Well, that was fun, wasnt it?
Clearly, by the horrendous turnout again in 2010, there are few citizens who take their right to vote seriously, or have become so jaded about City Hall, they dont bother. I know it was a popular campaign mantra to say citizens in Burlington want their voice heard at City Hall, but that was simply not true. You need to do nothing more than look at the election turnout numbers to see that this issue has been there for many, many years. Citizens of Burlington were no more engaged in 2010 than in the past, which is a shame.
Here are a few random thoughts on this election:
- I am thrilled for Rick G, and impressed by the showing of Carol D. I have been a supporter of Ricks since he jumped in, and was impressed with Carols fight. I can tell my kids now that daddy is a few hundred votes from being the Mayor :). I believe he is a good guy with the right temperament to do the job.
- Beating of the year - MMW in Ward 1. Like this result or not, one had to be blind not to see this shaping up people. This was one of the ones where the 'family and friend' poll was shown to be fun, but not serious. Thats why I was a little curious why Mr Bedinis team was forming 'pressers' from this- I thought more doors or something else would have been a better use of time. I liked Bedini, but those press releases really made me feel like they would have been insulting to anyone who looked closely.
- Did the low turnout affect the results of some races? Certainly in Wards 5 and 6, but one would be hard pressed to make a serious argument about any other ward.
- Did the line-ups affect the results? Who knows, but all I know is people are willing to wait in longer lines for a Tim Hortons coffee. If the issue was THAT widespread, we would have heard even more. Remember, people died for this right, so get over yourself and be patient. This doesnt mean the system shouldnt be made stronger, better, but lets not start looking for issues to get on the soapbox about.
- Biggest misread/line of BS fed to the people - that social media =votes or played a significant role in the election. Oh, it played a role, but a minor one. It was a nice way for all the candidates to stay connected to each other. Folks, as one who brought the concept of 'engagement' (rather than citizen committees) to Burlingtons election 4 years ago, take my word - social media is NOT community engagement in and of itself. Shape Burlington has done a solid job of better understanding the concept the past 4 years, and I think this work will be important here.
- biggest disappointment - the race in ward 5 - brutal. A true and remarkable story of how the voters didnt really look closely at the candidates. Im very sad about this, and I will tell you why. A TERRIFIC candidate in ward 5 came in last. He did okay in the orchard, but barely got a vote in the south. We all understand why this is, but only few of us are brave enough to say it, and its sad. To make matters worse, he was even beaten by a candidate that was so over the top that anyone interested in this election has already heard of this. On top of all of this, the winner here will need a quick and stern reminder that Rick G won the mayors race. :)
- most intriguing race - I am bias here, but this one baffled us. In the ward 2 and 4 Trustee race, there were 2 folks that campaigned against each other in a traditional way (websites, brochures delivered throughout homes in the wards, signs, cogeco spots, etc etc) , with 4 others who threw their names on the ballot, one that did a little bit of work in the south. Yes, it seemed likely that the two who campaigned against each other , made it through the ward, would show down against each other- BUT, a third candidate garnered a really impressive number of votes to win. First of all, we like her, and we support her, and we are sure she will do a wonderful job as trustee. Having said that, we were curious to explain this. The other three on the ballot got a random number of votes (which is expected), but the winning candidates spiked dramatically, so couldnt have been random. As it turns out, the winning candidate shared a name (sort of-spelled differently) with a very popular former Burlington politician. I have asked anyone that knows anything about this, and thats it (and the fact that we all know by the time MOST people get to Trustee on the ballot, they dont care). Bryna had some satisfaction beating the other candidate that was campaigning, but I think we just lost someone forever who was already only marginally interested in local politics. I found the whole thing pretty fascinating, and I think it will all work out.
- another disappointing moment - when Joan Little ripped MMW in the paper. Im not a fan of this. Let the voters decide. I still to this day think that Joans column hurt me when I was running 4 years ago. She was at least kind enough to mention all the candidates running this time, but the editorial comment on MMW (even if she is right) seemed to have a purpose to influence, and I didnt like that.
- best moments - just seeing people (not voters unfortunately) so engaged, seeing candidates work hard, connect with people etc. I love municipal elections, they are so interesting.
- Two races that had good options - Wards 4 and 3. This just shows how difficult it is to beat an incumbent, no matter how promising you may be, or how hard you work. Frustrating - yes, but the people who voted have spoken, and nobody can argue with that. Many races show you that the 'best' or most qualified candidate doesnt always win.
For those of you that didnt show up to vote this time - complain all you want the next 4 years (but do it quietly), then get involved, and have your say in 2014!
See you in 4 years :)
Friday, November 5, 2010
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Ward 4 - My Ward
Ward 4 runs from Appleby Line to Guelph Line, from the Lake to Upper Middle Road. It is one of the most 'established' areas of Burlington, and the one that has seen the least 'development' or change in recent years. Ward 4 has been my home to my family for the past 10 years.
There are three people running in Ward 4 - Jim Blake, Jack Dennison, and Brian Heagle. Since Mr. Blake is not really actively campaigning, I will focus on the two key candidates.
To be frank, I wanted change here in Ward 4 in 2006, but didnt get it. Yes, I am bias. As a resident here, I just dont 'get' the Dennison thing. Maybe its because I am relatively young, Im not sure. He survived the income tax situation, which is okay, so I dont need to bring that up fully now - its been discussed enough, and he was voted in after people knew that. What astounds me is he still touts himself as some sort of 'back to the basics' or 'business' guy. Seems this is an 'image' he likes to project, but isnt always consistent with his actions. Yes, Jack, you run a business. Philip Papadopoulos does as well. Many people do, with varied success. I will say though, that other than the Save General Brock situation a number of years back, ward 4 is the quietest and easiest (and least demanding) ward. This has protected Mr Dennison immensely, and kept him less busy than other Councillors at times. I will also acknowledge, that as a person that works with low-income families, I am often not a fan of people who just dont get it. He didnt submit any surveys from organizations that serve our needy. He doesnt pretend to care, which I do not like, but I respect. Earlier this year, when talking about new Burlingtonians / visible minorities getting involved in municipal politics here, he made a comment (..'anyone can throw their $100 in and run') that just showed he is really out of touch with the barriers some people have. Just to much of a 'we are the establishment, we belong here' feel for my liking. BUT, even an analysis that is based on my own 'not so favourable' experience deserves balance. I have met some neighbours, and some people south of Spruce who like what Jack has done as a councillor, and say he has helped them. There are some that say his 'taxpayer watchdog' may be part image, but there is some credibility to those claims on occasion. He has had a very quiet 4 years where he behaved, didnt seem to have any major gaffe (in the eyes of the broader voting ward 4 public). I will give Mr Dennis credit - he has worked very hard this election (knowing he had solid competition in 2010).
