Calgary Municipal Politics Thread

[getbak]

I guess I have to be the contrarian here.

I live in Renfrew, a couple blocks east of Edmonton Trail, and when I first saw the on-street parking, I thought it was one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard of, and nothing during the summer changed that opinion.

Maybe I didn't drive there during the right time of day, but it only ever seemed to be used in the one block directly in front of Open Range, and I think 4 cars was the greatest number of vehicles I saw parked on the street there at one time. It just doesn't seem like enough usage to warrant the traffic disruption.

All it ever seemed to me to be was a recipe for accidents as someone coming up the hill from downtown doesn't notice the parked cars until it's too late and either plows into the back of the parked car, or sideswipes the vehicle in the next lane by suddenly cutting over.

I'd be curious to know what the accident statistics were during the on-street parking trial. Maybe I have too little faith in the quality of Calgary drivers...but it would be the first time.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by getbak

I guess I have to be the contrarian here.

I live in Renfrew, a couple blocks east of Edmonton Trail, and when I first saw the on-street parking, I thought it was one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard of, and nothing during the summer changed that opinion.

Maybe I didn't drive there during the right time of day, but it only ever seemed to be used in the one block directly in front of Open Range, and I think 4 cars was the greatest number of vehicles I saw parked on the street there at one time. It just doesn't seem like enough usage to warrant the traffic disruption.

All it ever seemed to me to be was a recipe for accidents as someone coming up the hill from downtown doesn't notice the parked cars until it's too late and either plows into the back of the parked car, or sideswipes the vehicle in the next lane by suddenly cutting over.

I'd be curious to know what the accident statistics were during the on-street parking trial. Maybe I have too little faith in the quality of Calgary drivers...but it would be the first time.

I've just sent a tweet to Alderman Carra asking if he knows about any traffic accidents caused by the trial, will let you know if I hear anything back.

[Bigtime]

Some more on the Carra v. Ramsay CA feud:

“I really hope that he will work with us again,” said Shmyr. “I really can’t understand why he did this.”

Carra, however, says Shmyr is being either “disingenuous or insane.”

He says she and another member of the community association came to his office a while back and yelled at him for two hours telling him that he had no right to speak at one of the community meetings, that he is only “allowed to speak to the board.”


He gave numerous examples of “dysfunction” on the community association. They would ask him if he would help them “fight the Stampede.” His point, no. “I will help you dialogue with the Stampede, not fight with it. It’s like getting in a fight with an 800 lbs. gorilla, you’ll probably lose, so you need to make the gorilla your friend.” Never mind that the gorilla is already a pretty darned good citizen.

As for Carra, he says he has had other aldermen tell him that they have done what he has done (severed ties with dysfunctional groups or people) only they never made that public. I called a couple of aldermen and they confirmed that there are some people it’s just a waste of time to deal with.

http://blogs.calgaryherald.com/2011/...tion/#comments

[shermanator]

There's some talk that Calgary would raise the GST by an extra 1% in order to pay for sports and arts complexes. I think this is a brilliant idea personally, as most people wouldn't notice the extra percent on most purchases. Sure would help the Flames and Stamps...

"Whenever the people of Calgary are called upon to make decisions, the better the decisions are."

If Calgary collected an extra one per cent in sales tax on all local purchases, it would net about $350 million a year, according to the group's estimates.

George Brookman, a former president of the Calgary Stampede, made the pitch.

Brookman suggested the surtax could help Calgary finish projects long on waiting lists - a new sports field house at Foothills Athletic Park, a central library, a new Glenbow Museum and a modern art gallery.

Link: http://www.calgaryherald.com/enterta...239/story.html

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by getbak

I'd be curious to know what the accident statistics were during the on-street parking trial. Maybe I have too little faith in the quality of Calgary drivers...but it would be the first time.

Love the power of twitter and our politicians that are engaged on it, already received this response from Ald. Carra:

we'll b getting the review from Trans. I'm under the impression there was a fender bender within minutes at 1st but none after.

[c.t.ner]

Interesting to hear about the Carra vs. Ramsey feud. I did work with Carra in university for a short amount of time during the Forrest Lawn Charette. He seamed pretty reasonable and I was a big fan of his urban planning background.

That being said, during the lead up to the races, one of the biggest criticisms (albeit a rumour I heard second hand) with Carra was that he was a very much "my way or the highway" type of guy. Who had caused some head butting with other Community Associations in the area. Take that for what it is. That being said, I think his points against the CA are pretty valid though.

[Byrns]

Originally Posted by shermanator

There's some talk that Calgary would raise the GST by an extra 1% in order to pay for sports and arts complexes. I think this is a brilliant idea personally, as most people wouldn't notice the extra percent on most purchases. Sure would help the Flames and Stamps...



Link: http://www.calgaryherald.com/enterta...239/story.html

It's a terrible idea. What's stopping city council using this type of funding as the only way to do capital projects? They can just slowly transfer the capital portion of the budget to operations until 100% of the capital projects are now funding by the Calgary Sales Tax. Hoooray for new taxes!

[shermanator]

Originally Posted by Byrns

It's a terrible idea. What's stopping city council using this type of funding as the only way to do capital projects? They can just slowly transfer the capital portion of the budget to operations until 100% of the capital projects are now funding by the Calgary Sales Tax. Hoooray for new taxes!

