I work for Mayor Nenshi, ask me anything!

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by SebC

I've heard Nenshi talking about political salaries being set at about the worst level possible - high enough that people will do politics for the money, but not high enough that the best and brightest will do it for the money.

Do municipal politicians really need to be drawn from the best and the brightest? From people who would otherwise be surgeons and CFOs? It seems to me that we would have a pretty homogenous city council if they were all well-heeled professionals who associated with people who earned $250K +.

I'm fine with municipal politicians earning a decent middle-class living. And $115K is a good sight more than a decent middle-class salary. I'm not sure who Nenshi thinks is turning down a job in Calgary politics because it isn't enough dough. Being a city councillor was never meant to be a career. It wasn't long ago that they were paid about $30K, because it was expected you might do a term or two as a kind of civic duty and then go back to your real life. There's something to be said for elected officials at the municipal level being drawn from average citizens.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

There's something to be said for elected officials at the municipal level being drawn from average citizens.

I definitely think we'd do better with above average citizens than average citizens - whether it's in terms of analytical and creative solving, work ethic, compassion, or a variety of other attributes. It's almost tautological.

[Cube Inmate]

Originally Posted by SebC

I definitely think we'd do better with above average citizens than average citizens - whether it's in terms of analytical and creative solving, work ethic, compassion, or a variety of other attributes. It's almost tautological.

I think the Trump phenomenon is demonstrating what happens when people feel that their representatives are only selected from among the "elite." As much as it sucks to have an idiot in an elected position, the backlash of the common man can be even worse. And by "elite," I don't even mean the privileged and wealthy...but anyone who puts on airs of being smarter than the average Joe.

And yes, I understand the irony; Trump is one of the worst elitists around, yet is getting the support of those who are simply tired of "the establishment."

[GaiJin]

Originally Posted by SebC

Honestly, if your beef with our mayor is that he might not donate the tax credit he gets for a charitable donation to charity (which would in turn create another tax credit, which donating would create another tax credit, ad infinitum), then he must be doing extraordinarily well!

Is he benefitting from it , yes or no?
It's still a bit of hollow self serving gesture that looks good on the surface instead of just saying no to the extra pay.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by heep223

Nenshi's salary has grown 4% / annum.

I'd hardly call that a massive raise?

It's about 4% more than 99% of this city got the last few years.

Not only is he Canada's highest paid mayor, he makes more money than anyone in our senate including the speaker.

[calf]

Originally Posted by GaiJin

Is he benefitting from it , yes or no?
It's still a bit of hollow self serving gesture that looks good on the surface instead of just saying no to the extra pay.

He has less money in the bank by donating that cash and receiving a credit than if he were to keep it. So, no, he isn't benefitting.

[Addick]

Originally Posted by T@T

It's about 4% more than 99% of this city got the last few years.

Are you going to cry foul when their pay is held or reduced while 99% of Calgarians get a pay increase?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by V

Sorry, I'm a little slow, but why does that matter?

The average wage in the private sector needs to account for the risk premium compared to the public sector. So if you just look at average wage of the employed you miss all the people who are no longer working so the true private sector wage is lower.

This is more of an issue in union negotiations then with the council.

[Daorcey]

Originally Posted by GGG

Is there any information on the Cost Effectiveness of the Green Bin Program that is public. I am looking for detailed information on the assumptions made in terms of Capital Landfill cost, operating landfill cost, Capital compost Cost, Operating Compost cost, Value placed on Methane reduction vs CO2 emissions from increase trucking and composting process, and the value of the compost sold afterwards.

I am basically looking for the decision record used to decide to do the project. Is something like that publicly available?

Absolutely! You can find the report Council received to help them may the decision on this agenda (http://agendaminutes.calgary.ca/sire...doctype=AGENDA). Item 4.1.2

[troutman]

This seems to be the thread for municipal discussions . . .

Rosedale residents balk at proposed affordable housing sites in pricey neighbourhood

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-..._lsa=d5a0-54ca

“My concerns are the possible class of people that would be renting these affordable-housing units,” stated one resident, according to feedback compiled by the city.

“Are there reduced taxes for living next to affordable housing?” asked another.