The other option in Ward 4 is Brian Heagle. I knew he was citizen of the year last year, and when I heard he was running in my ward, I wanted to meet him. I liked what I saw. Friendly, engaging, positive. We have a shared interest in leadership, and believe there is a new, emerging style of leadership and leaders that Burlington has to offer. When researching a candidate, I dont really focus on platform ideas, I look for shared themes across the platforms of those that I think are 'true contenders' across the city. I believe that single-issue candidates from wards usually find it tough to get the support from their council colleagues (unless its a no-brainer). I believe Brian brings balance and an ability to work well with people to the table. Even though he was Citizen of the Year, which comes with its own exposure, he is still the 'new' candidate, running against a long-time incumbent.
One advantage Dennison has is the fact he has long lists of constituents he has helped who he can ask to erect a lawn sign, Make no mistake, Jack has a lot of lawn signs up. Interestingly though, more than a few people had said that they have a connection from the past to Jack, but havent decided who they will vote for. I think people forget that longtime residents (who have been through many,many elections) sometimes feel obligated when asked, but when they are in the privacy of the voting booth, they can vote for whoever they wish. Many want change, but wont express it until the ballot box. the opposite can be true of course.
The only comment I will make about the outcome is that if the 'same, traditional' voters hit the polls, and this ward race has not been able to engage new voters this year, we will see the same result. The fact that there are only 2 viable, campaigning candidates helps Brian, but this race shows how tough it is to gain the upper hand on an incumbent. I believe that if this was an open race between these two based on resume, ideas - it would be a landslide for Heagle, but dont underestimate how many people Councillors get to meet each term, and dennison has been around a long time.
I want change in my ward, but are residents in Ward 4 looking at the rest of the city saying we are the ward that needs to be steady, swallow hard and resist change? I hope not, but anything is possible.
I want a Councillor here who has roots, will work hard, will work together with others at City Hall, represents Ward 4, but cares for the people of the city as a whole, is able to look to the future, and will grow into a leader that one day will do bigger and better things for Burlington. Thats what I want, and thats why I really hope Brian Heagle makes his way on to council this term.
There are three people running in Ward 4 - Jim Blake, Jack Dennison, and Brian Heagle. Since Mr. Blake is not really actively campaigning, I will focus on the two key candidates.
To be frank, I wanted change here in Ward 4 in 2006, but didnt get it. Yes, I am bias. As a resident here, I just dont 'get' the Dennison thing. Maybe its because I am relatively young, Im not sure. He survived the income tax situation, which is okay, so I dont need to bring that up fully now - its been discussed enough, and he was voted in after people knew that. What astounds me is he still touts himself as some sort of 'back to the basics' or 'business' guy. Seems this is an 'image' he likes to project, but isnt always consistent with his actions. Yes, Jack, you run a business. Philip Papadopoulos does as well. Many people do, with varied success. I will say though, that other than the Save General Brock situation a number of years back, ward 4 is the quietest and easiest (and least demanding) ward. This has protected Mr Dennison immensely, and kept him less busy than other Councillors at times. I will also acknowledge, that as a person that works with low-income families, I am often not a fan of people who just dont get it. He didnt submit any surveys from organizations that serve our needy. He doesnt pretend to care, which I do not like, but I respect. Earlier this year, when talking about new Burlingtonians / visible minorities getting involved in municipal politics here, he made a comment (..'anyone can throw their $100 in and run') that just showed he is really out of touch with the barriers some people have. Just to much of a 'we are the establishment, we belong here' feel for my liking. BUT, even an analysis that is based on my own 'not so favourable' experience deserves balance. I have met some neighbours, and some people south of Spruce who like what Jack has done as a councillor, and say he has helped them. There are some that say his 'taxpayer watchdog' may be part image, but there is some credibility to those claims on occasion. He has had a very quiet 4 years where he behaved, didnt seem to have any major gaffe (in the eyes of the broader voting ward 4 public). I will give Mr Dennis credit - he has worked very hard this election (knowing he had solid competition in 2010).
The other option in Ward 4 is Brian Heagle. I knew he was citizen of the year last year, and when I heard he was running in my ward, I wanted to meet him. I liked what I saw. Friendly, engaging, positive. We have a shared interest in leadership, and believe there is a new, emerging style of leadership and leaders that Burlington has to offer. When researching a candidate, I dont really focus on platform ideas, I look for shared themes across the platforms of those that I think are 'true contenders' across the city. I believe that single-issue candidates from wards usually find it tough to get the support from their council colleagues (unless its a no-brainer). I believe Brian brings balance and an ability to work well with people to the table. Even though he was Citizen of the Year, which comes with its own exposure, he is still the 'new' candidate, running against a long-time incumbent.
One advantage Dennison has is the fact he has long lists of constituents he has helped who he can ask to erect a lawn sign, Make no mistake, Jack has a lot of lawn signs up. Interestingly though, more than a few people had said that they have a connection from the past to Jack, but havent decided who they will vote for. I think people forget that longtime residents (who have been through many,many elections) sometimes feel obligated when asked, but when they are in the privacy of the voting booth, they can vote for whoever they wish. Many want change, but wont express it until the ballot box. the opposite can be true of course.
The only comment I will make about the outcome is that if the 'same, traditional' voters hit the polls, and this ward race has not been able to engage new voters this year, we will see the same result. The fact that there are only 2 viable, campaigning candidates helps Brian, but this race shows how tough it is to gain the upper hand on an incumbent. I believe that if this was an open race between these two based on resume, ideas - it would be a landslide for Heagle, but dont underestimate how many people Councillors get to meet each term, and dennison has been around a long time.
