HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Business, Politics & the Economy


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Jul 30, 2018, 5:36 PM
Uhuniau Uhuniau is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 7,957
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
The benefit in general? I thought you meant from Ford's perceptive.

Bigger council can mean more chaos, more long, dragging pointless debate.
If there's a problem with "pointless debate", that's a job for the rules of procedure to deal with.

Quote:
You look at transit planning in Toronto, they continuously change the plans and change the game and end up with multi-billion dollar disasters that serve low-density suburbs and completely ignore the over-capacity and undeserved downtown. Everyone is looking out for their little corner of the city (and themselves).
And the connection of this phenomenon to the size of council is... ?

Ottawa's much smaller council has had the exact same problem with transit-dithering. It still has the problem of transit policies which pander to the suburbs.

Quote:
With a smaller council, you might end up with people who have more of a city-wide view.
If you want people with a city-wide view, you add at-large councillors. No matter what the size and number of wards, ward councillors, in Toronto or Ottawa or anywhere, are only ever going to be governed, in the end, by how they think their conduct, decisions, votes, or pronouncements play in their own ward.

Quote:
It's also easier to negotiate with a few than it is with a class-room of self-involved idiots.
Yes, as Jim Watson has shown time and time again, it's easier to horse-trade and backroom deal with a smaller number of councillors.

This, to me, is an argument in favour of a larger council, not a smaller one.
__________________
___
Enjoy my taxes, Orleans (and Kanata?).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Jul 30, 2018, 5:45 PM
YOWflier's Avatar
YOWflier YOWflier is offline
Melissa: fabulous.
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: YOW/CYOW/CUUP
Posts: 2,968
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketphish View Post
I heard that too... and it just served to discredit his entire platform, as he laid it out in the interview. Maybe he'll lose at strip-poker one night and sell the Prince of Wales Bridge to Moose ;-)
It was one of the most bizarre interviews I've heard in a long time. "I'm an old fart and never planned on being here, but I lost a bet with my friend so here I am. So ... yeah ... Watson sucks and you should vote for me. Here's why (I slapped it together over night) ..."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Jul 30, 2018, 6:24 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 23,762
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uhuniau View Post
If there's a problem with "pointless debate", that's a job for the rules of procedure to deal with.

And the connection of this phenomenon to the size of council is... ?

Ottawa's much smaller council has had the exact same problem with transit-dithering. It still has the problem of transit policies which pander to the suburbs.

If you want people with a city-wide view, you add at-large councillors. No matter what the size and number of wards, ward councillors, in Toronto or Ottawa or anywhere, are only ever going to be governed, in the end, by how they think their conduct, decisions, votes, or pronouncements play in their own ward.

Yes, as Jim Watson has shown time and time again, it's easier to horse-trade and backroom deal with a smaller number of councillors.

This, to me, is an argument in favour of a larger council, not a smaller one.
In terms of transit planning, council in Ottawa dithered over the N/S vs E/W plan in the 2005-2007 era. Since then, they have pretty much been in-sync. Yes, it is an imperfect plan (with the biggest beef for me being the Trillium diesel single track extension), focusing on serving all of the suburbs first and foremost, but that does have some merit whether or not you see it.

Though the Bank-Rideau-Montreal corridor should be considered at this point as part of a Stage 4, it is not critical.

In Toronto (and Queen's Park) on the other hand, the DRL is critical, but since the early 2000s, the City has continued to build these new subways deep into the suburbs, the absolutely useless Sheppard Line, the Cross-town (which has merit), forcing everyone to transfer into the overcrowded Yonge-University Line.

I'm curious to know why you think a bigger council is necessary. Do you think we should add more Councillors in Ottawa?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Jul 30, 2018, 6:49 PM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 15,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uhuniau View Post
Again, what is the inherent benefit of a smaller council?

