PDA

You are viewing a trimmed-down version of the SkyscraperPage.com discussion forum.  For the full version follow the link below.

View Full Version : HRM Municipal Election 2012



Pages : [1] 2 3

fenwick16
Jan 15, 2012, 3:51 PM
There are only about 9 months before the next HRM Municipal election. It will be interesting since the number of districts is being reduced from 23 to 16. Here are links of the new (draft) district map (http://www.halifax.ca/BoundaryReview/Documents/UARB_Decision_Map.pdf) versus the old district maps (http://www.halifax.ca/municipalclerk/districtboundaries.html).

Any predictions of which Councillors will be facing off? For example, for the new district 9 there is an overlap of Jennifer Watts current district 14 and Linda Mosher's current district 17. Linda Mosher seems to be more pro-development than Jennifer Watts (is this a correct assessment?) Based on halifax.ca votes, Linda Mosher voted for the Trillium and The Alexander. Opinions?

Councillor Sloane could possibly move to the new district 8, which includes part of her current district 12 and also Councillor Blumenthal's District 11. There have been rumours that Councillor Blumenthal plans to retire. Or Councillor Sloane could face off against Councillor Uteck in the new District 7.

I have a question - if Councillor Uteck decides to run for Mayor then would she also be eligible to run as the new District 7 Councillor?

I have had a chance to meet a few of the Councillors and correspond by email. I have a different view with regard to some opinions on this forum. For example, I have found Councillor Sloane to be fairly pro-development although she seems to be against tall buildings. She also seems to find time to correspond not only to people in her own district but also to ex-residents such as myself. She has also been pro-stadium.

I favour pro-development Councillors since I think the HRM needs to encourage progress and job development.

haligonia
Jan 15, 2012, 5:22 PM
Jennifer Watts isn't the most pro-development councillor, but she is very progressive. She listens to her constituents, is respectable at council meetings and is quite intelligent. A personal favourite.

Keith P.
Jan 15, 2012, 5:57 PM
Don't get me started on Sloane. She is first on the hit list of councilors who must go.

Watts is intelligent but takes a lot of very dumb positions. She is against all development and is an enviro-loon. "Progressive"? That is a word gaining favor these days, but it all just means lefty to me. Odds are she will get re-elected since that is the area that keeps voting for Epstein and she is his puppet, but that doesn't mean she is a member that should be returned to council.

Jonovision
Jan 20, 2012, 1:56 PM
Fred Connors of FRED announces his intent for a run for mayor.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/53806-fred-connors-run-mayor-halifax

kph06
Jan 20, 2012, 2:39 PM
Fred Connors of FRED announces his intent for a run for mayor.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/53806-fred-connors-run-mayor-halifax

My first impression when I read this last night was "well, Kelly just got re-elected." I think Fred will get a decent amount of votes, but unfortunatley, I bet the number of strong Kelly atlernatives will split the non-Kelly votes and Peter will scrape by. I think he's lost some of his regulars, but because Connors and Savage will probably have a stong campaign they will get a decent percentage each, but not enough to knock Peter off the chair. Too bad the competition can't hold some pre-election election, where only one wins and gets to run as Kelly's challenger.

someone123
Jan 20, 2012, 6:38 PM
That's what I thought too.

The runoff system could be built into the process (i.e. you rank multiple candidates and if your top pick gets eliminated, your lower picks are used), but I doubt that will change anytime soon.

Keith P.
Jan 20, 2012, 10:44 PM
Fred is a fringe candidate at best. He may get some of the hipster vote but aside from the chicken lobby he cannot be considered as a serious candidate by most people.

kph06
Jan 21, 2012, 12:29 AM
Fred is a fringe candidate at best. He may get some of the hipster vote but aside from the chicken lobby he cannot be considered as a serious candidate by most people.

I don't think he will do much off the peninsula, but where he seems to be "Halifamous", he might be getting people to vote who wouldn't normally.

spaustin
Jan 21, 2012, 12:59 AM
I don't think he will do much off the peninsula, but where he seems to be "Halifamous", he might be getting people to vote who wouldn't normally.

Yep. Municipal elections can be funny beasts. With turnout of only 36% last time, there is lots of room for new candidates to enter the race. If they can attract voters who didn't participate last time, having more than one won't necessarily hand things to Kelly.

Keith, why isn't Fred a "serious" candidate? He's a successful enterpreneur, a community activist and from the accounts I have heard, a thoughtful man. What would be your criteria for a serious candidate?

someone123
Jan 22, 2012, 7:58 PM
I don't think there's much point in sending letters to Gloria McCluskey. If you want to have an impact, send the letters to the media, post stuff on facebook, etc., and instead of focusing on McCluskey talk about why this was so bad and why it is in everybody's best interest to have more infill in areas like this.

Like I said before, I was under the impression that McCluskey won't be running in 2012, but I may be incorrect. I think a couple of other bad councillors will also be gone. However, there's no guarantee that they won't be replaced with new councillors who are also terrible. Jennifer Watts was new in 2008 and didn't she just try to pull a "Gloria" on that 8 storey proposal on Quinpool...?

Keith P.
Jan 22, 2012, 9:08 PM
I believe that Blumenthal has said he is retiring. Bob Harvey possibly as well, which is too bad because he is on the right side of most things.

Watts and Barkhouse are the two NDP puppets on council. Both are intelligent people but their priorities are very skewed and they are anti-development. Jim Smith is an absolute moron and tends to be on the wrong side of many things and should go too.

Of the rest, Sloane and McCluskey obviously need to go. Mary Wile is an embarrassment and needs to be replaced. Reg Rankin seems to be suffering health woes and may not re-offer I suspect. Peter Lund is another weak councilor. Debbie Hum is erratic and sometimes takes odd positions.

That's 11 people out of a new council of 16 who should be replaced.

someone123
Jan 22, 2012, 9:32 PM
We'll see what happens but I don't really expect Sloane to be re-elected given the redrawn boundaries. I think the new South End/Downtown district 7 is far more likely to go to Sue Uteck, which would be an improvement. Maybe we will finally have a downtown councillor with an appreciation for the area as a business district. Sloane seems to treat it as a kind of outgrowth of her own Gottingen neighbourhood. I doubt that voters living in condos along Spring Garden or whatever are thrilled with her. She almost lost in 2008 and had only 1144 votes.

The new District 8 is only maybe 1/3 Sloane's old constituents. If Patrick Murphy were to re-offer he'd probably have a better chance to win. I don't remember a ton about him from 2004-2008, but the fact that he hasn't done anything horrible enough to be memorable places him in front of many other councillors.

I think it's pretty likely that the new council will be an improvement over the old one. The only big risk I see is more Watts/Barkhouse-style candidates -- so the equivalent of a Bev Miller getting one of the districts that's up for grabs. Not a pleasant thought!

