2013 Calgary Municipal Election Thread

[Regular_John]

Originally Posted by First Lady

....
The posters who I do know, or those who use their real name; are like my friends in the CC.org group - they are decent people and generally don't take things personally. We can have differing views and discuss issues as adults.
....

Given that wording I'll take this as an opportunity to pipe in on the matter. Taking the name of another organization through backdoor "gotcha" legal manoeuvres (yes, I read Cory's post about the registration) is an underhanded, dirty technique, and you should have known better.

While technically (and possibly legally) speaking you were within your right to say "this organization is not currently registered properly and we have serious doubts about their transparency & motivations" it does not make it ok to simply barge in & dismantle their foundation through loopholes & stunts like this.

If you wanted to call them out on their shortcomings/organization structures there are much better ways of doing so. Given your social media, political & legal savvy you had a number of better options at your disposal, many of which would have allowed you to take the high road. You choose not to and now you're being rightly chastised for it.

/rant

[NuclearPizzaMan]

Originally Posted by Ducay

I'm actually quite surprised at that to be honest. Normally, when I make a sh*t attempt at a joke and it blows up in my face I give up on it pretty quick and begin trying to undo the damage.

Cory and Jane Morgan seem to be just going for broke on this (pun intended). I can't see CivicCamp, which has some solid donors, not going after the Morgans legally.

Best part is Jane has roughly 0.02% chance of having anyone give her the time of day or a shred of respect on this forum anymore. Took long enough, but she finally exposed herself for who she really is.

You shouldn't be surprised. Bad people do bad things. The "joke" thing is just cover.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Pagal4321

What I found to be a good editorial piece from the builder side.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion...490/story.html

Something has been bugging me about this. He states:

My experience tells me that Calgary is soon to face a housing affordability crisis, possibly within 24 months. Over the last eight years, we’ve seen this play out. Eight years ago, $285,000 would buy you a 2,000-square-foot single family home with a double-car garage on a 36-foot-wide lot. Today, it will buy you a 1,200-square-foot multi-family unit with a single garage 14 feet wide.

My fear is that in the not too distant future, if things continue as they are, the purchasing power for the average Calgary family will erode to the point where home ownership is no longer an option.

The bulk of that price increase started in late 2005, and ended in mid 2007 (a time period during which most would agree we had a "developer-friendly" city council).

This chart shows the growth in home prices in Calgary from September 2002 through September 2013...

Spoiler!

In September 2005, the average price for a detached house was about $275,000. In August 2007, the price reached its peak (in that run) just over $500,000. Since then, it has fluctuated between $400,000 and $500,000. In September 2013, the price appears slightly higher than it was in August 2007.

So, while it is true to say that a single detached home 8 years ago cost almost half the price of a similar home today, it is also true to say that a single detached home 6 years ago cost roughly the same price as a similar home today.

That massive spike in home prices corresponded with a similar spike in Calgary's population (itself caused by a massive boom in the local economy): http://www.liveincalgary.com/overvie...ast-population

From 2005 to 2006, the city's population grew 4% and from 2006 to 2007, it grew 3.5%. I believe the city census is conducted each spring (April, I believe), so those population spikes line up with the housing price spikes.


I find his statement, "if things continue as they are, the purchasing power for the average Calgary family will erode to the point where home ownership is no longer an option", to be very misleading. If the next five years are similar to the last five years, the average price for a single family house will not be significantly higher than it is today.

He goes on to say, "Government policy impacts the price of housing. That’s a fact. The price of housing impacts our economy. That’s a fact." So, what policies caused the average price of housing to nearly double in less than 2 years between the fall of 2005 and the fall of 2007? What government policies over the last five years have caused housing prices to stabilize?

[Slava]

My one fear with restricting development too much is that it will push the would-be buyers to Airdrie,Chestermere, Okotoks,Cochrane,Langdon,etc. and we will have the same kind of impacts on our infrastructure but collect no taxes to deal with it.

[TurnedTheCorner]

Has the landslide happened yet? Can the thread be closed?

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

Has the landslide happened yet? Can the thread be closed?

Two more sleeps.

[JobHopper]

I believe the Wild Rose Party was to supposed to win the last provincial election by a landslide as well. I voted for Nenshi and gave him the benefit of a doubt but what I've seen so far is that he's just another politician. Sounds like he's unable to relate to commoners and the dollars and cents they earn and just makes them pay and pay. Outcome will be interesting for sure.

