Naheed Nenshi vs Michelle Rempel

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Locke

Nenshi being a jerkface? Who cares? If your opponent is going to cry 'sexism' just for being wrong then your approach has to have more gravitas.

Clearly though, there are lots of people who care! I don't either them came out of this looking too great.

[Bownesian]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Of course it sucks that some businesses will see a large increase in taxes. With the current system, there is literally no way to have done anything different. Nenshi has been trying to change the system for 7 years, in part to be able avoid the problems of the property tax system that causes this kind of thing.

This is not true, except in the narrowest of terms of talking about how revenues are proportionally raised. The amount to be raised could be dropped (cutting expenses), or targeted measures like Nenshi's proposed rebate measure (returning excess taxes) are two ways the increase in the tax bill could be mitigated.

Right wingers like myself would argue that expenses can be cut from the budget - capital expenditures could be postponed, policies that lead to the Blue Ring that could have been amended, hiring freezes, wage rollbacks, etc. Others would say that these things should not be done in a downturn, which is a fine opinion, but there is not Nothing That Can be Done.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

I follow both and was watching twitter when this all happened starting from Nenshi's 5-part thread that started with this tweet:
https://twitter.com/nenshi/status/818258774485962753

Which prompted Rempel's reply thread starting with her first personal tweet here:
https://twitter.com/MichelleRempel/s...72600698679296

Followed by a thread here:
https://twitter.com/MichelleRempel/s...77386634412032

Rempel initially said the cost increases are too high (and so something else needed to be done), Nenshi saying it's impossible to do anything else because of how cities are funded. As is his oeuvre, he was the first to get snarky and personal in his 5th tweet when he referred to "your government". This got her hackles up and fought back accusing him of being a Liberal and it went back and forth with neither of them looking great.

Things died down and then the following clip happened, which I do see as extremely patronizing in a way that can easily be seen as sexist. Predictably, this quote from Nenshi made things much, much worse (watch this if nothing else):
https://twitter.com/CBCScott/status/819196897105588224

Then the article came out derived from the clip above, she got mad and he sorry-not-sorry defended his comment here, basically saying he's an ass to everyone and things got to where we are today:
https://twitter.com/nenshi/status/819028812646137857

I quite admire Michelle Rempel. Her twitter takes are clever, pretty instant and are strong opinions and that gets her into some fights like this, but it's honest and I can live with that. She has no tolerance for (and goes over the top in response to) patronizing head-patting tones from male politicians.

(This kind of thing has come up in debates with former minister McCallum, and has special meaning in Alberta given how it was perceived in the Prentice/Notley debate)

As a man, it's not for me to say whether these tones are truly sexism or are just perceived as such by thin-skinned pseudo-feminists vying for attention (or whatever the criticism of the day is), but I personally don't talk to people this way and don't think others should either.

I like Nenshi as well because he's smart and refers to data and when he's not being an ass is pretty informative about his ideas. Unfortunately, his skin is super thin, and he gets personal all the time in his twitter exchanges, especially with right of center politicians. I doubt he's sexist or meant his clip above to be sexist, but he shouldn't talk to or about people that way. It's unprofessional and unbecoming for a mayor.

Basically, they're both hot-heads, but Nenshi is more at fault in my opinion.

Great post, very informative, even if I dont agree with your final assertion.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

Rempel's an idiot, but man does Nenshi like to add in snarky remarks. You can tell a lot about a person by the way they act, and Nenshi is not a nice person. Guy must be a total tool to talk to, always trying to show you how much smarter he is than everyone else.

City Hall watchers say he's the most egotistical politician in this city since Klein, but he lacks Klein's personal charm.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

I quite admire Michelle Rempel. Her twitter takes are clever, pretty instant and are strong opinions and that gets her into some fights like this, but it's honest and I can live with that.

It's not remotely honest. It's entirely the opposite. It's an insincere, cynical attempt to score points by distracting from the issue and imputing motive to someone who clearly doesn't have it. This is not a new tactic, and it's disgusting. Say what you want about Nenshi but there is zero chance he's a misogynist, which you seem to accept later in your post.

As a man, it's not for me to say whether these tones are truly sexism or are just perceived as such by thin-skinned pseudo-feminists vying for attention (or whatever the criticism of the day is), but I personally don't talk to people this way and don't think others should either.

This is insanity. Yes. It is for you to say. Your genetalia does not preclude you from forming a well-considered opinion on whether the mayor's statement demeaned Rempel on the basis of her gender or otherwise. It's also not a matter of thin skin in this particular case; it's pretty clearly just opportunism on her part. You're losing on the merits of the policy discussion? Change the subject by calling your opponent a bad person.

Your final sentence is right, but has nothing to do with the rest of the paragraph - the fact that you shouldn't talk to people this way (because it's condescending) does not in any way imply that gender is at issue here.

[Bunk]

I'm quite impressed with many people's comprehension of our property tax system, revenue neutral calculation and so forth. Well done.

[Bownesian]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

This is insanity. Yes. It is for you to say. Your genetalia does not preclude you from forming a well-considered opinion on whether the mayor's statement demeaned Rempel on the basis of her gender or otherwise.

