparent community benefit was involved in their game. A harsh move, but that’s the nature of politics, I suppose. He was still disputing this with me as we left, however, so his poker group may yet show up with a letter and a representative who I think will be him.

The second possible progress is not so clearly a step forward yet. The discussion stepped right up to and then danced away from the question of whether commercial interests—if sufficiently large—would have membership independent of the local Chamber of Commerce, which would otherwise represent all business interests. The commercial interests at issue would, I am guessing, include the real estate agents, the contractors’/developers’ association, the golf course, and the marina. This could still go either way (a big argument for inclusiveness rather than exclusiveness was made), but—and less clearly discussed—a feeling at least on my part that there was an awful lot of business interest potentially showing up at this table, as opposed to community interest, lingers.

Thus, the Walking Group, the Gardening Club, the Lutheran Church, the Historical Society, the Arts Foundation—all of whom meet the voluntary/community interest qualifications—will get letters. Similarly, the Chamber of Commerce participates in community activities. So, we will see to whom the letters actually will go and we will see who shows up next month.

As one long-time activist resident said to me on the way out the door, “When I take even a little step forward, that’s progress. I’m content with that.” I’d be willing to go farther than that, I think. If you don’t go backward, that’s progress. However, operating in this 'theory of democracy' territory seems strangely foreign to me. I think it is largely because this community council idea is not yet framed in any way for me to be either comfortable with the concept or deeply opposed to it. I am waiting, fairly patiently, to see what is the frame that emerges. And the second part of this hesitation is my firm belief that most of the people who live here permanently as well as part-time are genuinely estranged from this discussion we are having. As one Canadian neighbor said to me, “I love coming down the Point where I don’t have to be responsible for anything but my own house.” It’s the libertarian streak in all of us that can do us in.