I want change in my ward, but are residents in Ward 4 looking at the rest of the city saying we are the ward that needs to be steady, swallow hard and resist change? I hope not, but anything is possible.
I want a Councillor here who has roots, will work hard, will work together with others at City Hall, represents Ward 4, but cares for the people of the city as a whole, is able to look to the future, and will grow into a leader that one day will do bigger and better things for Burlington. Thats what I want, and thats why I really hope Brian Heagle makes his way on to council this term.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Wards 1,3,6 -Burlington
When I first started writing this blog, I did so with the intention of trying to engage friends and family (and perhaps others) to the point where the question was not 'will I vote', but 'who will I vote for'.
I aimed to have some part in seeing 1,000 more people vote this year in a municipal election, and through Facebook (some success), Twitter (still a rough one for getting the unengaged) and email (by far the best for someone like me with a decent sized network), I am almost certain I have reached this goal. I have had more emails and conversations (usually at the arena) about politics this year than ever before. People know I am interested, and that my wife Bryna is running herself. The one question I get most (and have had many times this week) is 'I live in Ward x, who would you vote for?'. Not who should they vote for, but who would I vote for.
I have combined these 3 wards into one blog post. There are three days left in the election, and I dont want to make predictions about things I dont know enough about, in areas I havent spent a lot of time in during the election. These are the three wards I know the least about.
If someone asks me about Ward 1 - I would say Rick Craven. A good friend of mine likes Dobson, and that is who she will vote for. Others I have talked to say Mary Dilly knows a ton of people. When I watched the Cogeco spots, Saul Zemaitis was one of the best I saw. I really liked the way he seemed to have about him, and I have a soft spot for folks who have led non-profits. Although I dont know all the specific issues, I am certainly more engaged than the average person. As an incumbent, Im not sure I have sensed enough anger or disillusion with Craven that would justify seeing a change there.
Ward 3 is an interesting one. I have friends who like John Taylor, and some that have never heard of him. That could be good or bad I suppose, but they usually smirk with embarassment when I tell them he has been their representative at City Hall for 20+ years. Lisa Cooper is someone I met briefly, but dont know enough about to comment too much on. I know she has run a couple times before. So, once again, we have a situation with an incumbent, which frankly is hard to deal with, especially if there isnt that one or two MAJOR issues that the marginally engaged also know about. Unseating an incumbent requires a broader,grassroots call for change, not just a call from those that are 'really into this stuff' , or those running against that incumbent. I lead with all of this because I would really like to see someone like Cory Judson at City Hall. He has worked hard. I know that alone is not reason for change, but if 'reason for change' is in the residents minds, maybe Cory has been active enough to be the one. Id like to see him be more 'specific' at times, but one can see he works with passion. We have all been following Cory, and if he doesnt win, it wont be because he wasnt working hard. If asked, I would recommend Cory to my friends and family in ward 3 for a fresh start with solid representation.
Ward 6 has been the quietest race in the city it seems, but there are a couple of 'names' involved in this one. Firstly, lets assume Rob Herriott (who I met and really liked), and Phil Buck (pretty neat guy) are not really in the running as they are not launching full campaigns. Christopher Mulhern, who is a solid young guy, a first-time candidate, and has a platform that is aimed at families may be one to watch if he is interested in doing this in the years ahead. Im not sure he has been 'active' long enough to contend with two known 'names'. This again is a case where I would be happy to be wrong, but I do think this race comes down to Blair Lancaster and Mark Carr. I dont 'know' either. Based on what I have seen, I would still likely want to vote for Mulhern, but if it was clear one of the other two were to win, I would choose Carr. I have nothing against Blair Lancaster, but I have never been a fan of the party politic affiliations brought into municipal play, or the taste that I get from a 'I just really want to get elected to something' candidate. Carrs reasons for running are unclear (a job), but he is generally well known, has done this before, and seems motivated. If asked, (which has happened for Ward 6 a lot this week) I would probably tell my friends to vote Carr.
Please remember - these are the opinions of a 'somewhat' engaged Burlingtonian - I dont know every little detail about every issue in each of the wards. You can email me, debate, swear at me, tell me I am 'way off', but in the end, just express yourself through your vote!
I aimed to have some part in seeing 1,000 more people vote this year in a municipal election, and through Facebook (some success), Twitter (still a rough one for getting the unengaged) and email (by far the best for someone like me with a decent sized network), I am almost certain I have reached this goal. I have had more emails and conversations (usually at the arena) about politics this year than ever before. People know I am interested, and that my wife Bryna is running herself. The one question I get most (and have had many times this week) is 'I live in Ward x, who would you vote for?'. Not who should they vote for, but who would I vote for.
I have combined these 3 wards into one blog post. There are three days left in the election, and I dont want to make predictions about things I dont know enough about, in areas I havent spent a lot of time in during the election. These are the three wards I know the least about.
If someone asks me about Ward 1 - I would say Rick Craven. A good friend of mine likes Dobson, and that is who she will vote for. Others I have talked to say Mary Dilly knows a ton of people. When I watched the Cogeco spots, Saul Zemaitis was one of the best I saw. I really liked the way he seemed to have about him, and I have a soft spot for folks who have led non-profits. Although I dont know all the specific issues, I am certainly more engaged than the average person. As an incumbent, Im not sure I have sensed enough anger or disillusion with Craven that would justify seeing a change there.
Ward 3 is an interesting one. I have friends who like John Taylor, and some that have never heard of him. That could be good or bad I suppose, but they usually smirk with embarassment when I tell them he has been their representative at City Hall for 20+ years. Lisa Cooper is someone I met briefly, but dont know enough about to comment too much on. I know she has run a couple times before. So, once again, we have a situation with an incumbent, which frankly is hard to deal with, especially if there isnt that one or two MAJOR issues that the marginally engaged also know about. Unseating an incumbent requires a broader,grassroots call for change, not just a call from those that are 'really into this stuff' , or those running against that incumbent. I lead with all of this because I would really like to see someone like Cory Judson at City Hall. He has worked hard. I know that alone is not reason for change, but if 'reason for change' is in the residents minds, maybe Cory has been active enough to be the one. Id like to see him be more 'specific' at times, but one can see he works with passion. We have all been following Cory, and if he doesnt win, it wont be because he wasnt working hard. If asked, I would recommend Cory to my friends and family in ward 3 for a fresh start with solid representation.