Upwords
Jan 22, 2012, 9:54 PM
Good stuff, KeithP and someone123. Excellent assessments on the quality of the councillors. Though pretty discouraging to think 11 of 16 must go. But we're making progress on the "HRM Pro-development Campaign 2012."

Do you think we should start a new thread? (I don't want to distract any further from the Prince Albert Rd. issue - I'm sure there's lots more to be said on that one and this is a broader topic ... and exploratory at best thus far.) I'm new to the forum - please advise.

ibnem2
Jan 22, 2012, 11:36 PM
I agree this is about corruption and leadership that's why I asked about the study. IMO it needs to be used to damage her credibility...someone needs to be asking the tough questions...if she lies about this then what else is being hidden? Why is she so careless to lie about a fact that can be so easily disproved, in other words what are her REAL motivations for killing this???? The building is too tall...I don't believe her, all her excuses seem like a smokescreen to me...I hope someone is calling her on it.

I am just a simple guy, no real education beyond high school and I don't usually have a lot of time to keep up on this forum that I dearly love for a city I still dearly love (MTL dweller), let alone have time to dig around for staff reports (though I wish I did :D ) so that's why I asked about the wind study. I would like to write to her an e-mail expressing my disappointment and questioning her faulty reasoning and wanted confirmation that the wind study existed before I referred to it, I wouldn't want her to come back and say it's not there and have her be right. :)

If any of you have experience in letter writing of this sort (I don't) and would like to see the text before I send it, PM me. Input/feedback would be welcome :)

I hope I didn't offend you with my comments. I now understand your point.

On the wind study, my understanding is that it is normally released before a scheduled hearing along w other reports. Since a hearing was never scheduled, it may never be released (unless they go to appeal). Given that staff recommended the project (and they should know what they're doing), you should simply refer to the premise of a "positive staff" report and not worry about the details (i.e., that's what HRM staff is for and that's what the councillors are supposed to rely on as well).

On writing a letter, the more it comes from you the better it will read. Suggest you send to all the councillors and copy Mayor Kelly.

cheers ...

ibnem2
Jan 22, 2012, 11:41 PM
We'll see what happens but I don't really expect Sloane to be re-elected given the redrawn boundaries. I think the new South End/Downtown district 7 is far more likely to go to Sue Uteck, which would be an improvement. Maybe we will finally have a downtown councillor with an appreciation for the area as a business district. Sloane seems to treat it as a kind of outgrowth of her own Gottingen neighbourhood. I doubt that voters living in condos along Spring Garden or whatever are thrilled with her. She almost lost in 2008 and had only 1144 votes.

The new District 8 is only maybe 1/3 Sloane's old constituents. If Patrick Murphy were to re-offer he'd probably have a better chance to win. I don't remember a ton about him from 2004-2008, but the fact that he hasn't done anything horrible enough to be memorable places him in front of many other councillors.

I think it's pretty likely that the new council will be an improvement over the old one. The only big risk I see is more Watts/Barkhouse-style candidates -- so the equivalent of a Bev Miller getting one of the districts that's up for grabs. Not a pleasant thought!

Heard rumours that Karsten may be re-comsiderring his options, probably due to re-organization of the districts - That would be a pity. Karsten's district has been consolidated with Barkhouse's. People need to get behind this and let Karsten and other good leaders know that there is support. Given that it only takes in the 1,000 to 2,000 range of people to get elected (20% voting) it would not take much to get the people in a state of Glori-apathy out to vote ... if they have a cause and if one person tells the other.

Social media is changing a lot of things - did you guys hear about wikipedia and other sites shutting down SOPA last week ...

So Facebook, twitter, google and many other forums can be leveraged to effectively get people talking, get them excited and get them voting. It's hard to contest common sense and reason in the face of stupidity so it's just a matter of getting them interested. Easy - Right !

Keith P.
Jan 23, 2012, 12:15 AM
Do you think we should start a new thread? (I don't want to distract any further from the Prince Albert Rd. issue - I'm sure there's lots more to be said on that one and this is a broader topic ... and exploratory at best thus far.) I'm new to the forum - please advise.

There is a "HRM Municipal Election 2012" thread in the Business Politics and the Economy section. Maybe the mods could move some of these posts over there?

halifaxboyns
Jan 23, 2012, 12:48 AM
Just picking up the conversation about the Dartmouth Development proposal that got shot down and some 'call to action' - is it me, or is this whole issue with McClusky becoming a really big thing? I'm not saying that's bad - but it's not going away, it's staying in the media and it seems she's getting hit by email and phone calls about all this?

I think Keith's analysis of council is pretty accurate, however I'm not sure what's going to happen with Watts/Sloane. I suspect it will be a mutual cancellation of votes - because wouldn't they end up running for the same 'seat'? If so, I suspect Sloane's supporters won't like Watts and vise versa.

Councillor Blumenthal did announce he was retiring and it is a shame about Councillor Rankin's health, although I don't know how much of a contribution he's really been.

I think if development issues and public opinion are going to be an issue for the election - then people should be asking questions about those things. Frankly, go to debates and ask about the whole lack of public input or people's opinion's on development. Keep the issue up front and centre.

Waye Mason
Jan 23, 2012, 1:16 AM
Sloane lives in the new Peninsula North District on Creighton, and Watts lives on Duncan, so they get to face off.

Linda Mosher run unopposed by an incumbent, as will Sue Uteck.

I find it interesting that no one has talked about the suburban councillors. Walker, Dalrymple would be on my list to get rid of.

haligonia
Jan 23, 2012, 1:41 AM
Barry Dalrymple is an absolute moron. Outhit has been pretty good, though. He should retain his district.

gm_scott
Jan 23, 2012, 3:11 AM
^ Yes, please get rid of Dalrymple. He hasn't done a good job at all.

fenwick16
Jan 23, 2012, 3:47 AM
Is Sheila Fougere available to run as a Councillor? I read that she was a Councillor in District 14 (Connaught-Quinpool) before running and losing as a Liberal MP candidate in 2004 (by a close vote) and loss the Mayoral vote in 2008 but got a large number of votes.

Based on past HRM recorded votes, she is pro-development and voted for the Trillium, Alexander and United Gulf Towers, and other developments.

If she ran, which new district would she be in?



There is a Wikipedia page on the results of the 2008 vote - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax_Regional_Municipality_municipal_election,_2008#District_14:_Connaught_-_Quinpool

Dmajackson
Jan 23, 2012, 5:58 AM
Tim Outhit is a shoe-in since the only change in his riding is the addition of Royale Hemlocks (already heavily tied in with Bedford right now). He has proven his dedication quickly and will win by a landslide if even challenged.