[DiracSpike]

Wait, I thought NIMBYism was only a characteristic of rich white people in Bayview and Pumphill?

Can't really blame residents for being upset about this, although I don't really see how you'd be affected unless you lived right by those lots, and if you buy a house next to city-owned empty lots you should really expect the worst.

[The Yen Man]

How come NIMBY's are always saying "no no, we're totally not NIMBYs! We're upset because of the cost of the project and lack of consultation". Yah, like you guys care about what the project costs. And what's there to consult? You guys would just say "we've been consulted, and our conclusion is, not in my backyard!".

Just come out and admit you don't like having low income housing near you because it's going to bring in the poorer folk to your neighbourhood.

[Lubicon]

We're talking about one building (two units I suppose) on each street, that hardly seems overwhelming. And looking at Google streetview the houses on these proposed streets seem hardly high end homes to begin with although I imaging they have a relatively high market value. The arguement about hurting their upcoming retirement due to the house value (ie investment) losing value could also be viewed as these people mismanaging their money. If your home value is going to be your primary source of retirement wealth then you had too many eggs in the wrong basket.

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by troutman

This seems to be the thread for municipal discussions . . .

Rosedale residents balk at proposed affordable housing sites in pricey neighbourhood

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-..._lsa=d5a0-54ca

“My concerns are the possible class of people that would be renting these affordable-housing units,” stated one resident, according to feedback compiled by the city.

“Are there reduced taxes for living next to affordable housing?” asked another.

That's rich coming from a council who voted to close the midfield park which was one of the only low income places in the area not filled will drug addicts. Pathetic.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

We're talking about one building (two units I suppose) on each street, that hardly seems overwhelming. And looking at Google streetview the houses on these proposed streets seem hardly high end homes to begin with although I imaging they have a relatively high market value. The arguement about hurting their upcoming retirement due to the house value (ie investment) losing value could also be viewed as these people mismanaging their money. If your home value is going to be your primary source of retirement wealth then you had too many eggs in the wrong basket.

If anything, the new developments might actually help to marginally increase the property values. Instead of having a run-down vacant lot there will actually be a development in place. It may not be a modern and contemporary home but at least it will be better than a vacant lot. These are tucked away at the end of the blocks along a large concrete wall any ways so the "undesirables" are kind of out of the way of the "rich" folks.

[cam_wmh]

What is going on with the New Brighton soccer fields? They are always closed.
Poor drainage?

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

How come NIMBY's are always saying "no no, we're totally not NIMBYs! We're upset because of the cost of the project and lack of consultation". Yah, like you guys care about what the project costs. And what's there to consult? You guys would just say "we've been consulted, and our conclusion is, not in my backyard!".

Just come out and admit you don't like having low income housing near you because it's going to bring in the poorer folk to your neighbourhood.

Lol, that's exactly what one of the NIMBY's already said. From Troutman's post, just a few before yours.

Originally Posted by troutman

This seems to be the thread for municipal discussions . . .

Rosedale residents balk at proposed affordable housing sites in pricey neighbourhood

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-..._lsa=d5a0-54ca

“My concerns are the possible class of people that would be renting these affordable-housing units,” stated one resident, according to feedback compiled by the city.

“Are there reduced taxes for living next to affordable housing?” asked another.

[The Yen Man]

“There’s always going to be a small percentage of people who talk about issues like this from a NIMBY perspective,” Charlebois said.

“That’s not my group’s perspective . . . Affordable housing isn’t one of our issues. Our issue is the cost of the project and the lack of consultation.”

I was more commenting on this quote. Seems like her concerns are pretty much the same as the Nimby's who openly admitted to not wanting the poor folk in their rich neighborhood IMO. Don't say it's a "small percentage" because it clearly isn't.

[northcrunk]

I fell like NIMBY now means "The city wants to do something and residents are opposed" so they call them NIMBYs to force what the city wants.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

I fell like NIMBY now means "The city wants to do something and residents are opposed" so they call them NIMBYs to force what the city wants.

That's exactly what a NIMBY is. They city has deemed something as in the common good for the city and the residents don't want it for some selfish reason local to their neighbourhood.