.
What is the advantage of a larger one?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Jul 30, 2018, 7:11 PM
p_xavier p_xavier is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,568
I always loathed Clive's vision of the city and certainly its delivery. Height is bad with a NIMBY-ism inspired "community" designs is a symptom of class warfare where the residents are forever entitled along with increased home equity.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Jul 30, 2018, 9:58 PM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 11,438
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
What is the advantage of a larger one?
Fewer citizens per ward means it's easier for councillors to stay in touch with their constituents.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Jul 30, 2018, 10:05 PM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 15,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc View Post
Fewer citizens per ward means it's easier for councillors to stay in touch with their constituents.
Councillors don't stay in touch with their constituents. All but the most high-profile issues are handled by staffers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Jul 30, 2018, 10:45 PM
Norman Bates Norman Bates is offline
Living With My Mother
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 983
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
Councillors don't stay in touch with their constituents. All but the most high-profile issues are handled by staffers.
That’s been my experience.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Jul 30, 2018, 10:55 PM
Uhuniau Uhuniau is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 7,957
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
In Toronto (and Queen's Park) on the other hand, the DRL is critical, but since the early 2000s, the City has continued to build these new subways deep into the suburbs, the absolutely useless Sheppard Line, the Cross-town (which has merit), forcing everyone to transfer into the overcrowded Yonge-University Line.
None of which has anything to do with the size of the city council.

Quote:
I'm curious to know why you think a bigger council is necessary. Do you think we should add more Councillors in Ottawa?
It wouldn't be a bad idea, no. At very least, Ottawa desperately needs to redraw its ward map to bring the Gini score back into something resembling sanity.

In general terms, the smaller the size of the deliberative body, the less political, intellectual, and ideological diversity there is amongst the members who constitute it.

This is a bad thing, in case I'm not clear on that point.
__________________
___
Enjoy my taxes, Orleans (and Kanata?).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Jul 30, 2018, 10:58 PM
Uhuniau Uhuniau is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 7,957
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
What is the advantage of a larger one?
Greater diversity among the membership, greater distribution of committee roles, or executive roles in the case of bodies (legislatures, "executive" cities) which have such beasts embedded in them, and a higher likelihood that any individual pressure group or cause out there in civil society can find an elected champion to bore from within.
__________________
___
Enjoy my taxes, Orleans (and Kanata?).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Jul 31, 2018, 12:43 AM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 15,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uhuniau View Post
Greater diversity among the membership, greater distribution of committee roles, or executive roles in the case of bodies (legislatures, "executive" cities) which have such beasts embedded in them, and a higher likelihood that any individual pressure group or cause out there in civil society can find an elected champion to bore from within.
A large council had yielded almost no diversity. Most are former bureaucrats or former staffers, most are men and almost all are of European ancestry. Moreover, it has been my observation (although I have no stats) that neighbouring councillors tend to vote in lockstep, so combining adjacent wards would not change much politically.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Jul 31, 2018, 12:30 PM
LeadingEdgeBoomer LeadingEdgeBoomer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,018
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
Doug Ford doesn't want to be Premier of Ontario. He wants to be Mayor of Toronto. He was planning on running for mayor until the post for PC Leader opened up. I believe that if the PCs would have lost the Provincial election Doug would have quit to try for mayor this year.

He probably saw an opportunity to run Toronto from the Premier's seat at Queen's Park. Remembering the chaos that was his brother's tenure, Doug might have seen an opportunity to reduce council to make it easier to control, should he ever try a run for mayor again in the future.

It might also be about squashing his past enemies.

Of note: I believe that reducing the number of seats has its merits. Toronto's council is ridiculously huge and Ottawa, though not in Ford's plans cause he only gives a shit about Toronto, should also be reduced. But the way he's doing this, the last day to sign up for the election, is wrong on so many levels. This is dictator level shit. Cities should be asked politely to take a few years to revisit the wards, maybe even set a target (say 25% reduction, NOT %50) and implement the changes in 2022. That way, existing Councillors would have time to reflect on their future and have he chance to bow out gracefully instead of what will turn out to be a death-match between competing incumbents.
Good post. In talking to a few people I think that most are missing what is written here. Why would Ford reduce the TO council only, and not other cities, if it was all about efficiency and saving on salaries?
When the Fords were on council at lot of their colleagues gave them a rough ride. Now Doug Ford is in a position to take revenge on them and he is doing it. It, revenge, happens a lot in politics.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Jul 31, 2018, 1:44 PM
phil235's Avatar
phil235 phil235 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 3,699
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeadingEdgeBoomer View Post
When the Fords were on council at lot of their colleagues gave them a rough ride. Now Doug Ford is in a position to take revenge on them and he is doing it. It, revenge, happens a lot in politics.
It does, but this is a blatant politicization of a process that was largely independent of politics. It's discouraging to see these types of moves that have our system creeping closer and closer to the largely dysfunctional system down south.