How else do you propose catching up on our infrastructure debt created by years of rapid growth? Increasing the property tax rate sure isn't working. Everytime a budget goes through there's always one alderman who wants the raise to be 0%...

[Byrns]

Originally Posted by shermanator

How else do you propose catching up on our infrastructure debt created by years of rapid growth? Increasing the property tax rate sure isn't working. Everytime a budget goes through there's always one alderman who wants the raise to be 0%...

And what makes you think a sales tax will make the difference? Because they call it a "Penny Tax" and trick fools into thinking that this tax is no big deal?

How will it effect Calgary businesses? If I buy a car, why not drive to High River and save $400 rather than buy local. So long car dealerships! Or they'll move outside the city limits. So long business taxes!

[Rathji]

Cars is pretty much the only thing that that would matter on - and housing to a small degree, and there are enough incentives already to have a dealership outside of town that I doubt any existing Calgary dealership was willing to fork out the huge capital cost to move locations, just to to be able to say they charge 1% less for a car. How many dealerships could High River support?

Not saying I totally support such a tax, but if it meant a Saddledome rebuild sometime in the next 5 years, I would definitely be in full support.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Byrns

And what makes you think a sales tax will make the difference? Because they call it a "Penny Tax" and trick fools into thinking that this tax is no big deal?

How will it effect Calgary businesses? If I buy a car, why not drive to High River and save $400 rather than buy local. So long car dealerships! Or they'll move outside the city limits. So long business taxes!

I believe that there had been some mention of cars and houses being exempt. Of course, it's so early on, that everything just an idea at this point.

[Byrns]

Oh well, one more reason to move to a parasite community.

[Jimmy Stang]

^ Although I like the idea of more cultural and recreational funding, I don't think that any new tax will fly here. While the majority of people would like new facilities (and this extends to other unrelated civic issues like snow removal, better roads, etc.), but as soon as they are asked to pay for it through tax increases or user fees, their tune changes somewhat.

I doubt that this is unique to Calgary either, as people in general are quick to complain about levels of service and equally as quick to resist funding it.

[Ozy_Flame]

I can't see any problem in this. Calgarians are spenders, so are they really going to notice an extra dollar on a $100 restaurant bill? Really? This is what is going to put people up in an uproar?If it's a real issue, just consider it one less dollar you have to give to already over-inflated tipping expectations this city seems to embrace.

[Knut]

The point is that the tax is not just City Council deciding to implement the tax. It will be a plebiscite with a set term for specific projects.

For instance, they will propose a 1% increase on sales tax for a 5 year period of time to fund the building of a new arena and to complete the central library. The people will decide in a referendum if that is something that they want.

It is pure democracy and allows the people to select the projects they want to fund with their tax dollars. It will also hold the city accountable as if there is waste, or if the money is going somewhere it should not, the city will vote down any proposed tax next time.

It is actually a pretty smart idea, and I am usually against any tax increase.

[Knut]

As an example..

http://www.okc.gov/news/2007_12/NBA_Election.html

Oklahoma city proposed something similiar before attempting to land the Supersonics from Seattle. The people decided if they would fund the capital improvements required to bring the NBA team to the city.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Hesla

The point is that the tax is not just City Council deciding to implement the tax. It will be a plebiscite with a set term for specific projects.

For instance, they will propose a 1% increase on sales tax for a 5 year period of time to fund the building of a new arena and to complete the central library. The people will decide in a referendum if that is something that they want.

It is pure democracy and allows the people to select the projects they want to fund with their tax dollars. It will also hold the city accountable as if there is waste, or if the money is going somewhere it should not, the city will vote down any proposed tax next time.

It is actually a pretty smart idea, and I am usually against any tax increase.

The direct democracy angle is a great one, and will stop any complaints about a new (hockey rink/museum/library/opera house/lrt line/etc) being a white elephant. If the people voted for it, that's what they'll get.

It also might have a side effect of increasing turnout in municipal elections.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by calgaryrocks

I would think so, wasn't part of his campaign getting secondary suites? now it won't even happen in his term! (of course, he will likely get re-elected anyways)

Despite council rejecting allowing suites in every neighborhood, there has been progress. A bunch of different types of areas are either legal now where they aren't before or have had their restrictions loosened. For instance, in any area where a suite was a discretionary use (needed a full development permit and neighbors could appeal) it is now a permitted use (Building Permit only/ no appeals). Plus, all new communities have suites as a permitted use. The only places left is R-1 and RC-1 zoned areas.

The mayor is doing everything in his power and influence to get those zones as well, but it still relies on majority support of council, which doesn't exist. We brought every major business group, anti-poverty group and industry group on side- it was a remarkable coalition and it was shown over again that the majority of Calgarians support suites, but some Alderman simply won't budge due to a very vocal minority. If you feel strongly about the issue, don't sit back, contact your alderman

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Slava

I must be missing something. If the city is going to spend all kinds of money to educate me to vote yes, then why would we go through the exercise?

I am starting to feel like the city is wasting more and more money...coincidentally taxes are really starting to rise.

Council decided on no plebiscite largely due to cost, but also because of the belief that it wouldn't have changed anyome's mind anyway (it's non-binding) Council has to make the decision in the end anyway. Besides, we KNOW that the vast majority support (several scientific surveys) - even 74% support the ability of their neighbour to have a suite.

[Bigtime]

Bump time!

Nenshi is announcing his intentions to run/not run for re-election today at 2pm.