"Here's the proposal—once every hundred years or so, we get a mulligan on the constitution. A re-write. An upgrade and update, based on the new realities of society, life, world-wide realities and the economy. Canada is a vastly different country than it was in the 1860s...and it is a vastly different world.

Surely a modern version of our constitution would acknowledge local government as a distinctive, equal and recognized order of government with a variety of authority, taxation powers, jurisdiction and accountability."

Now, before you fall off your chair, let me explain. The above quote is from a book titled, "Getting Cities Right" that I wrote six years ago.

One of the many smart CAO's in municipal life was talking to me recently. She had just come across the book and was intrigued by the arguments I made in it for greater recognition of municipal government. After blushing modestly and thanking her, I re-read the book.

There are some interesting ideas in it.

Admittedly I was in a feisty mood when I wrote it. Few punches were held back. But I was pleased to discover that it stands up fairly well.

I am the first to acknowledge that in Canada, the very phrase "Constitutional Conference" sends strong people diving under the table and smart people fleeing for the dubious pleasures of a winter resort in Antarctica.

However, once your heart stops pounding and your pulse slows, give this some thought: I do not think the system we have in Canada for our six orders of government is working very well. Do you really believe our governments are operating as efficiently and effectively as possible?

We have jurisdictional over-lap and waste, confusion about governance, constant bickering between Premiers and the Prime Minister over money, and of course, municipalities are ignored completely because we have no constitutional standing.

Constitutions should not be dallied-with very often. But nations around the world have made improvements and changes to their constitutions. For example, the USA's decision in 1947 to restrict a President's term in office to eight years was a sensible one. Ireland's 2018 repeal of its abortion ban was responsive to a changing society's new norm.

The admitted risk of tampering with a constitution is when an autocratic does it to expand or extend his power, as Russia's Putin and Turkey's Erdogan have done.

But let us assume that in Canada it would be done for the good of the country.

Canada has had dozens of constitutional conferences. The State of New York has had nine such conferences. Florida has a 37-member Constitutional Revision Commission. It has the authority to put proposed changes to their state constitution directly to the public after the panel of distinguished citizens meet every 20 years.

The point is, constitutions can change, smoothly and intelligently.

Being realistic, with the animosity and chasms in Canada's national political scene these days, Canada's municipalities need to be innovative and bold in their collective thinking. We need to seize the agenda, because nobody else cares about us.

Here's the idea: Why don't local governments in Canada (led by FCM?) pull together a panel of what, 25? 30? distinguished and very smart people to re-think Canada's constitution and municipal government's role in our nation.

I know there are a thousand reasons it wouldn't work. But maybe, just maybe, it could open a door. Their report could be used as a springboard for forcing a larger national discussion about local governments and their growing importance in Canada.

The citizens panel would NOT, repeat NOT, include politicians of any stripe. By keeping politicians far away, I think the report would be done faster and be more acceptable because it would not represent any party or politician's views. That should make the report more acceptable to all politicians. They may disagree with some of the conclusions and/or recommendations, but at least they would create the foundation for a healthy discussion.

Right now, let's be honest—the municipal agenda for substantive change is pretty much nowhere on the federal or provincial radar.

Surely the citizen panel would understand that the current method of financing our cities is unsustainable. Surely they would understand that Canada's method of financing cities is quite unique in the world--and is deeply flawed. Municipalities need to move to consumption-based taxes and away from property-based taxes as their primary funding source.

What's the worst that could happen? An interesting report on the governance of our towns and cities by some smart people? Some national dialogue on the future of local governments? Maybe a few pokes with a sharp stick at recalcitrant provincial politicians?

With good will and thoughtful input, Canadians could have an adult conversation about our country, our cities, and our future.

The bottom line is this: It is time for Canada to have a national conference on the future of our cities. The report would confront the challenges and opportunities for Canada's urban regions over the next twenty, thirty, fifty years.

Or are such efforts doomed to be defeated by the forces of negativism, self-interest, fear and parochialism?

So. There it is.

Big thinking. Lofty ideas.

What is the future for our cities in Canada?