Debbie Hum is an almost guarantee since she is losing the part of her district that is not strongly behind her.

Brad Johns will likely win the new Middle/Upper Sackville area.

If reoffering Bob Harvey will win by a landslide.

Watts will beat-out Sloane provided Blumenthal is retiring. I'll likely be voting in this race.

fenwick16
Jan 23, 2012, 6:33 AM
I can understand the appeal of Jennifer Watts for people who are involved in active transportation since she seems to support that concept. On the other hand, I shutter to imagine the height limits for the Central Pan if she is involved in the decisions (I imagine height limits of 10 - 20 meters throughout the peninsula). Jennifer Watts seems to be against just about everything except active transportation and more green space. I think she would be better suited as a rural Councillor than a city Councillor.

q12
Feb 3, 2012, 9:58 PM
Epstein says he'll stay MLA, not run for mayor

Scott Simpson Feb 03, 2012 12:59:41 PM

http://www.news957.com/news/local/article/326914--epstein-says-he-ll-stay-mla-not-run-for-mayor

A member of the Nova Scotia Legislature who's been talked about as a potential candidate to run for mayor of HRM against Peter Kelly says he will not be doing so.

MLA Howard Epstein, who represents Halifax-Chebucto in the Dexter Government, would have had to to resign his seat in order to campaign for mayor, and he says he doesn't want to do that.

Epstein says he kept running into people encouraging him to run, and he's frustrated with the status quo.

He says he'll keep encouraging good people to run for council seats.

Mayor Kelly's leading opponents so far include Tom Martin, Fred Connors and Mike Savage, who's expceted to announce his intention to run on Monday.

Howard Epstein's definition of good people:

Communist, save the view, stop all development heritage NIMBY wing-nuts. :crazy:

Did I miss anything?

cormiermax
Feb 3, 2012, 10:25 PM
Kick that fool out of office already, please.

resetcbu1
Feb 3, 2012, 10:35 PM
At least he won't be our next mayor:cheers:

Keith P.
Feb 4, 2012, 12:44 AM
At least he won't be our next mayor:cheers:

Thank god for that.

worldlyhaligonian
Feb 4, 2012, 10:35 PM
Good people... as opposed to bad people... the rhetoric makes me sick.

Keith P.
Feb 4, 2012, 11:49 PM
Good people... as opposed to bad people... the rhetoric makes me sick.

Shhh!! Do not speak against Der Kommissar!!! :haha:

gypsy
Feb 5, 2012, 1:55 AM
I believe Mike Savage will enter the contest for mayor this week. I am concerned about Fred Connors. I think he is well meaning but maybe he should look at being a councilor or other elected office before throwing in his hat for mayor? He also has a lot of irons in the fire and being a decent mayor is an 80 hour a week job.

Like some of the others who have posted here I fear that the candidates trying to unseat Peter 'Which Way Does the Wind Blow' Kelly will split the vote and we will be saddled with Mayor Kelly yet again.

Keith P.
Feb 5, 2012, 2:51 AM
Connors will not be a factor.

I am less than convinced that Mike Savage is the savior many are making him out to be. He did nothing as a MP for many years and as a Liberal he has taken no stand on anything except for political expediency. More concerning is that he has assembled a group of backroom supporters that consist of many NDP types. Worrisome in that without a political philosophy of his own, he will follow their lead to pay back debts if elected.

While a trained seal would be better than Kelly, we could do a lot better than Mike Savage.

DB15
Feb 5, 2012, 6:39 PM
While a trained seal would be better than Kelly, we could do a lot better than Mike Savage.
such as?

q12
Feb 6, 2012, 3:49 PM
I just heard the ultimate anti-everything wingnut on NEWS 95.7. She was calling in to give her opinion on Mike Savage running for Mayor. She said "Why can't we just go back to good ol' Halifax".

She went on to say that Halifax has become too focused on development and attracting people to live here and visit. She said we don't need a stadium, convention centre and the oval. She said she will never visit the commons again as long as the oval is still there. She also had an issue with the Sands of Salter.

Jordi Morgan sounded shocked at the women's insane opinion.

It's hard to believe there are people who don't want any progress at all in this city. :brickwall:

halifaxboyns
Feb 6, 2012, 3:53 PM
The more these people come out of the wood work, the more of a 'fringe element' they are.

The city has realized that the only way to pay for things is to encourage development and see the benefits of an increased tax base. I suspect this person is older than jesus and came over on the arc.

Probably someone who never shows up to a public hearing and says their thoughts once a year, if that...ignore it.

q12
Feb 6, 2012, 3:57 PM
The more these people come out of the wood work, the more of a 'fringe element' they are.

The city has realized that the only way to pay for things is to encourage development and see the benefits of an increased tax base. I suspect this person is older than jesus and came over on the arc.

Probably someone who never shows up to a public hearing and says their thoughts once a year, if that...ignore it.

The crazy part was she sounded younger. If I can find the podcast, I'll post it. I honestly thought she was joking at first.

-Harlington-
Feb 6, 2012, 9:37 PM
Savage is running- http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/59731-savage-makes-it-official-hes-running-mayor

q12
Feb 6, 2012, 9:57 PM
Savage is running- http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/59731-savage-makes-it-official-hes-running-mayor
:previous:
We'll have development for the future that respects the Heritage and protects our Environment

:uhh:

Does that mean he is going give the Heritage Trust and Save the View the keys to the city? :???: :sly:

someone123
Feb 6, 2012, 10:26 PM
Does that mean he is going give the Heritage Trust and Save the View the keys to the city? :???: :sly:

That sounds like standard meaningless "rainbow, puppies, and unicorns" political talk.

The best way to predict what Savage would be like as mayor is probably to look at his political background. I don't know much about him. One plus is that Gloria McCluskey doesn't like him.

halifaxboyns
Feb 6, 2012, 10:31 PM
That sounds like standard meaningless "rainbow, puppies, and unicorns" political talk.

The best way to predict what Savage would be like as mayor is probably to look at his political background. I don't know much about him. One plus is that Gloria McCluskey doesn't like him.

I would've said sunshine and lollypop's personally...and rainbows, etc. lol

The CBC NS article on his announcement notes that Sheila Fourgere is backing Savage, so I think we can rule her out running this time around.

q12
Feb 6, 2012, 10:38 PM
Former Federal NDP leader Alexa McDonough is backing him too.

At least we should have plenty of time before the election to find out the different candidates stand on development.

kph06
Feb 8, 2012, 3:29 PM
News 95.7 is reporting Waye Mason is running for District 7, Peninsula South Downtown.

resetcbu1
Feb 8, 2012, 4:26 PM
News 95.7 is reporting Waye Mason is running for District 7, Peninsula South Downtown.

