Global reveals developer’s plan to control CGY city council

[Muta]

Go urban living! Woohoo!

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Slava

It is democracy in action though; I wouldn't cut a cheque to a candidate who would likely not support things I want to see supported? The developers have a vested interest in this have earmarked money as a result. Its a lot of money, but its the same principal.

And it's not going to candidates. It's going to the Manning Centre, where anyone can attend their training sessions.

Plus candidates still have to disclose their finances.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Plus candidates still have to disclose their finances.

Yes, after the election. The Province's changes to the Local Authorities Election Act were basically impotent. I do believe though that they give municipalites some authority to set their own rules on disclosure. Campaign Finance and Disclosure rules may well be part of Calgary's and Edmonton's Charter agreement with the Province. Certainly the big city elections are very different than a small hamlet, so more appropriate/tailored rules should apply to each.

Here's the Mayor's proposal on Campaign Finance and Disclosure Reform:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B02N...WMw/edit?hl=en

http://blog.calgarymayor.ca/2011/09/...ideas-not.html

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Yes, after the election. The Province's changes to the Local Authorities Election Act were basically impotent. I do believe though that they give municipalites some authority to set their own rules on disclosure. Campaign Finance and Disclosure rules may well be part of Calgary's and Edmonton's Charter agreement with the Province. Certainly the big city elections are very different than a small hamlet, so more appropriate/tailored rules should apply to each.

Here's the Mayor's proposal on Campaign Finance and Disclosure Reform:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B02N...WMw/edit?hl=en

http://blog.calgarymayor.ca/2011/09/...ideas-not.html

Well that is something I wouldn't argue; the electoral finance laws are a complete joke IMO. Just open for so much interpretation that they're useless.

That is the one area where I could see the video being damning for developers; if they're going to be clearly offside in terms of these laws then that would be a different story. Otherwise though, aside from personal dislike of their end goals, it's just a public release of the worst kept secret in municipal politics.

[Bunk]

Intrestingly, the Mayor's proposals for new Ethical Guidelines for Members of Council as well as Disclosure of Office expenses and gifts was approved by Council today. The Mayor's been following the components of these rules voluntarily (such as disclosing his expenses on his website quarterly) but felt it needed to be codified for all of Council:

http://blog.calgarymayor.ca/search/l...&max-results=7

Today's Council Agenda - Items under 8.4
http://agendaminutes.calgary.ca/sire...doctype=AGENDA

Blog on ethical guidelines
http://blog.calgarymayor.ca/2013/03/...isclosure.html

His Herald Column from a couple weeks ago on this
http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion...868/story.html

One interesting amendment to the ethical guidelines was that instead of just disclosing who is meeting with members of Council (similar to a lobbyist registry) Council members will also need to disclose who is meeting with their staff. The Mayor has been voluntarily disclosing his meetings with those external to the City of Calgary, but this new rule (moved by Alderman Chabot and supported by the Mayor) will mean disclosure of meetings with the Chief of Staff or staffers like myself.

[Bunk]

Harkens back to some of these comments from the Mayor's fundraiser several weeks back:

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/ca...207/story.html

No candidates have stepped forward to take on the mayor yet. But Nenshi warned that those who want him politically neutralized will try getting aldermen elected who dislike him, according to both social media posts and Herald interviews.

“There are people with very deep pockets trying to elect a council that won’t work with the mayor.... I want them to speak up,” political blogger Joey Oberhoffner wrote on Twitter, citing Nenshi from inside the fundraiser at Jack Singer Concert Hall.

“Take me on. Don’t buy proxy aldermen.... You don’t like me? Take me on"

[SebC]

This video highlights what to me is the big question in the upcoming municipal elections: will we elect a group of aldermen that allows our very popular mayor to act on his mandate, or will we allow this special interest group to have a council who will subvert Nenshi's agenda and act on behalf of the developers?

If you support Nenshi on smart growth, then pay attention to which side of this debate your alderman/candidates lie. The likes of Farrell and Pincott need support, or we risk having a council that will vote down Nenshi's agenda.

Something else to think about: how ethical is it for the development industry to attempt to subvert, in this manner, a mayor who has an absolutely huge mandate (from a well defined platform and very high approval rating)?

I would like to see all candidates asked, at any forum/debate that takes place, whether they support an increase to the standard developer fees to eliminate the subsidy the current fees provide (i.e. a roughly $7,500 increase per home). Don't vote for anyone who says "no".

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Intrestingly, the Mayor's proposals for new Ethical Guidelines for Members of Council as well as Disclosure of Office expenses and gifts was approved by Council today. The Mayor's been following the components of these rules voluntarily (such as disclosing his expenses on his website quarterly) but felt it needed to be codified for all of Council:

http://blog.calgarymayor.ca/search/l...&max-results=7

Today's Council Agenda - Items under 8.4
http://agendaminutes.calgary.ca/sire...doctype=AGENDA

Blog on ethical guidelines
http://blog.calgarymayor.ca/2013/03/...isclosure.html

His Herald Column from a couple weeks ago on this
http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion...868/story.html

One interesting amendment to the ethical guidelines was that instead of just disclosing who is meeting with members of Council (similar to a lobbyist registry) Council members will also need to disclose who is meeting with their staff. The Mayor has been voluntarily disclosing his meetings with those external to the City of Calgary, but this new rule (moved by Alderman Chabot and supported by the Mayor) will mean disclosure of meetings with the Chief of Staff or staffers like myself.

