[IanO]

Ashley would be an amazing Councillor and should do better than many might give her credit for.

 

[Glenco]

I think it's very silly when people try to frame tackling crime as some sort of inherent attack on poorer people. Built into your line of thinking is the harmful assumption that simply being less fortunate makes you commit crime which is of course absurd, there are tons of less fortunate who don't commit crime obviously (or are quite often victims of crime as I pointed out) and as well plenty of criminals who aren't necessarily less fortunate and are simply taking advantage of others.

Crime isn't a rich vs. poor issue as you keep trying to make it. In my experience the well-to-do are overall more apathetic than anything to crime in the city as it doesn't really affect them. If anything they enable this do nothing attitude towards crime because they don't want the cost of the solutions causing their taxes to rise.


Sohi only makes one mention of crime on his site right now and it's buried in a blog post. I really don't think if he's elected that he'll be centring community safety in the same way the guy who has this issue at the top of his policies webpage will. I think the issue could very well be swept under the rug if Sohi is elected, just as it's been swept under the rug under Iveson lately.


I really don't understand where the idea that Edmonton has an over reliance on policing leading to poor outcomes comes from? What exactly are you pointing to here in EPS actions or policies as evidence of this being the case? I realise it's très en vogue in some circles right now to poopoo the police in favour of vague conceptions of alternatives, but there's been from what I've seen little evidence that those alternatives being proposed actually work at all, where as the evidence for greater police numbers is fairly clear.



So I've seen plenty of evidence for Nickel's cement headedness, I don't think I've seen any evidence that he isn't sincere in his views though (as silly as they often can be). I've never really gotten the impression that he's being duplicitous, though maybe I just haven't followed his career closely enough? Is there anything you can point to of him being two faced like that?




If anything I'd hope you're right that he wouldn't have too much control, but I think electing him would send a strong message about how people are feeling and that crime and safety can't just continue to be ignored as an issue in the city as it has been lately.

Nickel has stated that he thinks to much attention is payed to the downtown and more attention should be focused on the burbs so does he really care about crime in the city centre. I have my doubts. He doe not have a platform just a bunch of do whistles and catch phrases anything to boost his polling. This man is totally disingenuous as a mayor yes he only one vote but he would create a fractious council. ,

 

[archited]

He has been totally off base on Council -- I would expect nothing different from him as Mayor. If he were the only person running for the position or, on the other hand, if he was 1 out of 1,000 I would still see no reason to vote for him. There is already a "Trump-lite heading up the Alberta Government, why would anyone want another one heading up the City.

 

[Aaron_Lloyd]

Not to get personal, but it's pretty easy to consider the issue of crime as less important than decorum when you live 2,000 km away and don't have to deal with it on a regular basis.

 

[archited]

^^^^ Not so...
1. My brother who still lives in Edmonton and was a sergeant on the Edmonton Police Service (retired) keeps me updated on the crime scene there (it is far, far less severe than greater Los Angeles).
2. Donald Trump trumpeted "law and order" through his whole term and did nothing about it here in the U.S. -- remind you of anyone?
3. The solution is found in this read... The Death and Life of Great American Cities by writer and activist Jane Jacobs and not in doubling the police force -- (after all -- think about it -- the Police Headquarters in Edmonton is located in the most serious crime precinct in Edmonotn) -- and Mike Nickel has no idea what he is talking about -- he is simply playing on people's emotional response to their base fears to get elected; otherwise why didn't he offer these solutions through his term as a City Councillor.

 

[kcantor]

^ ^^

i think the real problem isn't with the police or their numbers.

the real problems are with the lack of support for those "on the street" combined with a lack of support for the police from the courts.

 

[ChazYEG]

Not to get personal, but it's pretty easy to consider the issue of crime as less important than decorum when you live 2,000 km away and don't have to deal with it on a regular basis.

1 - you make it look like Edmonton crime issue, right now, makes the city feel like a 3rd world crime-ridden city, run by drug warlords, with gunfights and mass murdering. Less... A LOT less. Edmonton is still a fairly safe city for it's size and is far from being this Criminal Disneyland you seem to believe it has become.

2 - crime ia not the only issue in the city, and tackling other issues, including things that can reduce unemployment (which is a major contributor to homelessness, substance abuse and crime), needs to be a part of the solution. Just more cops and "hard on crime" attitude won't cut it.

3 - Again, Nickel is a strong advocate for less investment and attention to Downtown and more to the suburbs, which does inspire ANY confidence that the issues that we're discussing will see any special attention, if any at all.