Canadians used to trust the process, if not the politicians acting within it. Now our faith seems to be more in our particular ideology than the system, which is dangerous in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Jul 31, 2018, 1:51 PM
Uhuniau Uhuniau is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 7,957
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
A large council had yielded almost no diversity.
Which city are you talking about?

Quote:
Most are former bureaucrats or former staffers, most are men and almost all are of European ancestry. Moreover, it has been my observation (although I have no stats) that neighbouring councillors tend to vote in lockstep, so combining adjacent wards would not change much politically.
Reducing the size of a deliberative body ALWAYS reduces the diversity of political viewpoints on it.

You want an even more homogenous city council, one that moves even more in lockstep and is even more prone to closed-door horse-trading? Sure, slash the number of seats.
__________________
___
Enjoy my taxes, Orleans (and Kanata?).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Jul 31, 2018, 9:15 PM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 15,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uhuniau View Post
Which city are you talking about?



Reducing the size of a deliberative body ALWAYS reduces the diversity of political viewpoints on it.

You want an even more homogenous city council, one that moves even more in lockstep and is even more prone to closed-door horse-trading? Sure, slash the number of seats.
Ottawa

The Congress of People's Deputies had 2250 members. The Soviet Union was well known for its diversity of political viewpoints.

I think there would be less closed door horse trading as there would be fewer votes to buy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Jul 31, 2018, 9:21 PM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 15,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by phil235 View Post
It does, but this is a blatant politicization of a process that was largely independent of politics. It's discouraging to see these types of moves that have our system creeping closer and closer to the largely dysfunctional system down south.

Canadians used to trust the process, if not the politicians acting within it. Now our faith seems to be more in our particular ideology than the system, which is dangerous in my opinion.
I agree that it is ridiculously late in the process to change the boundaries. However, the most recent Federal and Provincial elections were conducted with the same boundaries that are being proposed, so if there is a structural problem with those boundaries then we have a much bigger problem than Toronto city council.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Jul 31, 2018, 9:34 PM
Uhuniau Uhuniau is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 7,957
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
Ottawa

The Congress of People's Deputies had 2250 members. The Soviet Union was well known for its diversity of political viewpoints.

I think there would be less closed door horse trading as there would be fewer votes to buy.
Yes, the sham legislatures of totalitarian communist dictatorships is totally comparable to the elected bodies of liberal democracies. My bad.
__________________
___
Enjoy my taxes, Orleans (and Kanata?).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 11:43 AM
jleiper jleiper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
Councillors don't stay in touch with their constituents. All but the most high-profile issues are handled by staffers.
If I may, that depends on who you elect. Once a week, I have "pop-up" office hours in the ward, which are virtually always packed with people coming by for three hours to chat big and small picture stuff. I read and reply to my own email. I spend hours each weekend writing a newsletter that is substantive and informative about any issue moving forward through the system.

Past two weeks, I've been trying to take "holidays", with no more than a couple of hours in a row to myself. City and my staff have been looking for decisions on small construction projects, noise exemptions, transit routes, and a couple of planning files; not to mention the snake and Magee House! I've been talking to a resident and by-law about the condo signs that are popping up all over. I've been working with residents and the architect on a controversial CoA project. I'm working through neighbour issues on a new supportive housing project that opened recently. This is all just a dull roar, and nothing like what I've got my fingers in when I'm actually on the job and not on vacation.

A few nights ago, I was looking at the sidewalk reconfiguration at Parkdale/Wellington where I'd had several onsite meetings with the developer and City to make sure we could keep that open when the original plan was to close it. There was a barrel in the way of the new route, which I moved. People saw me, and it became an impromptu pop-up, and I walked away with several to-dos.

Your councillor isn't sitting around eating bon-bons and sipping champagne. They're not an MP or MPP without a lot of connection to what we call case work. It's an on-the-ground job.