So you are saying if I took you out to Fatburger to argue the plight of the overfed fat people of the city, you would have to disclose that?

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Intrestingly, the Mayor's proposals for new Ethical Guidelines for Members of Council as well as Disclosure of Office expenses and gifts was approved by Council today. The Mayor's been following the components of these rules voluntarily (such as disclosing his expenses on his website quarterly) but felt it needed to be codified for all of Council:

http://blog.calgarymayor.ca/search/l...&max-results=7

Today's Council Agenda - Items under 8.4
http://agendaminutes.calgary.ca/sire...doctype=AGENDA

Blog on ethical guidelines
http://blog.calgarymayor.ca/2013/03/...isclosure.html

His Herald Column from a couple weeks ago on this
http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion...868/story.html

One interesting amendment to the ethical guidelines was that instead of just disclosing who is meeting with members of Council (similar to a lobbyist registry) Council members will also need to disclose who is meeting with their staff. The Mayor has been voluntarily disclosing his meetings with those external to the City of Calgary, but this new rule (moved by Alderman Chabot and supported by the Mayor) will mean disclosure of meetings with the Chief of Staff or staffers like myself.

All great ideas and steps in the right direction. I'm not sure what it has to do with the topic at hand though.

Are you suggesting that somehow the Manning Centre should also fall under these City initiatives? Or are you suggesting candidates in upcoming election should?

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by SebC

This video highlights what to me is the big question in the upcoming municipal elections: will we elect a group of aldermen that allows our very popular mayor to act on his mandate,

Actually we elect a group to work together, represent the whole city and come to consensus - - not to act on one persons' mandate.

or will we allow this special interest group to have a council who will subvert Nenshi's agenda and act on behalf of the developers?

Didn't Nenshi himself, just weeks ago, say the developers were the largest partner the city works with? The developers are citizens and employ 1000's more citizens; if they feel they are under represented on council why shouldn't they speak out and seek out candidates who will listen and be more willing to work with them.

This happens all the time on the provincial front; ie: teachers, doctors, unions, farmers, etc.

If you support Nenshi on smart growth, then pay attention to which side of this debate your alderman/candidates lie. The likes of Farrell and Pincott need support, or we risk having a council that will vote down Nenshi's agenda.

What's with this Nenshi's agenda? You've used that term twice.

Something else to think about: how ethical is it for the development industry to attempt to subvert, in this manner, a mayor who has an absolutely huge mandate (from a well defined platform and very high approval rating)?

What exactly are they subverting? From the sounds of it developers have given money to a think tank (not illegal); that think tank is now hosting a series of educational programs for all candidates. Sounds more like ensuring democracy; not subverting it.

[MrMastodonFarm]

God dammit, the thread's been First Lady'd.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Rathji

So you are saying if I took you out to Fatburger to argue the plight of the overfed fat people of the city, you would have to disclose that?

Yes, but I would pay for my own fatburger.

[SebC]

It's worth mentioning here that votecalgary.ca is run by and for the development industry... their influence isn't limited to fundraising. Take anything you read there with a grain of salt.

[kirant]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Global and Doug Vaessen says it will release the entire video tommorrow.

Could you post a link? I really want to see how my alderman ended up on this.

[Manhattanboy]

Aw boo hoo Mayor Nenshi. So sorry this is how things work in the "big city".

Bronconnier had it right when he said the mayor is merely one vote, which carries no greater weight than any one alderman and under our system all that is required to pass council resolutions is 8 votes.

Nenshi is a whiner.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Aw boo hoo Mayor Nenshi. So sorry this is how things work in the "big city".

Bronconnier had it right when he said the mayor is merely one vote, which carries no greater weight than any one alderman and under our system all that is required to pass council resolutions is 8 votes.

Nenshi is a whiner.

Did you even read the article or watch the video?

[SebC]

Originally Posted by First Lady

[snip]

It's pretty clear what Nenshi stands for. He ran a policy-heavy campaign in a high-profile election that had a massive turnout. This, combined with his sky-high approval rating gives him a strong mandate. I do not need to spell out for you what his platform was, if you don't know you can look it up yourself.

For these Manning Centre candidates to have an equal strength of mandate, they must be explicit and vocal about their intent to maintain/increase new home subsidies. If they do not get that strength of mandate (and I expect they won't), then in voting for the developer's agenda over Nenshi's they would be subverting the expressed will of the voting public.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by SebC

It's worth mentioning here that votecalgary.ca is run by and for the development industry... their influence isn't limited to fundraising. Take anything you read there with a grain of salt.

Shhh.... they even say that on their website.

http://www.votecalgary.ca/vote-calgary-story/

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Did you even read the article or watch the video?

I did. There is nothing illegal or immoral regarding the conduct of the meeting. Global is trying to sensationalize a whole lot of nothing.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by First Lady

All great ideas and steps in the right direction. I'm not sure what it has to do with the topic at hand though.

Are you suggesting that somehow the Manning Centre should also fall under these City initiatives? Or are you suggesting candidates in upcoming election should?

This whole thing relates to campaign contributions, disclosure and wielding influence with Council. These new measures are related and address how Council has designed ethical rules on things like disclusure of meetings, expenses and gifts - also related is the financing of campaigns and disclosure of contributions.

Not a comment on the Manning Centre at all.