[Muta]

What do you mean, he's unable to relate to commoners? I don't understand that. Please explain.

[TurnedTheCorner]

How soon after the election can I call 311 to complain about signs still being up? Regardless of whether they are on public or private property?

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Slava

My one fear with restricting development too much is that it will push the would-be buyers to Airdrie,Chestermere, Okotoks,Cochrane,Langdon,etc. and we will have the same kind of impacts on our infrastructure but collect no taxes to deal with it.

Is that true? Assuming they're commuting into Calgary, people living in bedroom communities might have a similar impact on our main highways, but I'd think they wouldn't cost the city nearly as much for police and fire protection, water, sewage, waste collection, parks, side streets, etc.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Is that true? Assuming they're commuting into Calgary, people living in bedroom communities might have a similar impact on our main highways, but I'd think they wouldn't cost the city nearly as much for police and fire protection, water, sewage, waste collection, parks, side streets, etc.

Sure, but transit, rec centers, libraries, roads and everything else not directly related to the house will. We already see that. Slowing development will just exacerbate it.

[frinkprof]

Regarding Transit Camp's election survey of candidates, I was originally going to make a post each day to coincide with the Metro article for each question but I wasn't able to make the time to.

Anyway, the comprehensive list of responses is on the Transit Camp blog (http://transitcamp.ca) and the Metro articles are easy to find on their website. A bit lazy of me but free time has been at a premium lately so there you have it.

[Bunk]

Wonder if they ever found out who taped it the meeting.

http://globalnews.ca/news/911778/e-m...seating-chart/

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by JobHopper

Sounds like he's unable to relate to commoners and the dollars and cents they earn and just makes them pay

Everything I've heard about Nenshi suggests he's the biggest cheapskate around.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Seperate the polls from what you read and see and hear from people. Polls are about as relevant as the number of people polled. I think we've also seen that polls in the last few elections have significantly departed from actual results. Yes the sun is a rag, but reading editorials in the sun and herald and reader feedback, absolutely Nenshi is feeling some heat from voters on the property tax and provincial tax grab and too many closed door off camera meetings and a lot of other issues.

Don't want to get involved in this but I dislike the raising of property taxes as well, which is why I want people who are building new home to pay that cost instead of me paying for it.

If I wanted to pay for a new home, I would move into one.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Seperate the polls from what you read and see and hear from people. Polls are about as relevant as the number of people polled. I think we've also seen that polls in the last few elections have significantly departed from actual results. Yes the sun is a rag, but reading editorials in the sun and herald and reader feedback, absolutely Nenshi is feeling some heat from voters on the property tax and provincial tax grab and too many closed door off camera meetings and a lot of other issues.

His message in the last election was far different. He came across as a fiscal conservative, he was going to do a better job with our money then the previous mayor. He was going to open things up in terms of transparency, he was going to gain control of the cities bureaucracy and cut waste. That message was relevant to city voters.

A couple things I want to address - first on the tax room - or as you characterize, a "tax grab".

Fair ball - if you want to characterize it that way, that's fine. But let's remember the context in which the City took the tax room and what it was used for. It's purely for capital projects - in a context where there are no new provincial grants, existing promised grants are being rolled back, and the Federal Gov't hasn't provided any help (an in fact yanked promised funding - $100m from P3 Canada for Rec Centres).

So, we had two choices - go back to the days of Duerr and build nothing and fall way behind in a fast growing city), or take matters into our own hands as a municipality and build.

People often laud the stuff getting built - which is this:

2011: $42 million annually created the Community Investment Fund, which is funding the new Central Library, 4 new regional recreation centres in NW and SE Calgary, 3 new library branches and maintenance and upgrades to parks, arenas, swimming pools, and other recreation facilities across the city.

2012: $10.2 million annually was distributed to five areas: $2 million for sidewalks (replaces the 50% resident share for sidewalk replacements), $2 million to improve transit system reliability, $2 million for targeted traffic congestion solutions, $2 million for lifecycle maintenance of City buildings, and $2.2 million for enhancing community facilities like community halls.

2013: $52 million for flood recovery (repairing things like bridges, roadways that the City will not recover from insurance or provincial or federal disaster recovery programs). Future allocation of this annual tax room amount is yet to be decided by Council.

Then some deride the ONLY method by which we would have been able to build any of those things.