 

[roe_]

I think it's very silly when people try to frame tackling crime as some sort of inherent attack on poorer people. Built into your line of thinking is the harmful assumption that simply being less fortunate makes you commit crime which is of course absurd, there are tons of less fortunate who don't commit crime obviously (or are quite often victims of crime as I pointed out) and as well plenty of criminals who aren't necessarily less fortunate and are simply taking advantage of others.

Crime isn't a rich vs. poor issue as you keep trying to make it. In my experience the well-to-do are overall more apathetic than anything to crime in the city as it doesn't really affect them. If anything they enable this do nothing attitude towards crime because they don't want the cost of the solutions causing their taxes to rise.

I won't assume you don't have any experience with the criminal justice system, but from my personal perspective I can say that crime is very much an issue of poverty. It wasn't until 2017 in Alberta that people stopped being put in jail for failing to pay loitering tickets. "Street checks" are still permitted and disproportionately target racialized and indigenous communities. People living in poverty are more likely to be held in detention when they are arrested, denied bail and plead guilty or be convicted of their charges.

What Edmonton doesn't need is a whole bunch of cops trying to arrest our way out of public disorder. Any municipal candidate that promises this will work isn't trying to fix the problem, they're trying to protect the status quo.

 

[rake]

I really don't understand where the idea that Edmonton has an over reliance on policing leading to poor outcomes comes from? What exactly are you pointing to here in EPS actions or policies as evidence of this being the case? I realise it's très en vogue in some circles right now to poopoo the police in favour of vague conceptions of alternatives, but there's been from what I've seen little evidence that those alternatives being proposed actually work at all, where as the evidence for greater police numbers is fairly clear.

Honestly, it's not my place at all to tell you who to vote for, but I'm not sure this paper is making the strongest argument here. They cite an estimated 50% increase in policing efforts/costs for a 15% reduction in crime in the targeted area and approximately 6% city-wide, and those reductions are basically only for property crime, with no meaningful impact on violent crime.

Edmonton spends half a billion on policing, let's say somewhere in the range of 80% is spent on actual police activities and half of that is spent on policing central communities - I don't think spending an additional $100 million for 15% less property crime in central Edmonton is going to be viewed as a tremendous 'win,' nor will it be enough to meaningfully change perceptions of safety downtown.

I'm really not trying to dunk on you - I appreciate that you've invested time and effort into researching this. But I do find it interesting that the first article referenced is (rightfully) concerned that alternative measures aren't able to demonstrate statistically relevant reductions in violent crime - but the second link seems to affirm more policing is the answer even though it can't demonstrate a statistically relevant reduction in violent crime.

 

[TAS]

Mayor's forum tonight - Watson, Krushell, Sohi and Oshry all supporting vaccine passport.
Nickel invited but did not attend.

Sohi, who definitely has the support of many in the NDP, was at odds with Oshry, Krushell and Watson who said the private sector should be contracted by the city to do things it can do more efficiently. Sohi is opposed to that.

"Watson said the city should focus on its core mandates such as road upkeep, transportation systems and multi-use pathways and then look to non-profits and the private sector for things outside of those mandates."

Oshry said the private sector should be doing what it can do more effectively and Krushell said there needs to be a balance."

Although Nickel declined to participate in Wednesday’s forum, he took to Twitter pointing out the four candidates were not wearing a mask in an indoor public space.

“Do candidates have special privileges excluding them from masking indoors? Or must they follow the bylaw like the rest of us,” Nickel said in a tweet.

Four Edmonton mayoral candidates voice support for proof of vaccination

Four of Edmonton’s mayoral candidates took the stage at Polar Park Brewing Co. on Wednesday evening, all saying they support having to provide proof of…

www.google.com

 

[Aaron_Lloyd]

Pleas for apathy because Edmonton isn't as bad as LA or a 3rd world country is exactly the sort of harmful whataboutism crap that's allowed the core of the city to backslide as it has. I don't think we should have to wait until things get to drug warlord levels to start actually caring and taking things seriously.

I find it genuinely disappointing that there's such a lack of interest on this forum for addressing crime directly considering how much of a factor it's been in holding back the development of the core of our city and the role crime plays in pushing people out to the suburbs. I also find it sad that there's seemingly so much sympathy for racialized and indigenous people said to be targeted by policing while apparently little sympathy for the vulnerable, racialized, and indigenous people who end up disproportionately victims of crime.