Haven't heard from him on here in a while, he musta been gearing up for this... wonder who'd be worse him or sloane lol?

kph06
Feb 8, 2012, 4:58 PM
Haven't heard from him on here in a while, he musta been gearing up for this... wonder who'd be worse him or sloane lol?

I think he will be going up against Uteck, as she will remain the southend councilor, I bet Sloane will run in Downtown/Northend. I think it would be pretty hard to uproot Uteck from the Southend.

I'm not sure if I have missed it earlier, but has there been any talk if Fougere will run for her old seat at council? I would like to see her back over Watts.

Waye Mason
Feb 8, 2012, 6:36 PM
I think he will be going up against Uteck, as she will remain the southend councilor, I bet Sloane will run in Downtown/Northend. I think it would be pretty hard to uproot Uteck from the Southend.

I'm not sure if I have missed it earlier, but has there been any talk if Fougere will run for her old seat at council? I would like to see her back over Watts.

Dawn and Sue are both likely to run in the new district.

The new district is huge... it runs from Jubilee to Oxford, up to Quinpool, across to North Park, then up to Cornwallis, and along Cornwallis to the Harbour.

So I might be running against Sue and Dawn. But I am running in a new district that neither can claim to be the incumbent of, so it will be a very interesting race.

Mostly I am running for change.

I won't be on the board all that often as I will be knocking on doors, but more info is on the website: http://wayemason.ca

haligonia
Feb 8, 2012, 7:22 PM
Congrats, Waye! I fully support your goals and hope to see you on council come October.

someone123
Feb 8, 2012, 8:25 PM
I wish you luck, but I think it will be a tough race.

I really think the downtown needs more councillors to sell it as an economic engine of regional importance. Council needs to buy in to that and invest reasonable amounts of money. They also need to overcome the inertia and opposition to change that has built up after decades of neglect. Not everybody is going to be happy about every plan and some things will need to be pushed forward.

halifaxboyns
Feb 8, 2012, 8:58 PM
Wouldn't that also mean that it would be Waye, Sue, Dawn and Jennifer Watts?

That's a good point Waye, they could only claim a small portion of the district as their 'home'. I'm not able to vote, but if you could uproot Jennifer, power to you.

Have you put your platform on line yet?

Waye Mason
Feb 8, 2012, 9:36 PM
Jennifer is in the new Peninsula North, if she runs.

sk8tr
Feb 9, 2012, 12:40 AM
Wouldn't it make sense for Savage to put together a slate of candidates? That way, he could be part of a wholesale change that the public might be ready for.

Someone123, isn't this how municipal elections work in Vancouver?

Do you think that Halifax is ready to 'throw the bums out?'

someone123
Feb 9, 2012, 1:26 AM
Someone123, isn't this how municipal elections work in Vancouver?

Yes. As far as I know there are two municipal parties in Vancouver -- Vision Vancouver (related to COPE) and the ironically-named Non-Partisan Association. The mayor, Gregor Robertson, is the leader of Vision Vancouver and most councillors belong to that party (Vancouver has only 10 councillors).

I'm not sure how much party discipline exists in Vancouver council, but presumably at the very least the Vision Vancouver members are able to get together and agree on policy ahead of time.

This may or may not be a good setup but Vancouver seems to have a much more effective municipal government than Halifax. At the very least, they accomplish much more (they have several advantages like sky-high property values, but some disadvantages as well compared to Halifax, like more poverty). There's still some hardcore NIMBYism, but I am amazed at how there is a steady stream of successful projects here while very minor projects are mired in studies and then left to die by HRM regional council. A few years ago for example they talked about revamping Granville Street in downtown Vancouver. A while later it was done, and that was that. Everything is supposedly complicated in Halifax but other cities manage.

Transit planning in metro Vancouver also seems pretty different from Halifax and is much, much more on the ball. There's some flip-flopping about some projects (like the SFU gondola or UBC line) but there is a steady stream of projects like the Millennium Line, Canada Line, and Evergreen Line that are far more extensive and sophisticated even after correcting for the size of the two cities. Halifax is 1/5 to 1/6 the size of Vancouver but its capital investment in transit is probably on the order of 1/20. I would expect that the operating cost subsidies are much lower as well.

kph06
Feb 9, 2012, 2:19 AM
Epstein was interviewed recently and said he would like to gather and support like-minded candidates to run for council... that would be terrible if the Howard Epstein Party of Halifax ruled council.

Keith P.
Feb 9, 2012, 11:26 AM
Epstein was interviewed recently and said he would like to gather and support like-minded candidates to run for council... that would be terrible if the Howard Epstein Party of Halifax ruled council.

Imagine 10 Jennifer Watts clones there. Chickens in every yard and no building taller than 4 floors allowed.

Halifax Hillbilly
Feb 9, 2012, 5:41 PM
Sloane lives in the new Peninsula North District on Creighton, and Watts lives on Duncan, so they get to face off.

Linda Mosher run unopposed by an incumbent, as will Sue Uteck.

I find it interesting that no one has talked about the suburban councillors. Walker, Dalrymple would be on my list to get rid of.

Walker has been acclaimed several times. He also seems to be one of the worst examples of protecting his own turf and the status quo at the expense of the whole municipality. I think it's time for him to move on - I believe he's been four plus terms.

If anyone runs proposing term limits they'd get my attention. If you can't accomplish anything in two terms, you're not going to get any better.

RyeJay
Feb 9, 2012, 6:31 PM
Walker has been acclaimed several times. He also seems to be one of the worst examples of protecting his own turf and the status quo at the expense of the whole municipality. I think it's time for him to move on - I believe he's been four plus terms.

If anyone runs proposing term limits they'd get my attention. If you can't accomplish anything in two terms, you're not going to get any better.

A mandate for term limits is also to assume that voters are either too stupid or too apathetic to vote for someone else.
(Exhibit A: HRM?)

For any case in which either holds true, another case can be found in which a lack of term limits was extremely benefitical due to the councillor's reliably progressive decisions. To set a limit for this 'good find' of a councillor means that the voters are forced to find another councillor of similar intentions -- which is often very difficult, if not impossible, to find.

someone123
Feb 9, 2012, 6:46 PM
Walker has been acclaimed several times. He also seems to be one of the worst examples of protecting his own turf and the status quo at the expense of the whole municipality. I think it's time for him to move on - I believe he's been four plus terms.

This is, I think, in large part a result of the small size and lack of importance of the HRM districts. These seats aren't competitive because nobody wants them.

The reduced council size should help a lot. At the very least we will have many cases where two old incumbents will be competing for the same seat. On top of that there is the upside of having a smaller group to make decisions -- we really do not need a procession of 23 people making 5 minute vanity speeches about every chicken or cat bylaw.