Your final sentence is right, but has nothing to do with the rest of the paragraph - the fact that you shouldn't talk to people this way (because it's condescending) does not in any way imply that gender is at issue here.

Respectfully, I'm saying that I don't know what it's like to be a woman and am accepting the very real possibility that I may be blind to small sexisms experienced by women out there. I do suspect that these sorts of condescending comments are disproportionately directed at women and so regardless of intent, the perception of imbalance and thus sexism is valid.

Whether our mayor is a misogynist (I suspect not) or an ass with thin skin and not much filter (more likely this), the "Math is hard" comment was perceived as sexist when it came from Prentice to Notley, and is thus unacceptable in the current political climate.

Because tone matters, please watch the video of Nenshi's comment if you haven't:
https://twitter.com/CBCScott/status/819196897105588224

I wouldn't like this sort of scornful condescension directed at myself, nor would I accept it. People shouldn't talk about each other that way, regardless of gender. It's disappointing, and is a part of a pattern that has driven me from being a Nenshi supporter to being much more ready to consider an alternative.

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by Smartcar

The real issue is that we pay for (almost all of) the cost of municipal government through property taxes, and the City isn't allowed to run a deficit. Property taxes are based on a mill rate set for the amount of money required, from the total assessment base. If the entire tax base shifts uniformly, the taxes paid will stay proportionately the same. If some property values go way down and others stay the same, the tax burden will shift. There is nothing the City can do about it, they can set separate mill rates for residential and non-residential but are not allowed to set a separate mill rate for downtown and suburban non-residential. 25% vacancy rates downtown are going to affect property values.

Michelle Rempel should know this and was just making political hay. So she deserved the snarky remark.

Actually, that first comment isn't true. I don't know how it is in Calgary but in my city property taxes make up 27 per cent of revenue and it isn't the largest revenue source at all.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

Whether our mayor is a misogynist (I suspect not) or an ass with thin skin and not much filter (more likely this), the "Math is hard" comment was perceived as sexist when it came from Prentice to Notley, and is thus unacceptable in the current political climate.

If it is considered sexist in the current political climate (and it certainly is by some, which is why Rempel chose to respond in this way), that's a problem with the political climate itself. Whether or not Notley or Rempel claim to "perceive" it as sexist (as stated, I think it's more a matter of phony, cynical opportunism) is irrelevant. Claiming to have had your feelings hurt by a statement does not in any way affect the intent or content of the statement. In other words,

Spoiler!

Because tone matters, please watch the video of Nenshi's comment if you haven't:
https://twitter.com/CBCScott/status/819196897105588224
I wouldn't like this sort of scornful condescension directed at myself, nor would I accept it. People shouldn't talk about each other that way, regardless of gender.

I have, and I think your comment is a perfectly reasonable reaction to it. I understand his frustration with an MP making public statements that are deliberately misleading, as Rempel's were, but his response represents what people dislike most about Nenshi. If I'm being honest, though, I'd probably be at least as big a sarcastic jerk if I were mayor and faced with some of the nonsense that's propagated by politicians hoping to advance their own interests and agenda, without any sense that they care about misinforming their audience. That said, I can't disagree with your assessment.

It's disappointing, and is a part of a pattern that has driven me from being a Nenshi supporter to being much more ready to consider an alternative.

I agree that it's part of a pattern. I don't agree that it significantly moves me toward an alternative, with the caveat that I'll consider any alternative in any election that seems like they'd do a better job at the position. Nenshi's intermittent public relations gaffes don't change my view that he is highly qualified to be doing what he's doing, and that by and large, he's done a pretty good job. I'd rather have a mayor who says dumb things to the press than one who's totally unobjectionable in public but isn't as capable in his day to day job. Just my voting priorities, of course.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

Can we talk about the real issue? Why is the city increasing taxes on commercial properties at a time when vacancies are at an all time high and minimum wage increases are hurting small business? Does the city just say we are going to collect X amount of tax and because all the downtown properties crashed in valuation it means all the mom & pops have to pick up the slack of the major corporate players who aren't paying anymore?

We all know that increasing property taxes on landlords only leads to them simply passing down the cost to their tenants in increased rent or operating costs.

This makes it even harder for all the small business tenants to even survive.

As others have said, the way property taxes are calculated, it takes the assessment base from the previous year and adjusts the rate to be "revenue neutral" from the previous year. Then the City sets the budget to sort out how much money it requires, then sets the new mill rate that will collect that amount of money based on the new assessment base.

When you hear a "5% property tax increase" that's how much more revenue it's receiving over last year. When you consider say 2.5% population growth and 2.5% inflation, it's in essence "level" from the previous year to operate services.

This year, (inclusive of a small rebate from reserves) the tax change is zero. Taking in the same amount as last year.

However, the problem with the system is when circumstances like what going on now, happen.

Downtown comprises almost a quarter of the total tax revenue of the City. When it's hard hit like now and it's assessed value drops far more than the City average, non downtown commercial properties pay proportionally more with the new adjusted mill rate. Council is trying to offset this unfortunate circumstance somehow (something that would equate to a cap of a 5% increase). Even if the City reduced its aggregate tax take, in a year like this still many properties would see a heavy increase individually.

