Municipal Politics

[You Need A Thneed]

Stevenson lives in Coral Springs, so he does currently live in Ward 5, except now, Coral Springs will be in Ward 10, so even if he switches to ward 5, he still won't live in the ward.

I do suspect that Ray Jones would switch to running in Ward 10 and Stevenson to Ward 5 if they decide to run again.

[lubicon]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

No doubt all part of a nefarious plan by our tax and spend mayor Spendshi to turn the suburbs against one another while he builds bike lanes and giant pieces of public art not built by Calgarians everywhere in the inner city.

Undoubtably true. But we too are getting giant pieces of public art not build by Calgarians way out here in the burbs too. Tuscany LRT station project will be happening this summer and im actually looking forward to seeing what it will look like.


http://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/Recreatio...ublic-Art.aspx

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by fusili

I think we will see some interesting shifts in where councillors run next election.

I have my money that Jones runs in Ward 10 instead of 5, as the new ward 10 is essentially the old ward 5, and he is "Rundle Ray". With Chabot running for Mayor and Gian Carlo picking up greater forest lawn (I think he is a good fit for it), this leaves ward 5 open. However, Stevenson might decide to run in ward 5 instead of 3 (it has the airport and IIRC, he lives in the far NE). So either we are getting a new candidate in Ward 5 or 3, but it all depends on where Stevenson and Jones run. I imagine they will talk before deciding where to run, and agree to both not run in ward 5.

I prefer scenario B personally, as it is more geographically contiguous.

This also puts 6 councillors on the Green Line.

I think Ray Jones and Jim Stevenson are both candidates to retire. Stevenson moreso than Jones. Jones is the new Hodges in a way. Has a couple niches (sports, ward-centric) but is mostly the elder statesman who has been in it so long that it's all he knows and loves. Stevenson is no spring chicken (in his 70s), entered politics later in life and isn't as invested in the job as Jones.

Chabot will be the conservative foil in the mayor's race next election.

Chu has made himself un-(re)electable, even if he switches wards. Well-organized get-Chu-out campaigns have been mounting for some time in ward 4 and I hope the same thing would happen if he moves wards.

Could get all new councilors representing most of the north east.

Unfortunately I think Magliocca and Sutherland will be re-elected.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

I think Druh Farrell has to be pretty happy about this; she keeps her stronghold south of Confederation Park, and switches the Dalhousie/Brentwood/Highland area for the U of C area and Bridgeland/Renfrew. She'll do well in those areas and they aren't sick of her yet.

Sean Chu on the other hand, just picked up all that former Farrell territory in his ward. I wouldn't be surprised to see him in the musical chairs as well - Stevenson lives in Coral Springs, so I think he'd pick 5 over 3, while Chu lives in Sandstone and makes as much sense in 3 as in 4. (He makes more sense being a host on the Sun News Network.)

Kevin Taylor, the conservative super PAC candidate for Ward 7 in the 2013 election, won both Dalhousie and Brentwood. With these communities going to Ward 4 he is more of a shoe-in for re-election.

Originally Posted by lubicon

Rocky Ridge and Royal Oak get split in half under Plan B which doesn't make much sense to me. They are connected physically and as communities, doesn't seem logical to put them in different wards.

Somewhat agreed. The 2013 election map has the 2 communities separated into Ward 1 and 2. This has worked well for the community as both Sutherland and Magliocca are vested in representing and listening to resident concerns.

While I live in Citadel I follow RRROCA quite closely. The commingling of different communities has always been a bit of an odd arrangement. Citadel and Arbour Lake CA do a lot of co-concerns but they are not nearly as connected at the hip as RR-RO.

Final thought on RR-RO, I grew up in Edmonton during the period when each Ward was represented by 2 Alderman and always thought this approach worked better than 1 representative per Ward. If the issue was big enough you could count on 1:6 representation at council rather than 1:12. Issues that affect two communities within the Ward, the Alderman would divide representation during the debate and produce a consensus much faster.

