News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.1K     0 

Which mayoral candidate do you intend to vote for in 2021?

  • Jeremy Farkas

    Votes: 3 5.1%

  • Jyoti Gondek

    Votes: 43 72.9%

  • Brad Field

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Jan Damery

    Votes: 11 18.6%

  • Jeff Davison

    Votes: 2 3.4%

  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    59
The current 2019-2022 budget has $110 million in capital allocated to sidewalks, pathways and parks improvements; the Eau Claire plaza is about $18 million.

I'm not saying a 14% increase in the parks/paths capital budget would be a bad thing, but it doesn't seem like the reason I'd want someone to spend four years as mayor. And the fact that it's relatively small compared to the big picture and also a round number strikes me as something pulled out of a hat by someone who hasn't really done any homework (seriously, I spent 5 minutes googling and skimming), which is a reason for me to not want someone to spend four years as mayor.

The fact that her platform seems to be a buzzword salad liberally spiced with links to low quality claims implies either she's not that smart, or she doesn't think we're that smart.
 
ByeByeBaby said:
The current 2019-2022 budget has $110 million in capital allocated to sidewalks, pathways and parks improvements; the Eau Claire plaza is about $18 million.

I'm not saying a 14% increase in the parks/paths capital budget would be a bad thing, but it doesn't seem like the reason I'd want someone to spend four years as mayor. And the fact that it's relatively small compared to the big picture and also a round number strikes me as something pulled out of a hat by someone who hasn't really done any homework (seriously, I spent 5 minutes googling and skimming), which is a reason for me to not want someone to spend four years as mayor.

The fact that her platform seems to be a buzzword salad liberally spiced with links to low quality claims implies either she's not that smart, or she doesn't think we're that smart.
Click to expand...
You should look at all the candidates and see which ones your criticism doesn’t apply - hint it is every one of them. Anyways, I am guessing a lot of thought on here is applying an after labour day or after thanksgiving lens on what we have in the policy window for each candidate to a before July 1 reality. All the candidates today have either no specifics at all or just the start of a few things with no reflection of cost.
 
darwink said:
The city somewhat operates and sets budgets like that now. It is just jarring to see it set out as a guiding way instead of using acceptable buzzwords like zero based budgeting (a first Nenshi term initiative that hit its stride in the second term) to describe a similar ish approach.
Click to expand...
I also love how he proceeded to make an expensive spending promise alongside that commitment
 
I like the idea of some sort of automatic filtering system on every candidate platform policy point:
  • is it legally possible to do what you are proposing?
  • if you won, could you actually do anything about it as Mayor or Councillor or is this the responsibility of another tier of government?
  • is what you proposing actually any different than what we are already doing?
I think that would eliminate 95% of candidate materials and candidates off the top.
 
The only one so far that has any indication of having different thoughts on planning and development is Farkas by the looks of it (his "more citizen input on development"). Not sure his idea will be good or not, but at least touching on this.

Surprised at that, given how big of a news story the Guidebook for Great Communities has been recently, along with a lot of community specific issues in the recent years (Inglewood is a prime example).
 
CBBarnett said:
I like the idea of some sort of automatic filtering system on every candidate platform policy point:
  • is it legally possible to do what you are proposing?
  • if you won, could you actually do anything about it as Mayor or Councillor or is this the responsibility of another tier of government?
  • is what you proposing actually any different than what we are already doing?
I think that would eliminate 95% of candidate materials and candidates off the top.
Click to expand...
In that case, most no one would vote except for NIMBY people, and the low taxes people. Gotta have something to sell! Jyoti Gondek's two of 3 main platform points are about the province giving the city the education property tax back. The third point is work as a team with outside stakeholders (maybe to distract on the not really working as a team with city council?). Only so many people get excited about secondary suites, and fortunately we as a city have avoided serious candidates drawing entirely new transit lines on maps not contemplated on any official plans (unlike Montreal (Pink Line), Toronto (Smart Track), or Vancouver (Vancouver Streetcar).

Plus, for the third point: when other candidates are proposing cuts, saying what you'd do even if it isn't groundbreaking is important. If a popular candidate was proposing removing the cycle track, you'd sure bet that a position on keeping the cycle track is important even if it is just maintaining the status quo.

Oh, and the second point you make. There is a big difference between "can actually do anything" and "is the responsibility of another tier". The city can do a lot that should be the responsibility of another tier of government, and the city doing it is a signal to that other tier of government that the senior government is not meeting the needs of its citizens in that area.
 
Last edited:
darwink said:
I'd challenge anyone looking for groundbreaking ideas to try to remember what were the 12 ideas in the Nenshi platform. I've mentioned one. Can you remember another? I'll hide them here:

#12 – Calgary will be a City where its citizens are enriched by outstanding libraries, recreation amenities, and a vibrant cultural scene​

#11 – Calgary will be a city where every neighbourhood is a safe neighbourhood​

#10 – Calgary will reduce the number of people living in poverty and ensure opportunity for all
#9 – Calgarians will be able to get around easily by any mode of transportation
#8 – Calgary City Council will be more transparent, more efficient, and easier for citizens to engage
#7 – Calgary will be a city of sustainable, walkable, livable, complete communities
#6 – Political campaigns should be about the best ideas, not the most money
#5 – Calgary Transit will be a preferred choice, not the last choice.
#4 – Calgarians will have convenient, quick access to their airport.
#3 – Calgary will be the best place in Canada to start and grow a business
#2 – Nenshi proposes audit changes; brings transparency to city hall
#1 – Nenshi proposes common-sense policy on secondary suites
Click to expand...
I didn't remember any of these to be honest until seeing them again, but at that time those points by Nenshi seemed revolutionary for a city that had spent years under Al Duer and Dave Bronconnier. Like I said, I don't have anything against Damery, and it's possible I may end up voting for her, but the ideas don't jump out as revolutionary to me. Given some of the change Calgary has seen in the past decade there may not be much that jumps out as revolutionary
 
And there you have it :) It is about feeling, not about what they are. The feeling of the moment aligns with some ideas, and they capture the feeling of revolutionairy, of change, of a breathe of fresh air as the past ideas have started to get weighed down by inevitable complexity that results. You can see the attempts in all the campaigns to start to plant seeds of ideas that will grow and build that feeling as the what, 20 weeks to election day play out. It is about iPod vs Zune vs Minidisc - all have the same function but which evoked the feeling of living in the future?

Not to discount very large policy differences of trying to cut taxes versus keeping the status quo. Or of going to war with the province on most files versus trying to work together. Or even the cumulative effects of small things, like what would Calgary be like if there were up to 10,000 more live music gigs a year, or just a bit more snow clearing so on main streets you didn't have to hike over windrows in winter as a pedestrian to move around destinations or access multiuse pathways.
 
By nomination day it will be pretty clear how many candidates have a shot, and who are the also rans. At this point any of the top 5 but Farkas still has a pretty good shot in landing in the also ran pile. The quality of candidates that landed in the also ran pile in 2010 was really high. Multiple councillors and former councillors. An MLA. A respected business and non profit leader.

From polling I've seen, Farkas can only win with 4 serious candidates who end up with a near perfect split which is very unlikely. With only 3, Farkas likely comes 3rd.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top