Ward 6 has been the quietest race in the city it seems, but there are a couple of 'names' involved in this one. Firstly, lets assume Rob Herriott (who I met and really liked), and Phil Buck (pretty neat guy) are not really in the running as they are not launching full campaigns. Christopher Mulhern, who is a solid young guy, a first-time candidate, and has a platform that is aimed at families may be one to watch if he is interested in doing this in the years ahead. Im not sure he has been 'active' long enough to contend with two known 'names'. This again is a case where I would be happy to be wrong, but I do think this race comes down to Blair Lancaster and Mark Carr. I dont 'know' either. Based on what I have seen, I would still likely want to vote for Mulhern, but if it was clear one of the other two were to win, I would choose Carr. I have nothing against Blair Lancaster, but I have never been a fan of the party politic affiliations brought into municipal play, or the taste that I get from a 'I just really want to get elected to something' candidate. Carrs reasons for running are unclear (a job), but he is generally well known, has done this before, and seems motivated. If asked, (which has happened for Ward 6 a lot this week) I would probably tell my friends to vote Carr.
Please remember - these are the opinions of a 'somewhat' engaged Burlingtonian - I dont know every little detail about every issue in each of the wards. You can email me, debate, swear at me, tell me I am 'way off', but in the end, just express yourself through your vote!
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Ward 5- EOA (East of Appleby) :)
This was the candidates session I looked most forward to. This is the ward I ran in 4 years ago, where I grew up, the one I know best, and an area of the City I feel very strongly about.
I thought the candidates handled themselves quite well at this event. If I was voting here, I would certainly feel relieved that there were a few solid people that we could send to City Hall. I wont get too deeply into the candidates specific ideas, because 7 people are running, and there a lot of new (and some very grandiose) ideas put forward in this meeting, while some kept it simple. In order of how the candidates sat left to right, here is my brief synopsis of each:
Peggy Russell - Understandably, she made the point that she has been the only elected official, and her answers focused on her experiences as a Trustee. I found her responses to be solid, sometimes a little like a reading a resume. I didnt feel/see a real connection to the neighbourhoods, to Ward 5 anywhere through the night. She may appeal to those who would like an experienced elected official in office.
Paul Keselman - Interesting guy, very to the point. He was 'chosen' to do this, was the first to register, is a staunch conservative, was going to build a mega-mall and give everyone $200. He said most of the others are only doing this because Goldring left (which is a good point) and they think this is a very winnable ward. He seemed angry. I did like his frankness, it was rare, refreshing, but a little scary. I could go on about each thing he said, as it makes good reading, but he is not a serious candidate, so I will refrain.
Serge Beraldo - Passionate, to the point. Serge has put a lot of thought into the ideas he has for Ward 5. He seems like he would be a good advocate for citizens, a representative that would fight for EOA, his old neighbourhood. He is a likeable , down-to-earth candidate. He has ideas for both north and south, and wants to build a seniors recreation centre in the Lakeside Village area. Serge handled himself nicely on the evening, and I expect was a pleasant surprise for those that didnt know him. He had the best closing line with 'I dont want to change the world, I just want to focus on your neighbourhood'. That showed he was a neighbourhood type of guy.
Cal Millar - Retired Sun writer. Cal was solid, fatherly almost. His answers were genuine. He had a very simple focus of good representation, listening to people, working for the residents of Ward 5. Im not sure if he has been campaigning hard throughout (I havent seen a sign), but I suspect that if he was, he would be a person that people would like. An interesting moment came after Keselman said he was the only 'conservative' on the panel, Mr Millar responded saying that he too was a 'Conservative'. I think one meant the brand, and one meant the extreme southern U.S type extreme conservative. I dont think either helped themselves the way that came off.
Dave Kumar - Dave worked at the City 38 years, retired recently. Quiet, smart, very real. Knows the system from the inside out. This is a candidate that you CANNOT dislike. He is all about keeping taxes down finding efficiencies at City Hall. Does he have the extroverted, 'look -at-me' type personality that we voters sometimes want/think is needed ? I dont think so. When Keselman said he is the only one who has worked in government, Kumar was quick to point out his 38 years at the City of Burlington - the very place he was looking to go as a Councillor.
James Smith - A longtime resident of south ward 5. James talked about his work as a designer, CAD technologist, and how that relates to contributing to potential solutions to the 'pier mess'. James is the one who took initiative and made this all-candidates event happen. He has a broad history of working and helping others politically, but across the spectrum of party lines. He is an advocate for transit, wants to freeze hydro rates, and has a tax break idea for senors which is interesting. He is a smart, creative solid candidate that will have broad appeal.
Paul Sharman - He is a relative newcomer to Ward 5, but lives there. Clearly a bright. articulate candidate who was not shy about getting involved (transit issue, Sherwood stadium issue). He brings a solid financial background, and has a lot of ideas of how to change City Hall. He came off as much more interested in teaching people at City Hall 'what he knows' than representing people at ward 5. It felt to me like he was running for mayor. Im not sure if others picked up on this disconnect. He is clearly a smart man, and worked the room well, but something doesnt add up for me here. He was very clear about his 'success' in the financial industry. Mr. Sharman has involved himself in a lot of things in a very short amount of time, and is a solid communicator.
I have been spending a a lot of time in the ward, looking at signs, talking with people as well, and have had a tough time getting a read on who may be leading this race - it seems to be down to 4 (Beraldo, Kumar, Sharman, Smith). Once one puts all illegal signs (Boulevards, corners, GO Station) out of ones mind - Sharman seems to be well represented in two south neighbourhoods, Kumar almost exclusively in the orchard, with a little better balance through the whole ward from Smith and Beraldo. The others have signs out, but not many on private property that I have seen so far.
With 7 candidates, the votes will be split. Remember, this is only my opinion based on the last month in the ward. I dont see Keselman, Millar, or Russell in the 'top 4'. Millar just hasnt been out there enough in my opinion, and Russell, although she has experience and name recognition, may have picked a ward to run in where she may have trouble finding traction.
