2013 Calgary Municipal Election Thread

[Slava]

Thanks, I do appreciate that! I would get crushed at this point though. You would need to have about $90-100k raised and have a team all set at this point. With nominations being Monday it would be futile to come out of the wood work. The power of incumbency is one thing, but a last minute stab is a whole other.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

"Whatever OT compensation is in employees' contracts, they should be eligible to receive it without any questions asked. Then come the personal conscience and ethical considerations from the employees themselves - should they keep it or return/donate it considering the circumstances?

Meh, I think there's a little too much emotional attachment to this issue for some people. Yes, it was amazing that thousands of volunteers came together and helped out where they could. And lots of people are attaching that same scenario to city workers who put in OT, but the reality is, they were working.

They were called out to work on this project and put in tons of hours, doing their job. There was no beer breaks, or standing around with people you've met to talk about how awesome everyone is, or stopping by a TD van to grab a bunch of food and drink. They just came out, on the clock and worked at specific tasks. They deserve the OT, and shouldn't feel bad about it, imo.

It's great for those of us who volunteered to look at it from our perspective and think "man, seriously guys? We were all there for free, and you're there collecting OT? Brutal." But the reality is, I'm sure a lot of those opinions would change if you were the one being called out for work and then being asked if you want money for it or not.

[Mazrim]

My biggest beef with DCU is she picks strange issues to tackle and gets blinded by them. She sees nothing else and most of the time only a small group of people benefit from her agenda. She spent most of her term fighting a privately owned golf course turning into density near a C-Train Station!

I get that you need dissenting opinions from time to time in council, but stuff like this OT pay just don't sit well with how I want our ward represented. I'd rather vote for anyone but her.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Meh, I think there's a little too much emotional attachment to this issue for some people. Yes, it was amazing that thousands of volunteers came together and helped out where they could. And lots of people are attaching that same scenario to city workers who put in OT, but the reality is, they were working.

They were called out to work on this project and put in tons of hours, doing their job. There was no beer breaks, or standing around with people you've met to talk about how awesome everyone is, or stopping by a TD van to grab a bunch of food and drink. They just came out, on the clock and worked at specific tasks. They deserve the OT, and shouldn't feel bad about it, imo.

It's great for those of us who volunteered to look at it from our perspective and think "man, seriously guys? We were all there for free, and you're there collecting OT? Brutal." But the reality is, I'm sure a lot of those opinions would change if you were the one being called out for work and then being asked if you want money for it or not.

I don't disagree that these people worked for it, and I don't think that anyone thinks they stood around the water-cooler trading stock tips or spent the time posting on CP. On the radio last night though I heard that some of these guys claimed $300k in overtime! That seems completely ridiculous.

I have a hard time thinking that overtime is something that we should be paying to salaried employees who are at these levels. I'm not hardline here, because I recognize that these are extenuating circumstances that hopefully we don't see again, but at the same time a guy making a few hundred a year with full benefits a good pension and everything else is well compensated.

I think it also has to be recognized that we're not talking about front-line responders here. These people are in management. No one is suggesting that police offices, fire fighters, roads crews or other workers in these areas aren't deserving of being paid. That is a pretty clear distinction IMO.

[burn_this_city]

All combined it was $300k I thought, I don't think anyone collected that much.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

All combined it was $300k I thought, I don't think anyone collected that much.

I hope so! If it was combined then forget my comments....its nothing in that case. If one guy picked that up though, then I'm thinking we should be looking at it further.

[Knut]

Originally Posted by Slava

Thanks, I do appreciate that! I would get crushed at this point though. You would need to have about $90-100k raised and have a team all set at this point. With nominations being Monday it would be futile to come out of the wood work. The power of incumbency is one thing, but a last minute stab is a whole other.

1) do a Kickstarter type program to fund you

2) Pick a color (say Bright Orange)

3) Agressive Twitter campaign and have a bunch of "Team Orange" to support you.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Hesla

1) do a Kickstarter type program to fund you

2) Pick a color (say Bright Orange)

3) Agressive Twitter campaign and have a bunch of "Team Orange" to support you.

To take out "Big Red" it would be fitting to use orange just because the two colours clash!

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Hesla

1) do a Kickstarter type program to fund you

2) Pick a color (say Bright Orange)

3) Agressive Twitter campaign and have a bunch of "Team Orange" to support you.

Each one of your volunteers could be an "agent orange".

[Knut]

Got a slogan for you ...

" Pick Vic, he is not a Dic"

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Each one of your volunteers could be an "agent orange".

I would volunteer to be Agent Orange to DCU.

[Bunk]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...roup-1.1861230

Maybe someone should start a rival Super-PAC. Calgary Latte-Sippers for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow.

[I-Hate-Hulse]

If signs are any indication, Druh could be in for a fight. Brent Alexander door knocked in my part of the ward and it's about 5-1 for Brent since then.

I wish I had been around when he answered - would like to have quizzed him on a few things. His website is far too vague and speaks in generalities - kudos to Chris Harper for clearly stating his position on a variety of topics. That said, Kevin Taylor's site is even worse...

[SebC]

Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse

If signs are any indication, Druh could be in for a fight. Brent Alexander door knocked in my part of the ward and it's about 5-1 for Brent since then.