Yes, if you're looking for a new stop sign somewhere, or suggesting a new advance green, the councillor's staff will probably do the work of getting an answer from the City about why that can or can't be done. If you're calling your councillor with something you should be calling 3-1-1 about, yeah, the councillor's staff will probably deal with that - fixing a pothole, replacing a green bin, etc. But if your councillor's advocacy matters, and there's a real chance that their involvement will be key to the outcome, I don't know many councillors around the table who don't jump in.

City staff aren't accountable to individual councillors, but they do exercise a lot of deference. Since I got elected I've been very impressed at their responsiveness to every question under the sun (the City is a very complex place) and ability to brief so that councillors can provide guidance. When that guidance is in line with policy or staff's delegated authority, they defer, and it's a ton of these little decisions the councillor has to make each week that never see the light of day of a headline.

The story I'm coming out of this term with is a sidewalk that was supposed to be closed. Separate from the current re-configuration, the developer was going to be installing a hydro vault at Parkdale/Wellington in prep for the new development. They were going to close the sidewalk for three weeks or so. When I saw that (remember that I read my own email), I didn't see that that was acceptable given the distance between lights through that stretch (next one is Rosemount/Carruthers). I kept saying there has to be a better way, getting told it was the only choice, then finally asked staff and the developer to meet me there. Onsite, they described the challenges and regulations. I noted that the developer's property in the parking lot was empty, and asked why they couldn't remove a small portion of decorative fence, build a couple of asphalt ramps, and fence off a pedestrian detour. And that was exactly what they did. At minimal cost, there was a very convenient and safe by-pass to the construction.

Your councillor can't always achieve the outcome you want. They don't have authority over most things - just moral suasion. Only Council can direct City staff, not councillors. But, I would suggest most councillors around the table get that this is a customer service job, and that they have to get some mud on their boots.

Suggesting that councillors' staff members deal with most issues does a disservice to the work that doesn't show up in the media. City Hall isn't the West Wing. Anyone running for office had better be prepared to hit the ground running on more small, grunt work issues than they probably even knew a councillor has to deal with every day. Councillors' staff members keep the ball rolling, and I couldn't do it without them, but the buck stops here.

Kitchissippi is literally being torn up and re-built day by day. Even if the councillor's office budget was significantly increased to hire more staff, there's no way I could be hands-on to many more files. There's only so many hours in the day. Reducing the number of councillors would simply mean that on issues like a sidewalk closure, the chance of getting the councillor's attention would be dramatically reduced, and I believe that that would be a negative outcome for everyone's quality of life.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 4:40 PM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 15,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by jleiper View Post
Your councillor isn't sitting around eating bon-bons and sipping champagne. They're not an MP or MPP without a lot of connection to what we call case work. It's an on-the-ground job.
I am not suggesting that councilors sit around eating bon-bons and sipping champagne (also that is a horrible pairing). I am suggesting that the work of adjacent councilors significantly overlaps. People often have three or four wards within walking distance of their houses. Councillors are often tripping over each other at the same photo ops, the same community events, the same open houses, etc. They meet the same lobbyists, the same community groups and get briefed by the same staff on the same issues. They often sit on the same committees, make the same points at council, vote the same way, etc.

Maybe you spend a lot of time meeting with constituents (although I would be curious what percentage of your day is meetings with your constituents and not issue or project based meetings). I am however, somewhat doubtful that that is the norm on council.

Last edited by acottawa; Aug 18, 2018 at 4:40 PM. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 8:08 PM
Proof Sheet Proof Sheet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,856
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
A large council had yielded almost no diversity. Most are former bureaucrats or former staffers, most are men and almost all are of European ancestry. Moreover, it has been my observation (although I have no stats) that neighbouring councillors tend to vote in lockstep, so combining adjacent wards would not change much politically.
Shad Qadri, Georges Derouze, and Michael Qaqish and Eli El-Chantiry are of non european ancestry although I"m not sure why european ancestry is a determinant.

Last time I checked there were no formal impediments to prevent more women or people of non-european ancestry to run for Council.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Business, Politics & the Economy
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:12 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.