There will be candidates that win certain polls. I predict Dave Kumar will win the orchard. He will appeal rto a lot of new Burlingtonians. I believe he is a candidate that would have a very good chance of contending if we could get more young people, and more people above the QEW to vote. But that wont happen. I see Kumar landing in the middle of this race.
So, who are the contenders? I see Beraldo, Sharman, and Smith. Beraldo and Smith have the strongest ties to the ward, and roots mean something to some. Even though Sharman lives there, its been a short time, and that could change tomorrow.
I like Beraldo, but I see him coming in 3rd. I hope I am wrong. He is passionate, and would be a really solid councillor. I think the alount of money spent will come into play (re: communications materials ,advertising etc). Should it? I dont think so. I lost a tight race here after spending $1800 to my opponents 20k plus. Anyone that says money doesnt factor is municipal elections is wrong, and hasnt been involved.
So that leaves Sharman and Smith. I believe one of these two will win.
Paul Sharman wanted to be mayor. When Rick Goldring jumped in, he retreated back to ward 5. This should mean something to people looking for a 'leader'. This was a strategic second choice for him. He is clearly good at getting involved in contentious issues, and as the 'spokesman'. There is no questioning his accounting and finance background. He has a lot of strengths, but it feels like there is something there that we dont know/see, and it was clear to anyone at the candidates meeting the other night - he would be constantly challenging the way the City does business, and letting them know he has a better way (which can be good or bad for Councillor to do).
Im not predicting James Smith will win the ward, but I think he is the best fit. I think he is the most well balanced, strongest representative that could be chosen for Ward 5. He has deep roots in Ward 5, something Beraldo also has. He is a collaborative person (organizing this during his own campaign), and is both smart and creative. He clearly sees residents as his equal. He has a stake here, which makes him accountable. He appears to be someone who would build a solid long-term relationship with people in the ward, and seems genuinely interested in both the north, middle, and south areas of the ward.
I thought the candidates handled themselves quite well at this event. If I was voting here, I would certainly feel relieved that there were a few solid people that we could send to City Hall. I wont get too deeply into the candidates specific ideas, because 7 people are running, and there a lot of new (and some very grandiose) ideas put forward in this meeting, while some kept it simple. In order of how the candidates sat left to right, here is my brief synopsis of each:
Peggy Russell - Understandably, she made the point that she has been the only elected official, and her answers focused on her experiences as a Trustee. I found her responses to be solid, sometimes a little like a reading a resume. I didnt feel/see a real connection to the neighbourhoods, to Ward 5 anywhere through the night. She may appeal to those who would like an experienced elected official in office.
Paul Keselman - Interesting guy, very to the point. He was 'chosen' to do this, was the first to register, is a staunch conservative, was going to build a mega-mall and give everyone $200. He said most of the others are only doing this because Goldring left (which is a good point) and they think this is a very winnable ward. He seemed angry. I did like his frankness, it was rare, refreshing, but a little scary. I could go on about each thing he said, as it makes good reading, but he is not a serious candidate, so I will refrain.
Serge Beraldo - Passionate, to the point. Serge has put a lot of thought into the ideas he has for Ward 5. He seems like he would be a good advocate for citizens, a representative that would fight for EOA, his old neighbourhood. He is a likeable , down-to-earth candidate. He has ideas for both north and south, and wants to build a seniors recreation centre in the Lakeside Village area. Serge handled himself nicely on the evening, and I expect was a pleasant surprise for those that didnt know him. He had the best closing line with 'I dont want to change the world, I just want to focus on your neighbourhood'. That showed he was a neighbourhood type of guy.
Cal Millar - Retired Sun writer. Cal was solid, fatherly almost. His answers were genuine. He had a very simple focus of good representation, listening to people, working for the residents of Ward 5. Im not sure if he has been campaigning hard throughout (I havent seen a sign), but I suspect that if he was, he would be a person that people would like. An interesting moment came after Keselman said he was the only 'conservative' on the panel, Mr Millar responded saying that he too was a 'Conservative'. I think one meant the brand, and one meant the extreme southern U.S type extreme conservative. I dont think either helped themselves the way that came off.
Dave Kumar - Dave worked at the City 38 years, retired recently. Quiet, smart, very real. Knows the system from the inside out. This is a candidate that you CANNOT dislike. He is all about keeping taxes down finding efficiencies at City Hall. Does he have the extroverted, 'look -at-me' type personality that we voters sometimes want/think is needed ? I dont think so. When Keselman said he is the only one who has worked in government, Kumar was quick to point out his 38 years at the City of Burlington - the very place he was looking to go as a Councillor.
James Smith - A longtime resident of south ward 5. James talked about his work as a designer, CAD technologist, and how that relates to contributing to potential solutions to the 'pier mess'. James is the one who took initiative and made this all-candidates event happen. He has a broad history of working and helping others politically, but across the spectrum of party lines. He is an advocate for transit, wants to freeze hydro rates, and has a tax break idea for senors which is interesting. He is a smart, creative solid candidate that will have broad appeal.
Paul Sharman - He is a relative newcomer to Ward 5, but lives there. Clearly a bright. articulate candidate who was not shy about getting involved (transit issue, Sherwood stadium issue). He brings a solid financial background, and has a lot of ideas of how to change City Hall. He came off as much more interested in teaching people at City Hall 'what he knows' than representing people at ward 5. It felt to me like he was running for mayor. Im not sure if others picked up on this disconnect. He is clearly a smart man, and worked the room well, but something doesnt add up for me here. He was very clear about his 'success' in the financial industry. Mr. Sharman has involved himself in a lot of things in a very short amount of time, and is a solid communicator.
I have been spending a a lot of time in the ward, looking at signs, talking with people as well, and have had a tough time getting a read on who may be leading this race - it seems to be down to 4 (Beraldo, Kumar, Sharman, Smith). Once one puts all illegal signs (Boulevards, corners, GO Station) out of ones mind - Sharman seems to be well represented in two south neighbourhoods, Kumar almost exclusively in the orchard, with a little better balance through the whole ward from Smith and Beraldo. The others have signs out, but not many on private property that I have seen so far.
With 7 candidates, the votes will be split. Remember, this is only my opinion based on the last month in the ward. I dont see Keselman, Millar, or Russell in the 'top 4'. Millar just hasnt been out there enough in my opinion, and Russell, although she has experience and name recognition, may have picked a ward to run in where she may have trouble finding traction.