I think it's a bit silly to minimize the positive effects a 43% reduction of auto break-ins and 15% reduction in burglaries in areas specifically targeted for additional enforcement when in fact I think it would be a big deal for a lot of people who are stuck in the most crime ridden areas of our city. I don't buy that $100m is a reasonable estimate of the costs that would be required given the relatively limited geographic areas that really need the additional enforcement (e.g. Belgravia and Windsor Park may be central neighbourhoods but they wouldn't really see any benefit to extra police on the streets in the same way McCauley might).

I'm by no means a police-only kind of guy, I'd really like to see more social supports put in place. Unfortunately a fair amount of that will have to wait for the provincial election in 2023. Municipally, while I'm definitely not married to the idea of voting for the guy, only one major mayoral candidate right now appears to be prioritizing public safety and as boneheaded as he often is I think I might rather at this point take a risk with him than have a 4 year stint of fauxgressive do-nothingness on this issue which is what I'd be worried we'd get under Sohi. It doesn't help that Sohi has been so tight lipped with elements of his platform which certainly leaves a lot of room for fearing the worst. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there's a decent chance he'll release a comprehensive plan soon for public safety that will end up swaying me back to him (in double checking things for this post it looks like he's added quite a few more policies since I last looked that all looked good), but in the meantime I'm going to remain skeptical.

I think we all want a better type of urbanism to take root in the city... but I also think there are people on this forum need to realise that the city needs to enable the conditions for people to actually want better urban design and doing what we can now to enhance the feeling of public safety in central Edmonton would go a long way to making people more receptive.

 

[EdmTrekker]

^^^^ Not so...
1. My brother who still lives in Edmonton and was a sergeant on the Edmonton Police Service (retired) keeps me updated on the crime scene there (it is far, far less severe than greater Los Angeles).
2. Donald Trump trumpeted "law and order" through his whole term and did nothing about it here in the U.S. -- remind you of anyone?
3. The solution is found in this read... The Death and Life of Great American Cities by writer and activist Jane Jacobs and not in doubling the police force -- (after all -- think about it -- the Police Headquarters in Edmonton is located in the most serious crime precinct in Edmonotn) -- and Mike Nickel has no idea what he is talking about -- he is simply playing on people's emotional response to their base fears to get elected; otherwise why didn't he offer these solutions through his term as a City Councillor.

4. Mike Nickel has no idea what he is talking about -- he is simply playing on people's emotional response to their base fears to get elected; otherwise why didn't he offer these solutions through his term as a City Councillor. (EdmTrekker says you just called bingo! Nickel is a sniveler who never stops bitching but offers NO solution to anything - another wanna be big mouth Trump that wants to win by brow beating, deceiving and putting down anything he does not like (and may even like) to generate anger. We know his game and we know some of his supporters).

 

[EdmTrekker]

4. Mike Nickel has no idea what he is talking about -- he is simply playing on people's emotional response to their base fears to get elected; otherwise why didn't he offer these solutions through his term as a City Councillor. (EdmTrekker says you just called bingo! Nickel is a sniveler who never stops bitching but offers NO solution to anything - another wanna be big mouth Trump that wants to win by brow beating, deceiving and putting down anything he does not like (and may even like) to generate anger. We know his game and we know some of his supporters and so do his competitors and future councillors).

 

[TAS]

I think this column is a fair assessment of the mayor's race so far

Keith Gerein: Edmonton's election is one of the most intriguing in decades, and it deserves our attention

Don’t look now, but there are only five weeks left until Edmonton chooses its next mayor, city councillors and school trustees.

www.google.com

"In terms of policy, three of the four are relatively aligned on many of the priority issues. Krushell, Oshry and Watson tend to see eye to eye on avoiding tax hikes, cutting city costs, reducing burdens on business, investing locally, building up the tech sector, focusing on small-scale infrastructure, bringing more events downtown, improving provincial-municipal relations and getting the city out of land development.

As for Sohi, his platform isn’t outrageously different, but he is definitely the outlier of the quartet.

Like the others, he has advocated for a more cost-efficient and business-friendly city hall. However, he has not proposed any specifics on taxes or spending reductions, and has resisted the idea of cutting the municipal payroll. Compared with the other three, he also sees a more activist role for the city in guiding economic growth".

The column talks about some back and forth between oshry and sohi.

"In a Wednesday afternoon debate, for example, Sohi responded with an out-of-character, ill-advised quip about Oshry owing much of his success to family privilege, which is not true."

Some of the Oshry Sohi jabs...
"has produced a handful of moments on stage uncomfortable enough to leave the two women candidates looking like the only real grownups."

 

[Edmonchuk]

Avoiding tax hikes, small-scale infrastructure = no investment in infrastructure and public transit? Or I don't understand something?