Also as mentioned the City is required under the Municipal Government Act to tax this way. It would like to see changes, but that requires provincial legislative change. No luck so far.

[MoneyGuy]

Condescending, yes. Sexist, no.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

I know it's obviously more complex than that but I really believe it's the role of government to be flexible and foster economic growth even if it needs to take a hit in bad times. Maybe I'm a "New Deal" or Keynesian sort of guy. I guess these rules are dictated at the provincial or federal level.

We obviously don't want Canadian cities to fall into the Detroit model of debt.

There's are a number of challenges. As others have stated, municipalities are restricted from running deficits. That overall is a good thing in my view.

The second constraint of course is that for better or worse most municipal employees are in public sector union with multiyear contracts. Many existing contracts date back to when things were white hot. Wage increases were below private sector wage growth in those times, but obviously do not go down if suddenly things tank. Since this is a huge cost, it limits flexibility in budget making.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

This is not true, except in the narrowest of terms of talking about how revenues are proportionally raised. The amount to be raised could be dropped (cutting expenses), or targeted measures like Nenshi's proposed rebate measure (returning excess taxes) are two ways the increase in the tax bill could be mitigated.

Right wingers like myself would argue that expenses can be cut from the budget - capital expenditures could be postponed, policies that lead to the Blue Ring that could have been amended, hiring freezes, wage rollbacks, etc. Others would say that these things should not be done in a downturn, which is a fine opinion, but there is not Nothing That Can be Done.

Overall, taxes were not raised this year over last. Sure, they could look to cut expenses more, but cutting 2-3% would reduce the "30%" gain only very slightly, still in the high twenties.

Cutting capital expenses makes no difference to people's property taxes - different money pots.

You are right that it's not exactly "nothing" that they can do, but there are no measures that could be done to reduce that increase by a chunk large enough to "make business owners happy."

Hopefully in a year or two, downtown vacancies are down, and the current increases will revert back automatically.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Locke

Its almost like the people who have been lamenting the fact that while Revenues are decreasing steadily all taxes are increasing might be on to something.

Maybe we need legislation that prohibits increased Government spending during times of decreased Government revenue?

"People have less, we need to take more!! Now is the time!!"

Rempel has a degree in Economics? I think it should be rescinded.

The City didn't increase tax supported operating spending at all.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

The law they need to amend is the Municipal Government Act. That law can only be amended by the provincial government.

Oddly enough, Nenshi has been asking to have it changed but the provincial government has not moved yet. I think they want specific acts for Calgary and Edmonton.

Also people (like Rempel) criticize the current system when oddities like this year happen when the goose that lays the golden egg taxwise (downtown) has its value plummet and other get increases.

But when the Mayor and Council ask for amended powers to fix it conservative think tanks, watchdogs, and politicians scream bloody murder claiming they are after a "power grab" a "money grab", or a "blank cheque". They also seem to offer no solution, it's just chest pounding populism (like Rempel did).

[Kjesse]

It would be fun to have Bunk comment on Nenshi's personality. But I understand why he won't

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

After 6 years going on 7, if the worst we have to complain about with him is snarkiness, I'd say we have a pretty good mayor and he's doing a fine job.

I agree, there's no doubt he can't seem to help himself online. He needs to be more disciplined in this regard. Self inflicted wounds, but otherwise, substantively a strong record in my opinion.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

I think I let my dislike of Nenshi, get in my way. Having read more tweets from Rempel, she's an absolute moron and has no understanding of what it is she was talking about. TO turn around and use the "sexist" card is ridiculous, and basically continuing to use it over and over again even after he apologized. I don't even think he should have apologized.

On twitter I pointed out pretty quickly through a 5 second search he has levelled the "math is hard" retort twice before. Both to men. There was absolutely nothing sexist about the comment, regardless of how snarky it came across.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Bunk

The City didn't increase tax supported operating spending at all.

I wasnt explicitly calling out the City, but at the same time the use of the term 'Revenue Neutral' when talking about Property Tax increases is disingenuous.

Is it 'Revenue Neutral?' Sure it is. Its not like the City is making profit and heading out for a Hawaiian vacation on the back of their ill-gotten gains.

But saying something is 'Revenue Neutral' is not the same as saying 'Taxes did not increase.'

Its just saying that the City required more Revenue due to increased costs and ergo Property Taxes went up, which is exactly what Nenshi was saying because Property Taxes are pretty much the City's only means of acquiring Revenue.

Boil it down to the lowest common denominator:

Did Property Taxes go up? Yes or no?

The nature of the neutrality of the revenue is irrelevant.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

If you had told me that an MP and a Mayor of a city in Canada got into a pissing match on twitter, i'd have bet a lot of money it was Nenshi.

I'm glad Rempel raised the issue for her constituents. And i'm glad that she asked for a meeting and called out Nenshi for responding via Twitter.

He said his assistant is working on catching up on a backlog of meeting requests following having the Christmas break off. You wouldn't believe how many requests he gets. I doubt he even knew a meeting request was made.