There will be candidates that win certain polls. I predict Dave Kumar will win the orchard. He will appeal rto a lot of new Burlingtonians. I believe he is a candidate that would have a very good chance of contending if we could get more young people, and more people above the QEW to vote. But that wont happen. I see Kumar landing in the middle of this race.
So, who are the contenders? I see Beraldo, Sharman, and Smith. Beraldo and Smith have the strongest ties to the ward, and roots mean something to some. Even though Sharman lives there, its been a short time, and that could change tomorrow.
I like Beraldo, but I see him coming in 3rd. I hope I am wrong. He is passionate, and would be a really solid councillor. I think the alount of money spent will come into play (re: communications materials ,advertising etc). Should it? I dont think so. I lost a tight race here after spending $1800 to my opponents 20k plus. Anyone that says money doesnt factor is municipal elections is wrong, and hasnt been involved.
So that leaves Sharman and Smith. I believe one of these two will win.
Paul Sharman wanted to be mayor. When Rick Goldring jumped in, he retreated back to ward 5. This should mean something to people looking for a 'leader'. This was a strategic second choice for him. He is clearly good at getting involved in contentious issues, and as the 'spokesman'. There is no questioning his accounting and finance background. He has a lot of strengths, but it feels like there is something there that we dont know/see, and it was clear to anyone at the candidates meeting the other night - he would be constantly challenging the way the City does business, and letting them know he has a better way (which can be good or bad for Councillor to do).
Im not predicting James Smith will win the ward, but I think he is the best fit. I think he is the most well balanced, strongest representative that could be chosen for Ward 5. He has deep roots in Ward 5, something Beraldo also has. He is a collaborative person (organizing this during his own campaign), and is both smart and creative. He clearly sees residents as his equal. He has a stake here, which makes him accountable. He appears to be someone who would build a solid long-term relationship with people in the ward, and seems genuinely interested in both the north, middle, and south areas of the ward.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Ward 2- Burlington Downtown
I popped in to Wellington Square last night to catch some of the Ward 2 candidates meeting last night. I was on the way home from the Trustees meeting at Central High School with Evan and Kate, and THEY asked me to go! :) Its interesting to see that all three of my kids are enjoying various aspects of this election, and that they know virtually all of the candidates across the city by name, sign. They also know Grandma and Grandpa live in Ward 2, so wanted to swing by because they have seen the signs of all 4 candidates. This is the most interesting race in the election in my opinion. You have four distinct and interesting candidates, and depending on what you want, and are looking for - there is someone in this race for you!!
Peter Thoem, the incumbent. Peter seems the quiet, stoic, respectful & polite representative. He is not a 'camera-hog' or PR seeker in any way, and is not in this for 'the show'. He reminds us that 'flash' can be overrated, and would appeal to people that arent drawn to the 'typical' slick politician.
You have Marianne Meed Ward, a relative newcomer to the downtown ward, but not on the political scene here. Marianne has run in 2 previous elections (one in Ward 1, and as a liberal candidate). She has run a very strong on-the-ground campaign in my opinion, with the 'save the waterfront' campaign she led as a good strategic precursor to this election campaign. Marianne has taken on the role of activist (with petitions and causes). As a journalist, she is a solid communicator, and has made great use of social media and other communications tools. She has also done her homework on the issues from what I can see.
Next you have Dave Bedini - who seems to like to lead with the phrase 'lifelong resident'. I do understand why he focuses on that. The one thing I really like about people that have 'deep roots' in the community is that they are 'truly' more accountable than others. I say this because someone else can 'storm into town, cause a ruckus, promise the world' and if it doesnt work out, they can just leave. Bedini cant do that - he has too many family and friends , too much history here to do that. Thats motivating! His platform seems fine, and he comes across as the good, friendly neighbour. His communications teams response to the recent online polls has me a little insulted, but I will get over it. - he seems solid.
Lastly, you have Shannon Gillies. Shannon is the youngest candidate, and is both articulate and thoughtful in her responses. She has as nice a presence as any candidate in the city. She seems fresh, not jaded, real. She could be the choice for some people that just want to 'start fresh' with a candidate who is a non-politician, a good person, and who would be a good representative. Shannon may be the underdog (lack of experience, name recognition), but I think those that meet her will like her.
I am glad I am not in ward 2, because the choice would be difficult for me. However, there are MANY signs downtown, so it seems the residents of Ward 2 are really engaged in this election, and are behind their chosen candidate.
So, in the end, if I lived here, how would I make my choice? I would want to know about the relationship these candidates have with each of the other existing councillors and potential Mayors. I say this because I dont think we want a council that is constantly fighting with each other. We would want to ensure that the people representing us will go to bat for our issues, but have the ability to 'play in the sandbox' as well.
Peter Thoem, the incumbent. Peter seems the quiet, stoic, respectful & polite representative. He is not a 'camera-hog' or PR seeker in any way, and is not in this for 'the show'. He reminds us that 'flash' can be overrated, and would appeal to people that arent drawn to the 'typical' slick politician.
You have Marianne Meed Ward, a relative newcomer to the downtown ward, but not on the political scene here. Marianne has run in 2 previous elections (one in Ward 1, and as a liberal candidate). She has run a very strong on-the-ground campaign in my opinion, with the 'save the waterfront' campaign she led as a good strategic precursor to this election campaign. Marianne has taken on the role of activist (with petitions and causes). As a journalist, she is a solid communicator, and has made great use of social media and other communications tools. She has also done her homework on the issues from what I can see.
Next you have Dave Bedini - who seems to like to lead with the phrase 'lifelong resident'. I do understand why he focuses on that. The one thing I really like about people that have 'deep roots' in the community is that they are 'truly' more accountable than others. I say this because someone else can 'storm into town, cause a ruckus, promise the world' and if it doesnt work out, they can just leave. Bedini cant do that - he has too many family and friends , too much history here to do that. Thats motivating! His platform seems fine, and he comes across as the good, friendly neighbour. His communications teams response to the recent online polls has me a little insulted, but I will get over it. - he seems solid.