Halifax Hillbilly
Feb 10, 2012, 3:11 PM
This is, I think, in large part a result of the small size and lack of importance of the HRM districts. These seats aren't competitive because nobody wants them.

The reduced council size should help a lot. At the very least we will have many cases where two old incumbents will be competing for the same seat. On top of that there is the upside of having a smaller group to make decisions -- we really do not need a procession of 23 people making 5 minute vanity speeches about every chicken or cat bylaw.

Another thing that hopefully comes out of larger districts is fewer councillors protecting their own turf instead of looking at the bigger picture. I've honestly heard of councillors passing the buck on problems (crappy streets, vandalized infrastructure, poor bus service, etc.) in the district next door, like it doesn't affect their constituents. Not my problem, talk to councillor X,Y or Z.

Halifax Hillbilly
Feb 10, 2012, 3:16 PM
A mandate for term limits is also to assume that voters are either too stupid or too apathetic to vote for someone else.
(Exhibit A: HRM?)

For any case in which either holds true, another case can be found in which a lack of term limits was extremely benefitical due to the councillor's reliably progressive decisions. To set a limit for this 'good find' of a councillor means that the voters are forced to find another councillor of similar intentions -- which is often very difficult, if not impossible, to find.

There would be that downside, obviously. I guess one of my main thoughts is with few exceptions politicians seem to become more entrenched in the system and less responsive to the needs of the communities they represent the longer they serve. It's like there is a little political bubble that 90% of them build and never pop. To my eyes many of the worst councillors today were decent councillors two terms ago. There is a certain amount of inertia and tone-deafness that seems inherent in politics - better to limit it if possible. You will kick some good people out along the way, but I bet in many cases a fresh face will be an improvement over someone who stopped caring two terms ago.

Haligonian88
Feb 18, 2012, 1:09 PM
This surprises me a bit, maybe people are starting to see that Peter Kelly has had his time and we need a change.

Savage at 53%, Kelly at 25% in new poll
February 17, 2012 - 7:02pm BY DAVID JACKSON STAFF REPORTER

A new poll has Halifax Mayor Peter Kelly well behind Mike Savage in the mayoral race, capping off a difficult week for the incumbent.

Of about 300 decided voters in the Corporate Research Associates poll, 53 per cent said they’d vote for Savage if an election were held today.

Kelly was second at 25 per cent. A similar poll in November, before Savage had even declared he was in the race, had Savage at 41 per cent support and Kelly at 37 per cent.

Savage announced his candidacy on Feb. 6. Kelly has said he has every intention of running but is holding off on officially entering the race because it would distract him from his work at city hall.

Retired police officer Tom Martin garnered nine per cent support in the poll released Friday. Businessman Fred Connors was at eight per cent and Dalhousie University student Matthew Worona at five per cent.

The poll of 400 residents of Halifax Regional Municipality was done Feb. 6-16. Twenty-six per cent didn’t pick any of the candidates. The margin of error is 4.9 percentage points, 95 per cent of the time.

...

http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/64166-savage-53-kelly-25-new-poll

The article goes on to talk about the story in the Coast this week about Kelly.

Keith P.
Feb 18, 2012, 2:57 PM
Be careful of those poll results:

1. It is a CRA/Don Mills poll. He is the arch-enemy of Kelly, pondered his own run for mayor, and was behind the anti-Kelly movement last time.
2. He is a Mike Savage supporter and attended the campaign launch.
3. The poll was taken the day after the campaign launch.

I don't doubt that this time Kelly has some real opposition. I would rather have polls from other sources than CRA though.

Waye Mason
Feb 18, 2012, 4:57 PM
Be careful of those poll results:

1. It is a CRA/Don Mills poll. He is the arch-enemy of Kelly, pondered his own run for mayor, and was behind the anti-Kelly movement last time.
2. He is a Mike Savage supporter and attended the campaign launch.
3. The poll was taken the day after the campaign launch.

I don't doubt that this time Kelly has some real opposition. I would rather have polls from other sources than CRA though.

This.

That said, I do think Kelly's support is at an all time low, but nine months is a lifetime in politics.

fenwick16
Feb 18, 2012, 5:43 PM
Be careful of those poll results:

1. It is a CRA/Don Mills poll. He is the arch-enemy of Kelly, pondered his own run for mayor, and was behind the anti-Kelly movement last time.
2. He is a Mike Savage supporter and attended the campaign launch.
3. The poll was taken the day after the campaign launch.

I don't doubt that this time Kelly has some real opposition. I would rather have polls from other sources than CRA though.

Thanks for the information, that puts the results in a different light.

Can someone explain why Mike Savage is being supported by several NDP'ers? Is it so he won't run against NDP'er Robert Chisholm in the next federal election?

Keith P.
Feb 18, 2012, 6:12 PM
Can someone explain why Mike Savage is being supported by several NDP'ers? Is it so he won't run against NDP'er Robert Chisholm in the next federal election?

I assumed they supported him so they would not be forced to support Kommissar Howard Epstein. :haha:

Halifax Hillbilly
Feb 18, 2012, 8:24 PM
That said, I do think Kelly's support is at an all time low, but nine months is a lifetime in politics.

If Kelly has lost trust, I don't see how he can recover. The story from the Coast is particularly damning. Whatever opinions one has of Bousquet the story seems to be nothing but facts from the probate court - public documents. I mean at the least Kelly has utterly failed to settle the will, and at worst there is the problem of $145,000 under dispute and the offer from Kelly to give it back if a confidentiality agreement is signed! How do you push that under the table? Just think of the optics: $145,000 moved by Kelly into his own account. That's all you need to hear and it sounds horrible. If he did have a proper reason for having done this he isn't saying anything, and whatever his reasons might have been the headline number of $145,000 punches so much harder. And there's a confidentiality agreement thrown into the settlement - that screams he's hiding something. This issue is sure to come up again as the campaigns get rolling, and Kelly isn't exactly a strong debater who's good at damage control.

The poll results need to be taken with a grain of salt given their origin, but if people are starting to put all the questionable decisions together and deciding they don't trust Peter Kelly he's toast. Nine days, nine weeks, nine months, it doesn't matter - he can't rebuild if he's lost the public trust. If.

haligonia
Feb 18, 2012, 9:00 PM
Thanks for the information, that puts the results in a different light.

Can someone explain why Mike Savage is being supported by several NDP'ers? Is it so he won't run against NDP'er Robert Chisholm in the next federal election?

I am quite left-leaning myself (I support the NDP) and think there could be a few reasons:

He is a legitimate opponent to Peter Kelly, who is strongly disliked by many who support the party.
He seems to have more of an urban focus than Peter Kelly.
Alexa McDonough, the former leader of the federal NDP, has supported him.