On the question of City spending - while services have increased (snow removal budget, increase in police, etc) the per capita cost per citizen of delivering all services (operating budget) accounting for inflation and population growth is level.

The Mayor cut $108 million from the 2012-2014 operating budget and implemented zero-based reviews - which are now being done on the two largest business units in the City - Parks and Roads (about 5000 employees). It's a systematic method to improve service delivery and improve efficiency of that service delivery - will save us millions per department. Yeah, it's not an across the board slash and burn approach that's super quick, but those approaches don't ever affect real systematic efficiency.

[Slava]

Can you review the tax issue for me again? I saw some of the discussion between you (Bunk), Nenshi and Markusoff on twitter, but missed most of it. Would you mind explaining both sides though? I'm not sure I understand where the discrepancy is.

[1stLand]

Originally Posted by Bunk

A couple things I want to address - first on the tax room - or as you characterize, a "tax grab".

Fair ball - if you want to characterize it that way, that's fine. But let's remember the context in which the City took the tax room and what it was used for. It's purely for capital projects - in a context where there are no new provincial grants, existing promised grants are being rolled back, and the Federal Gov't hasn't provided any help (an in fact yanked promised funding - $100m from P3 Canada for Rec Centres).

So, we had two choices - go back to the days of Duerr and build nothing and fall way behind in a fast growing city), or take matters into our own hands as a municipality and build.

People often laud the stuff getting built - which is this:

2011: $42 million annually created the Community Investment Fund, which is funding the new Central Library, 4 new regional recreation centres in NW and SE Calgary, 3 new library branches and maintenance and upgrades to parks, arenas, swimming pools, and other recreation facilities across the city.

2012: $10.2 million annually was distributed to five areas: $2 million for sidewalks (replaces the 50% resident share for sidewalk replacements), $2 million to improve transit system reliability, $2 million for targeted traffic congestion solutions, $2 million for lifecycle maintenance of City buildings, and $2.2 million for enhancing community facilities like community halls.

2013: $52 million for flood recovery (repairing things like bridges, roadways that the City will not recover from insurance or provincial or federal disaster recovery programs). Future allocation of this annual tax room amount is yet to be decided by Council.

Then some deride the ONLY method by which we would have been able to build any of those things.

On the question of City spending - while services have increased (snow removal budget, increase in police, etc) the per capita cost per citizen of delivering all services (operating budget) accounting for inflation and population growth is level.

The Mayor cut $108 million from the 2012-2014 operating budget and implemented zero-based reviews - which are now being done on the two largest business units in the City - Parks and Roads (about 5000 employees). It's a systematic method to improve service delivery and improve efficiency of that service delivery - will save us millions per department. Yeah, it's not an across the board slash and burn approach that's super quick, but those approaches don't ever affect real systematic efficiency.

I am a fiscal conservative and I definitely do not want to go back to the days of "Build Nothing Duerr" I have no problem with major investments to infrastructure - namely wider roads and interchanges to alleviate traffic congestion.

What I will be critical of the current mayor about is the lack of:
- Cutting costs (bloated administration)
- Innovation in finding new forms of revenue aside from increasing taxes
- Stupid expenditures such as the big blue circle

Need to find more money to get stuff built.

And Nenshi needs to find effective ways to lobby the province and federal government for money for infrastructure.
He had failed thus far.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by 1stLand

- Stupid expenditures such as the big blue circle

How is this a 'stupid' expenditure? Every municipal project has a 1% fee built into the approved funding for the project that is dedicated to public art. Just because you don't like the art means that it is a 'stupid' policy.

You would hate Montreal, then. Its built-in funding for art is 2%. And Berlin, which is a whopping 5%.

[Kavvy]

Originally Posted by 1stLand

What I will be critical of the current mayor about is the lack of:
- Cutting costs (bloated administration)
- Innovation in finding new forms of revenue aside from increasing taxes
- Stupid expenditures such as the big blue circle

.

I think you brought up some interesting points, however, the big blue circle discussion needs to die.

It is my understanding no one is annoyed that we have a 1% capital project cost which goes to art, people are just annoyed at the fact we have an expensive, ugly, badly located piece of art (yes art is subjective, but it's ugly) we as tax payers paid for.

If that is the case, I was told that this type of art is selected by a committee, of which Nenshi doesn't control, so it really isn't in his scope. Let the circle discussion die please!

Someone with more understanding of civic processes can't confirm if the above is true I am sure.