Lastly, you have Shannon Gillies. Shannon is the youngest candidate, and is both articulate and thoughtful in her responses. She has as nice a presence as any candidate in the city. She seems fresh, not jaded, real. She could be the choice for some people that just want to 'start fresh' with a candidate who is a non-politician, a good person, and who would be a good representative. Shannon may be the underdog (lack of experience, name recognition), but I think those that meet her will like her.
I am glad I am not in ward 2, because the choice would be difficult for me. However, there are MANY signs downtown, so it seems the residents of Ward 2 are really engaged in this election, and are behind their chosen candidate.
So, in the end, if I lived here, how would I make my choice? I would want to know about the relationship these candidates have with each of the other existing councillors and potential Mayors. I say this because I dont think we want a council that is constantly fighting with each other. We would want to ensure that the people representing us will go to bat for our issues, but have the ability to 'play in the sandbox' as well.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Random Election Thoughts in the Last 10 Days...
For those paying attention, the municipal election has not really been one that is about 'the issues' per se. With the exception of the newest controversy (the wind turbine at Walmart), there has been general agreement on most major issues (ie - finish the pier, work better together, engage citizens, save green space). Yet, there are still a number of interesting characters, stories, sidebars in play that are worth discussion. You will find my take 'on' these things below:
on election signs...why is it some candidates cant follow the rules. I know its hard to get support at the doors for your signs, but if you cant follow that simple rule now....
on facing an incumbent....they will likely do well in the sign war, but DONT GIVE UP. Every door is a possible vote. In my ward, the incumbent has a LOT of signs now, but for every house with a sign, there are 20 without - think about that. I think people feel more strongly about incumbents (one way or the other), so signs are easier for them to get.
on voting turnout...Im still not ultra-hopeful, but I hope we can see 40% turnout. Is that unrealistic? Sad, but perhaps it is. This election has not been a divisive or nasty one, or one that the residents of Burlington as a whole are clamoring to get to the ballots for...
on leadership.... most overused word in the election. I teach leadership at U of G, and Im not sure I even know what it means any more.
on social media...great way for candidates to stay in touch with each other, with their loyal followers, but there is a long way to go to use it as a way to engage the unengaged. I think the candidates websites with video probably have had more effect. Hats off to the candidates who have explored and integrated a wide range of social media (facebook and twitter, etc) into their campaign (Rick, Carol, Shannon, Cory, Brian, Christopher, Marianne, Bryna). Many candidates have done one or the other.
on 'online voting'...kudos to the City. I thought it was easy, well explained, clear (except the end date). We need to acknowledge a job well done - lets hope there is a small spike in turnout....
on the CM poll..its fun, but lets not get too silly here writing press releases based on the results. Its family and friends voting for the most part, and even more, family and friends who have access to a computer. My guess is MANY of the hard core voters in Burlington (found mostly along the strip south of the QEW) dont use a computer. remember, these are the folks that have determined every Burlington election since I was a child. Why? because they actually vote.
on election signs....candidates should be forced to get out there now and clean up the boulevards......
on the Pier.....I was waiting for a candidate to just say 'lets get everyone with a pick-up truck in Ward 2 to meet at Spencer Smith Saturday night and we will haul that eyesore right out of there'. That hasnt happened yet :)
on living north of the QEW....where many of our friends, hockey families, many of Burlingtons newcomers live - IF YOU VOTE, you will have a considerable effect on this election...
on Trustees....I wish more people cared. The ones that do, really do, but I have especially noticed this helping my lovely wife with her campaign this year. Trustees seem to be an afterthought, but as a taxpayer, look where the bulk of our $$ goes...
winning the election...I still think a key tactic was to work HARD HARD HARD to get out the new voter. if you look at the platforms of most candidates for mayor, I still think they were going primarily for the 'typical' Burlington voter - a safe stance. Their advisors are probably cynical and are telling them not to waste too much time on a group of people that wont vote anyway. Easy for me to say, but someday someone will awaken the non-voter (like Obama did)
on election signs...best sign in town? I say Heagles is the sharpest. I also like Goldrings, Jacksons, Bedinis, Gillies, Meed Wards.
on mistakes....We are still waiting for the one major gaffe that can happen in the last few weeks of a campaign....:) Someone will do something stupid, maybe accuse someone of something. Perhaps new information will be revealed - someone not paying their taxes....maybe a huge new issue could pop up...something, anything to add some life to this election so that Burlingtonians will vote.
We are in the home stretch - On October 25th - PLEASE VOTE!!!
on election signs...why is it some candidates cant follow the rules. I know its hard to get support at the doors for your signs, but if you cant follow that simple rule now....
on facing an incumbent....they will likely do well in the sign war, but DONT GIVE UP. Every door is a possible vote. In my ward, the incumbent has a LOT of signs now, but for every house with a sign, there are 20 without - think about that. I think people feel more strongly about incumbents (one way or the other), so signs are easier for them to get.
on voting turnout...Im still not ultra-hopeful, but I hope we can see 40% turnout. Is that unrealistic? Sad, but perhaps it is. This election has not been a divisive or nasty one, or one that the residents of Burlington as a whole are clamoring to get to the ballots for...
on leadership.... most overused word in the election. I teach leadership at U of G, and Im not sure I even know what it means any more.
on social media...great way for candidates to stay in touch with each other, with their loyal followers, but there is a long way to go to use it as a way to engage the unengaged. I think the candidates websites with video probably have had more effect. Hats off to the candidates who have explored and integrated a wide range of social media (facebook and twitter, etc) into their campaign (Rick, Carol, Shannon, Cory, Brian, Christopher, Marianne, Bryna). Many candidates have done one or the other.
on 'online voting'...kudos to the City. I thought it was easy, well explained, clear (except the end date). We need to acknowledge a job well done - lets hope there is a small spike in turnout....
on the CM poll..its fun, but lets not get too silly here writing press releases based on the results. Its family and friends voting for the most part, and even more, family and friends who have access to a computer. My guess is MANY of the hard core voters in Burlington (found mostly along the strip south of the QEW) dont use a computer. remember, these are the folks that have determined every Burlington election since I was a child. Why? because they actually vote.
on election signs....candidates should be forced to get out there now and clean up the boulevards......