PoscStudent
Feb 18, 2012, 10:33 PM
In municipal politics it's not uncommon to see members of one federal or provincial party support a member of another party. A lot of the issues that may divide them in the House of Commons don't really come in to play municipally.

In the 2010 Toronto mayoral election George Smitherman, the former deputy premier of Dalton McGuinty's Liberal government, had a large number of endorsements from Progressive Conservatives, which he used to try and beat conservative Rob Ford.

Haligonian88
Feb 21, 2012, 1:40 AM
Things aren't looking good for Peter, the Chronicle Herald has picked up the will story. Maybe he won't even both running again?

Questions over will dog Halifax mayor
February 20, 2012 - 9:28pm BY LAURA FRASER CITY HALL REPORTER

Peter Kelly faces allegations over how he handled Bedford woman's estate

...

http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/65205-questions-over-will-dog-halifax-mayor

fenwick16
Feb 21, 2012, 2:04 AM
This is in the Chronicle Herald story: (source: http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/65205-questions-over-will-dog-halifax-mayor)


.
.
.
But Thibeault’s cousin, Helen Day, said in an interview Monday she believes the Bedford woman planned to give the money to Kelly as a gift outside the will. Thibeault had a fractious relationship with many of those named in her estate, Day said, and she may have worried they would contest the will if she left the bulk of her assets to Kelly.

At the funeral, Kelly distributed the will among the beneficiaries, Day said. Her sister, Cathy Ivany, is named and Day said the pair were surprised Kelly had not received more than the others named.

He told the sisters that Thibeault had given him a gift for his children’s education, Day said, and she believed him.

“I wish I could say that Mary told me she was doing this (gift outside the will) but I can’t,” Day said. “But there is no question in my mind that she meant for Peter to have the bulk. Peter was like a son to Mary and his children were like her grandchildren.

“Mary would be turning in her grave if she knew about what was happening to him right now.”


I do not know that real details of this story, however, it seems that the Chronicle Herald story is not as "one-sided" as The Coast story.

hollistreet
Feb 22, 2012, 5:36 PM
CBC just announced that Peter Kelly is not running for re-election!!!!!!!!!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2012/02/22/ns-kelly-mayor.html

RyeJay
Feb 22, 2012, 6:22 PM
^ HAa! hahahaah

-Harlington-
Feb 22, 2012, 6:38 PM
From Peter Kelly's Facebook :



Peter Kelly
February 22, 2012) Halifax – Mayor Peter Kelly announced today that he will not be seeking re-election this October.

“I feel that, after 27 years of public service, I have made my contribution to the good of the community to the very best of my ability and it is time to seek new horizons,” he said.

Mayor Kelly said that he intends to complete his term.

“It has been a great privilege to be mayor of HRM and I will carry with me forever the spirit of goodwill that citizens have always shown me. They have been my constant guide and inspiration. The residents were always the best part of this job and I thank them from the bottom of my heart for their advice, their support and also for their forgiveness when I have made mistakes, and I have made my fair share!.”

Mayor Kelly, 55, said he made his decision not to reoffer on Tuesday, after taking some personal time to reflect and to consult with his family.

“Being mayor has come with a cost,” he said. “Working more than 90 hours a week has taken its toll. My marriage has ended and it has been a strain on my family. I have always put the wellbeing of the municipality first but now it is time to give my family priority. I know that everyone will understand and respect my decision.”

Mayor Kelly said it would not be easy to walk away after so many years in office but that he felt it was time to move on.

“I have always had the best interests of the community at heart and have been committed to making HRM the best place in Canada to live, work, learn and play.”

Mayor Kelly acknowledged that there had been stumbles along the way, not least being

the issue of his duties as executor to the estate of his late friend, Mary Thibeault.

“I am not making any excuses. Whatever problems have arisen have been because of my own tardiness and I am in the process of fulfilling her instructions,” he said. “Everything is accounted for and will be distributed according to her wishes.”



Contact: Mayor Peter Kelly

1-902-490-4010

For the benefit of those HRM Employees who may not have access to GroupWise, please post these notices on a bulletin board nearest you.




Looks like its all Savage

someone123
Feb 22, 2012, 7:08 PM
I wonder if this means that a bunch of people will now join the race?

It's going to be an interesting municipal election cycle for sure!

cormiermax
Feb 22, 2012, 7:39 PM
I was not expecting that!

Northend Nerd
Feb 22, 2012, 7:44 PM
I am happy to know that we will see a new face in office this fall.

Antigonish
Feb 22, 2012, 9:13 PM
So who do we want in office thats pro development fellas?

PoscStudent
Feb 22, 2012, 9:20 PM
Are there any other conservatives who may run with Kelly out?

JHikka
Feb 22, 2012, 9:33 PM
Not surprising considering all the flak the man has received over the years. I'd be tired of that, too.

RyeJay
Feb 22, 2012, 10:00 PM
Everyone ready for some Savage?

fenwick16
Feb 22, 2012, 11:12 PM
I think Halifax will be losing a good Mayor. However, considering the toll that the mayoral position is taking on Mayor Kelly's health and family it seems like a good time to take an extended break (after the end of his term in October).

spaustin
Feb 23, 2012, 3:44 AM
I think this is good news for Halifax. It was definitely time for a change and this early announcement means that the race is potentially open for the taking. Might make for a more forward looking campaign. Without Kelly, the pressure to rally behind Savage is off and Savage will have to convince people to vote for him rather than being able to bank strongly on anti-kelly votes. It will be interesting is to see who steps forward now. Steve Adams said on CTV this evening that he's considering it. I don't think Epstein will change his mind, but look for David Boyd to rejoin the race :) Maybe the owner of the Wooden Monkey, Lil MacPherson, will reconsider too.

Keith P.
Feb 23, 2012, 10:58 AM
It will be interesting is to see who steps forward now. Steve Adams said on CTV this evening that he's considering it. I don't think Epstein will change his mind, but look for David Boyd to rejoin the race :) Maybe the owner of the Wooden Monkey, Lil MacPherson, will reconsider too.

We need legitimate candidates, not more wingnuts like Boyd or left-wing loonies like MacPherson. Adams would have little chance given his record. It would certainly be nice to see someone with a strong business background offer though.

worldlyhaligonian
Feb 23, 2012, 8:06 PM
We need legitimate candidates, not more wingnuts like Boyd or left-wing loonies like MacPherson. Adams would have little chance given his record. It would certainly be nice to see someone with a strong business background offer though.

Exactly. Kelly wasn't even that "conservative" per se, just in relation to the wingnuts who colluded against him.

Kelly was a pushover though, let's hope whoever becomes mayor can deal with all these forces in council who seek to disrupt freedom in this city by opposing everything and imposing laws on what we can and cannot do.