I wish I had been around when he answered - would like to have quizzed him on a few things. His website is far too vague and speaks in generalities - kudos to Chris Harper for clearly stating his position on a variety of topics. That said, Kevin Taylor's site is even worse...

What part of the ward are you in? Alexander's support is strong in West Hillhurst, but overall Ward 7 will most likely be between Farrell and Taylor, as it was last time. Alexander is the guy who might play spoiler for Farrell.

As far as specifics go, I think Alexander's actually presented quite a lot of detail. You just have to go through his blog to find it.

I disagree with you on Chris Harper's platform (hi, charper). I find it deliberately vague in a quite a few places.

Example 1: "Improving City services isn’t about spending more or spending less, it’s about making the best use of what we already have" is effectively dodging the question of whether we are taxed at an appropriate level. Everybody wants bang for the buck. That's not an election issue, nor does it differentiate a candidate from anyone else.

Example 2: "Keeping our city’s growth balanced is important to ensuring affordability and opportunities for every Calgarian to afford a home whether a
condominium, secondary suite, or single family residence. Chris supports a balanced approach that makes the best use of the land we already have without making Calgary unaffordable."

I support a "balanced approach". Cal Wenzel supports a "balanced approach". Which way are we out of balance and how does that balance need to shift? Or have we already nailed the right balance? You can't equivocate any better than that. Stop balancing on the fence, Chris!

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by Bunk

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...roup-1.1861230

Maybe someone should start a rival Super-PAC. Calgary Latte-Sippers for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow.

Already on it Bunk.

If they are "Common Sense Calgary" I was thinking of starting "C'mon Son!", the name of the group is simply the rebuttal to their claims and accusations, and the images they chose to use on their website.

In fact the very image of the heroin den looking Vancouver house on the home page was brought up to them in an interview yesterday on CBC's The Homestretch. Their spokesman admitted in the interview that it was indeed "extreme" but that was so it could "start conversation".

C'mon son!

I'm sure the Common Sense folks will try and claim their website it just like Civic Camp (you know the latte lifters slate website), but just compare the front page of each and the differences are quite clear right away:

Common Sense Calgary:
http://commonsensecalgary.com/



Using the pic of the YVR house and the statement that YYC planners are making Calgary unaffordable.

Civic Camp:
http://www.civiccamp.org/



No fear mongering pictures or statements, some info about a crowdsourcing initiative for the 2013 school board trustee forum. Further down the page is the calendar with info like the forums they are putting on for the various races. Also showing twitter activity on the left side and facebook on the right.

Just yesterday someone on twitter contacted Common Sense asking them a question:

Welcome to twitter @commonsenseyyc Question - you tout the need for affordable housing on your site. What's your stance on secondary suites?

Here was the response:

@alexYYC Thanks for the Q. We would like to hear from voters on impact of 2nd suites on affordability & community. Stay tuned! #yycvote #yyc

Hmm, not answering a direct question based on the OPINION that the website states. I think it is more than fair to expect them to answer a question to an accusation they make on their website.


This is where Civic Camp and Common Sense diverge, one is actually set up to gather a wide range of information, opinions, and questions to be used for the upcoming election and even day to day stuff in the city. Common Sense has been set up to make fear mongering statements and not actually engage or reply to people asking them about said statements. Instead falling back to the "We are here to hear from voters on it" statement.



I just think it is weak effort all around, and is full of quite a few holes in their statements.

[Slava]

Is common sense directly endorsing/supporting candidates?

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by Slava

Is common sense directly endorsing/supporting candidates?

The spokesperson I heard yesterday said no. I think they will be long on bold statements and short on real answers.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

The spokesperson I heard yesterday said no. I think they will be long on bold statements and short on real answers.

Haha. In all honesty, if they're not endorsing anyone and not actually supporting anyone its a whole lot of nothing. I heard all they're doing is that website and I think the impact is basically zero.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by Slava

Haha. In all honesty, if they're not endorsing anyone and not actually supporting anyone its a whole lot of nothing. I heard all they're doing is that website and I think the impact is basically zero.

I think that the strategy will be to have a lot of these "issues" parroted by the Manning/developer-backed candidates, and a site like this reinforces that. Then when Joe the Plumber goes to cast his vote for councillor, he'll think "this guy has my vote because he believes in cheap houses and freeways and cops and common sense! Just like that website said too!"

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

I think that the strategy will be to have a lot of these "issues" parroted by the Manning/developer-backed candidates, and a site like this reinforces that. Then when Joe the Plumber goes to cast his vote for councillor, he'll think "this guy has my vote because he believes in cheap houses and freeways and cops and common sense! Just like that website said too!"

Sure, but its no different than what SebC alluded to above. Every candidate uses these buzzwords and catch phrases. Everyone out there is a fiscal conservative who will trim the fat, represent the people, act in a prudent and balanced manner and is in favour of smart growth. Virtually none of them want to tell you explicitly how any of this will take place, or what they'll actually do though.

I was approached yesterday to sign nomination papers for an aldermanic candidate (spoiler, it was not for DCU!). His representative told me that his basic stance was "change". There were no other details, and no actual policy planks whatsoever that I could find. Don't get me wrong, I still happily signed, but that is politics these days.