on the Pier.....I was waiting for a candidate to just say 'lets get everyone with a pick-up truck in Ward 2 to meet at Spencer Smith Saturday night and we will haul that eyesore right out of there'. That hasnt happened yet :)
on living north of the QEW....where many of our friends, hockey families, many of Burlingtons newcomers live - IF YOU VOTE, you will have a considerable effect on this election...
on Trustees....I wish more people cared. The ones that do, really do, but I have especially noticed this helping my lovely wife with her campaign this year. Trustees seem to be an afterthought, but as a taxpayer, look where the bulk of our $$ goes...
winning the election...I still think a key tactic was to work HARD HARD HARD to get out the new voter. if you look at the platforms of most candidates for mayor, I still think they were going primarily for the 'typical' Burlington voter - a safe stance. Their advisors are probably cynical and are telling them not to waste too much time on a group of people that wont vote anyway. Easy for me to say, but someday someone will awaken the non-voter (like Obama did)
on election signs...best sign in town? I say Heagles is the sharpest. I also like Goldrings, Jacksons, Bedinis, Gillies, Meed Wards.
on mistakes....We are still waiting for the one major gaffe that can happen in the last few weeks of a campaign....:) Someone will do something stupid, maybe accuse someone of something. Perhaps new information will be revealed - someone not paying their taxes....maybe a huge new issue could pop up...something, anything to add some life to this election so that Burlingtonians will vote.
We are in the home stretch - On October 25th - PLEASE VOTE!!!
Saturday, October 9, 2010
A Losing Campaign!
So many people running for office, yet only a small number of good folks will be elected here in Burlington on October 25th. Five people are vying for the mayors job, and another 5 on average for the 6 Councillor positions . This means about 28 people will go home disappointed after election night.
My friends have asked me what it is that makes someone want to seek public office. My response was that is individual, and there are as many reasons as there are candidates. Here are some of the reasons that I have seen, and what I instinctively respond to that question with:
- there are people in the community who are passionate about an issue (or two), and want the spotlight on that issue (s),
-there are the altruistic ones - who are doing this for the betterment of the community,
- there are people that simply need a job, and think the pay ( 90k or so) makes this an attractive option,
- there are people who the local political parties would like to see in City Hall, so they mount an orchestrated effort to get a candidate elected municipally,
-some candidates have specific policy objectives,
- some see this as a stepping stone to another 'level' of politics (provincial, federal),
- there are people that seek recognition, they have that need to see their names on a sign, and,
- there are people that like to enter the race just to shake it up a little, ask some tough questions, cause some discomfort for the incumbents.
Most people that step forward are likely a combination of these, or maybe they have a whole other set of reasons altogether. Id like to get your input and thoughts on other reasons??
But any way you slice it, putting your name on the brochure, a sign, and getting to the doors asking people to vote for you is not easy, and at times can be downright unpleasant. Answering endless emails and calls about your stance on a range of issues can be draining. Spending your hard earned money (or others money in the larger campaigns) , only to lose, can feel deflating. What about the candidate that pretty much knows from the start that they are going to lose - what do they have to gain?
Is it possible for a losing campaign to have a positive benefit on the community? I say absolutely. I can cite one simple example from my own campaign 4 years ago. There were a couple candidates talking about citizens forums. As a director at a national ngo with extensive youth engagement history, I brought a long and deep community engagement background to that campaign, and brought the 'language' of citizen engagement to the discussions and debates in 2006. I lost my campaign for ward 5, but I am thrilled to see this language and approach all over a number of the candidates brochures and in the citizen engagement work that has been done at City Hall the past few years. They did the hard work, but it is heartening to see that good ideas can come from all the candidates, not just the winners. Winning candidates obviously can affect change and policy in a much more real way, but even those candidates that 'lose' on election day can influence what happens at City Hall the next 4 years, and although they still have 16 days to fight hard to win, we all win when their good ideas turn into action in our city.
So, fight hard, campaign cleanly and fairly, but please dont let your good ideas for our city stop in your hands should you be unsuccessful in your bid for City Hall! Leadership is influence.
My friends have asked me what it is that makes someone want to seek public office. My response was that is individual, and there are as many reasons as there are candidates. Here are some of the reasons that I have seen, and what I instinctively respond to that question with:
- there are people in the community who are passionate about an issue (or two), and want the spotlight on that issue (s),
-there are the altruistic ones - who are doing this for the betterment of the community,
- there are people that simply need a job, and think the pay ( 90k or so) makes this an attractive option,
- there are people who the local political parties would like to see in City Hall, so they mount an orchestrated effort to get a candidate elected municipally,
-some candidates have specific policy objectives,
- some see this as a stepping stone to another 'level' of politics (provincial, federal),
- there are people that seek recognition, they have that need to see their names on a sign, and,
- there are people that like to enter the race just to shake it up a little, ask some tough questions, cause some discomfort for the incumbents.
Most people that step forward are likely a combination of these, or maybe they have a whole other set of reasons altogether. Id like to get your input and thoughts on other reasons??
But any way you slice it, putting your name on the brochure, a sign, and getting to the doors asking people to vote for you is not easy, and at times can be downright unpleasant. Answering endless emails and calls about your stance on a range of issues can be draining. Spending your hard earned money (or others money in the larger campaigns) , only to lose, can feel deflating. What about the candidate that pretty much knows from the start that they are going to lose - what do they have to gain?
Is it possible for a losing campaign to have a positive benefit on the community? I say absolutely. I can cite one simple example from my own campaign 4 years ago. There were a couple candidates talking about citizens forums. As a director at a national ngo with extensive youth engagement history, I brought a long and deep community engagement background to that campaign, and brought the 'language' of citizen engagement to the discussions and debates in 2006. I lost my campaign for ward 5, but I am thrilled to see this language and approach all over a number of the candidates brochures and in the citizen engagement work that has been done at City Hall the past few years. They did the hard work, but it is heartening to see that good ideas can come from all the candidates, not just the winners. Winning candidates obviously can affect change and policy in a much more real way, but even those candidates that 'lose' on election day can influence what happens at City Hall the next 4 years, and although they still have 16 days to fight hard to win, we all win when their good ideas turn into action in our city.
So, fight hard, campaign cleanly and fairly, but please dont let your good ideas for our city stop in your hands should you be unsuccessful in your bid for City Hall! Leadership is influence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)