Let's let people develop empty lots and allow people to raise chickens... although proponents of these two concepts think they are different, it boils down to freedom.

Ultimately, no matter what your point of view, we are being legislated to death in this city and province.

beyeas
Feb 24, 2012, 12:41 AM
Exactly. Kelly wasn't even that "conservative" per se, just in relation to the wingnuts who colluded against him.

Kelly was a pushover though, let's hope whoever becomes mayor can deal with all these forces in council who seek to disrupt freedom in this city by opposing everything and imposing laws on what we can and cannot do.

Let's let people develop empty lots and allow people to raise chickens... although proponents of these two concepts think they are different, it boils down to freedom.

Ultimately, no matter what your point of view, we are being legislated to death in this city and province.

Well put! :tup:

someone123
Feb 24, 2012, 1:14 AM
Kelly was a pushover though ...

That was my biggest problem with him as mayor. I don't think he's a bad person, and I think that he genuinely worked hard for the city. Ultimately, however, he failed to rally people around important causes and follow through on them. In particular Halifax needs a lot more direction when it comes to transportation planning and investing in the downtown core, because the default state of affairs is for most councillors to care only about their own district.

beyeas
Feb 24, 2012, 2:16 PM
The biggest thing that excites me about this election cycle is that the combo of the reduction in districts and the fact that there will be a new mayor is a great opportunity to have serious discussions in the lead up to the election about where we want to go as a city. No doubt at the end of the day that is stuff that goes in a municipal plan, but it has to start with having people in place who are willing to see things through and are willing to be innovative in their thinking.

The last 20 years have shown that the status quo does not work, so let's start having a conversation in this city about what we are, what we want to be, and how we want to do things differently so that we can get there. After an election may be too late, so the time is now.

scooby074
Feb 25, 2012, 12:33 AM
Is there any potential mayoral candidate that is really pro-rail? Commuter, LRT or streetcar?

Hali87
Feb 25, 2012, 7:24 AM
Ironically, Peter Kelly has been since the '90s...

Hali87
Feb 25, 2012, 7:30 AM
If I had to guess, I'd wager that Fred Connors is pro-rail; as a hairstylist and the owner of a hipster mecca in the North End, I would assume he'd be at least somewhat image-conscious, and rail is great for a city's image.

The Dal student (I forget his name) is from Ontario, where rail transit already exists in a couple cities (or considerably more if you count GO stations), and I would guess that he'd be more open to emerging trends than an older politician.

David Boyd is a taxi driver. Not sure if he'd support major transit initiatives.

This leaves Mike Savage, and tbh I don't really know what his stand is on anything. These are all complete guesses anyway.
edit: forgot the ex-cop. Again, I don't really know what his priorities would be, other than public safety. I suppose improved transit reduces the number of car crashes.

someone123
Feb 25, 2012, 6:21 PM
Ironically, Peter Kelly has been since the '90s...

Yeah. That highlights what a lot of people are talking about when they mention something like "creative thinking" (or perhaps "mayor windsock").

Kelly ran on what you might consider a pro-rail platform even during the 2000 election, but he never seemed to have much of a plan and whenever there was some hiccup the whole thing would languish for 5 years. Instead we need the kind of leadership that switches gears to overcome problems, and that comes up with more robust, modern plans so there are fewer problems to begin with.

It is the same with so many other issues, like the streetscaping projects downtown. They are needed but somebody wasn't happy with the plans so the whole thing died on the table, and years later nothing has been done. Real leadership means taking important projects like that and doing what needs to be done to get them implemented.

worldlyhaligonian
Feb 25, 2012, 7:02 PM
A pro-rail stance is somewhat irrelevant from an applied point of view.

Hasn't metro transit codified language that basically is circumventing any rail option? Also, CN doesn't appear like they want to play ball.

To be honest, all the anti-development / anti-spending groups would probably be against rail. "It costs too much" blah blah blah.

The combination of these factors plus council means that rail is definitely a stretch.

RyeJay
Feb 25, 2012, 9:08 PM
The notion that rail costs too much is rampant.
Costs too much? It costs too much not to...

Rail seemed like a stretch for HRM before, but the amount of people supporting it (and other forms of public transit) is getting bigger and louder. Aside from how environmentally concerned much of the city's population is, people are struggling with affording to own and operate a vehicle. A car is simply not an option anymore for an increasing number of suburbanites.

In trying to think long-term about this issue, upon the market's status of being mostly hybrid/electric vehicles, which would obviously save from expensive trips to the pump, the costs of everything else will keep rising regardless. And people want to live in the suburbs affordably.

If people want to keep living in the suburbs then these public transit options must see investment. A candidate would be smart to speak up during any moment within news coverage of the frequent jumps in gas prices.

Any bets on how expensive gas'll be this summer?

someone123
Feb 25, 2012, 9:35 PM
The notion that rail costs too much is rampant.
Costs too much? It costs too much not to...

The rail cost argument is based on the straw man of commuter rail systems in major cities. It is like arguing that you can't afford to buy a house because Bill Gates' mansion cost $150M.

In reality there are many, many different approaches and technologies available and the costs to implement them vary by orders of magnitude. Halifax could have streetcars, hybrid streetcar/LRT, LRT at grade, LRT in its own right of way above or below ground, a full subway, etc. Some of those options are unaffordable, like the subway, but others would not be particularly expensive as far as Halifax infrastructure projects go. Some rail lines have been built for around $60M. That is perfectly reasonable if you're talking about replacing routes like the 1, which handle 10,000+ people per day.

As I've said many times I think we should be looking at a streetcar/LRT type of setup to serve the core (and avoid bottlenecks) combined with expanded MetroLink-style service for the suburbs. HRM also needs to look at transit-oriented development when planning transit projects -- that is something other cities have been doing for years.

Hali87
Feb 26, 2012, 12:09 AM
A pro-rail stance is somewhat irrelevant from an applied point of view.

Hasn't metro transit codified language that basically is circumventing any rail option? Also, CN doesn't appear like they want to play ball.

To be honest, all the anti-development / anti-spending groups would probably be against rail. "It costs too much" blah blah blah.

The combination of these factors plus council means that rail is definitely a stretch.

The official stance in the Regional Plan is that rail was not envisioned to be feasible in the short-term, but that rail corridors and potential multimodal transfers should be protected for when the city eventually decides to implement rail. There has been a gradual shift in attitude and language in subsequent staff reports, and the current Metro Transit 5-year plan asserts that some form of LRT will likely be NECESSARY within 10 to 15 years. There appears to be a lot of inconsistency in terms of what is considered "LRT" and what is considered "commuter rail" (some departments/councillors absolutely use the 2 terms interchangeably but others do not, while also failing to acknowledge that others do)

Hali87
Feb 26, 2012, 12:11 AM
HRM also needs to look at transit-oriented development when planning transit projects -- that is something other cities have been doing for years.

Mill Cove, Birch Cove and Dartmouth Cove are all being planned as transit-oriented communities based around hypothetical transit systems that do not actually exist yet.

someone123
Feb 26, 2012, 12:45 AM
Mill Cove, Birch Cove and Dartmouth Cove are all being planned as transit-oriented communities based around hypothetical transit systems that do not actually exist yet.

Yes. Transit is often mentioned when high-level plans for different areas are created but then there are many transportation reports that analyze the cost/benefits of things like commuter rail without accounting for TOD. There seems to be a disconnect. I suspect the problem is that HRM transportation planning is behind the times.

The official stance in the Regional Plan is that rail was not envisioned to be feasible in the short-term, but that rail corridors and potential multimodal transfers should be protected for when the city eventually decides to implement rail. There has been a gradual shift in attitude and language in subsequent staff reports, and the current Metro Transit 5-year plan asserts that some form of LRT will likely be NECESSARY within 10 to 15 years. There appears to be a lot of inconsistency in terms of what is considered "LRT" and what is considered "commuter rail" (some departments/councillors absolutely use the 2 terms interchangeably but others do not, while also failing to acknowledge that others do)

I've noticed the inconsistencies too. They appear in staff reports, councillor statements, and in the media. A big problem in Halifax is simply that people do not seem to be aware of the options and technologies available. I think there would be a lot of value in having a study to present what these different options might look like in Halifax. With the commuter rail plan council has not been looking at alternatives properly.

Halifax does need better transit in 10-15 years. By then the region will be approaching 500,000 people, and traffic along major corridors and at bottlenecks will be much worse. Council is hesitant to widen roads and road widening is very expensive, so if they want the core areas to continue to work properly our existing transportation space will have to be used more efficiently. The way to accomplish this is to get more people on transit. An LRT route would be an extremely efficient use of space and would be a great way to avoid having to aggressively widen roads to accommodate new traffic.

worldlyhaligonian
Feb 27, 2012, 6:25 AM
The notion that rail costs too much is rampant.
Costs too much? It costs too much not to...

Rail seemed like a stretch for HRM before, but the amount of people supporting it (and other forms of public transit) is getting bigger and louder. Aside from how environmentally concerned much of the city's population is, people are struggling with affording to own and operate a vehicle. A car is simply not an option anymore for an increasing number of suburbanites.

In trying to think long-term about this issue, upon the market's status of being mostly hybrid/electric vehicles, which would obviously save from expensive trips to the pump, the costs of everything else will keep rising regardless. And people want to live in the suburbs affordably.

If people want to keep living in the suburbs then these public transit options must see investment. A candidate would be smart to speak up during any moment within news coverage of the frequent jumps in gas prices.

Any bets on how expensive gas'll be this summer?

I'm not saying its my point of view, its just been stated by councilors, etc.

scooby074
Mar 2, 2012, 1:22 AM
Interesting discussion on rail. I had no idea Kelly was pro rail. Maybe i should have asked if there was a pro-rail candidate with the will and political conviction to push through a commuter rail network against the NIMBYs and "too expensive" types.

Someone who'll get things done over seemingly endless and expensive studies.

worldlyhaligonian
Mar 2, 2012, 4:27 PM
The official stance in the Regional Plan is that rail was not envisioned to be feasible in the short-term, but that rail corridors and potential multimodal transfers should be protected for when the city eventually decides to implement rail. There has been a gradual shift in attitude and language in subsequent staff reports, and the current Metro Transit 5-year plan asserts that some form of LRT will likely be NECESSARY within 10 to 15 years. There appears to be a lot of inconsistency in terms of what is considered "LRT" and what is considered "commuter rail" (some departments/councillors absolutely use the 2 terms interchangeably but others do not, while also failing to acknowledge that others do)

Interesting... this begs the question: How are they determining that rail is not feasible? Sounds like a load of b/s to me. Most infrastructure projects are "feasible", they just might have significant capital costs initially.

If rail is necessary in 10-15 years they better get started now, how are the moes going to lay all that track? Vinyl siding on the trains?

fenwick16
Jul 28, 2012, 1:26 PM
The municipal elections are quickly approaching (October 2012).

Here is some news about District 8, Peninsula-North-Ward. (Source: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2012/07/23/ns-sloane-watts-face-off.html)

My perception of Councillor Sloane has changed during the past couple of years. At one time I thought that she was anti-development. But Councillor Sloane has been a proponent of the Nova Centre and HRM Stadium. Both Councillors really care about the city. Personally, if I lived in north Halifax, I would vote for Councillor Sloane but I would feel bad to see Councillor Watts lose. I had the opportunity to meet both Councillors in person on January 19 2010 and I left my toyish looking stadium model with Councillor Sloane - http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=4656051&postcount=657 (PS: if it is still at City Hall then it is ok to dispose of it). Councillor Hendsbee and Councillor Fisher were two others big proponents of an HRM stadium and both seem to be pro-development (in my opinion).


Veteran councillors duel for District 8
CBC News
Posted: Jul 23, 2012 8:49 PM AT
Last Updated: Jul 24, 2012 3:37 PM AT

http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/images/news/photos/2012/07/23/district-8_620x349_1.jpg
The number of councillors in Halifax will decrease from 23 to 16 in October, forcing two incumbent councillors to face off in District 8. (CBC)

Two incumbent Halifax councillors who often see eye to eye are going head to head for the same seat in the upcoming municipal election.

Under the new municipal boundaries the number of councillors will be cut from 23 to 16 and the boundaries have changed.

Coun. Dawn Sloane has won in the downtown district three times, but now District 12 will essentially be split in two.

She's now running in the newly formed Peninsula-North-Ward against another incumbent Connaught-Quinpool Coun. Jennifer Watts.
.
.
.

worldlyhaligonian
Jul 28, 2012, 2:47 PM
Novel idea: neither of 'em!

spaustin
Jul 29, 2012, 3:26 AM
Well I have some news. You might have caught it already on twitter or the Coast, but I have decided to run for council in Dartmouth Centre. It's definitely time for some new faces on council. Dartmouth Centre is turning out to be a really crowded race with Jim and Gloria plus 4 other challengers and myself. It's a full field! I'm going to be releasing a series of videos over the campaign that will, together, make a video policy platform. I will have several on planning/development issues, which may be of interest to you guys. You can check out my first on Downtown Dartmouth at the link below or on my website, samaustin.ca:

http://youtu.be/ScBJTX0rbdo

So with Waye Mason and myself running, there are two forumers running in the election!