Originally Posted by frinkprof

Chu has made himself un-(re)electable, even if he switches wards. Well-organized get-Chu-out campaigns have been mounting for some time in ward 4 and I hope the same thing would happen if he moves wards.

With the movement of communities, Chu is more likely to be re-elected than if things stayed the same. He won with the support of the Conservative Super PAC and they will be back in full force at the next election.

With ward 1 &2 safe, the Conservative Super PAC will be able to put more attention onto Ward 4. How well funded is the anti-Chu campaign?

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by Cage

With the movement of communities, Chu is more likely to be re-elected than if things stayed the same. He won with the support of the Conservative Super PAC and they will be back in full force at the next election.

With ward 1 &2 safe, the Conservative Super PAC will be able to put more attention onto Ward 4. How well funded is the anti-Chu campaign?

I don't disagree with the mitigating circumstances you've raised, especially that the developer/conservative funding push will be strong. I just think that Chu's dwindling support and the growing disdain for him trumps all of that. He is one of the worst councillors in decades and rivals Anders as one of the most toxic Calgary-based politicians in decades as well. Lots of other councilors have been polarizing (Druh is fairly popular here but reviled in other circles, McIver the opposite), but Chu isn't polarizing. He's demonstrably stupid, off putting and unfit for the job.

His actions (or inactions) are too numerous, constant, publicly reported and indefensible. All sides of the media grill him, and even the current councilors that you would consider his closest allies either stay mum when the rest of council mock him or knock him down in council meetings, or even join in. The "Sean Chu is a bad councilor and generally an idiot" sentiment goes beyond the realm of the hyper-engaged.

I can't speak to the funding of opposition campaigns, as it is still far away from election time and I'm not personally close to it. The point is that an organized-enough and substantive-enough campaign can knock Chu out. He's done most of the work himself. I do acknowledge that it would need to be reasonably funded though.

[Rusty van Reddick]

Originally Posted by Cage

How well funded is the anti-Chu campaign?

It doesn't have to be well-funded.

[Radley77]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

I don't disagree with the mitigating circumstances you've raised, especially that the developer/conservative funding push will be strong. I just think that Chu's dwindling support and the growing disdain for him trumps all of that. He is one of the worst councillors in decades and rivals Anders as one of the most toxic Calgary-based politicians in decades as well. Lots of other councilors have been polarizing (Druh is fairly popular here but reviled in other circles, McIver the opposite), but Chu isn't polarizing. He's demonstrably stupid, off putting and unfit for the job.

His actions (or inactions) are too numerous, constant, publicly reported and indefensible. All sides of the media grill him, and even the current councilors that you would consider his closest allies either stay mum when the rest of council mock him or knock him down in council meetings, or even join in. The "Sean Chu is a bad councilor and generally an idiot" sentiment goes beyond the realm of the hyper-engaged.

I can't speak to the funding of opposition campaigns, as it is still far away from election time and I'm not personally close to it. The point is that an organized-enough and substantive-enough campaign can knock Chu out. He's done most of the work himself. I do acknowledge that it would need to be reasonably funded though.

I think would want/need $150K to mount a campaign against Sean Chu. You need that on the ground visibility through ad campaigns I think to win an election. Plus a substantive-enough campaign. Sean Chu's worst enemy is himself and google search.

There is a ton of evidence how developer's were very selective and sophisticated in the last campaign and I suspect there will be a ton of money thrown at the Sean Chu campaign. Though, Sean Chu also runs the risk that someone with similar ideology and with higher credibility runs against him too so there is also valid scenarios that could play out where vote splitting occurs.

I understand Amanda Wilkie, Sean Chu's former campaign manager is suing Sean Chu for defamation. Richard Wilkie (Amanda Wilkie's father?) on the other hand ran against Carra in ward 9 in the last election with a fairly conservative campaign.

Another big gamechanger for Sean Chu is that he was deeply embedded with the PC party. Now that the PC party holds much less credibility those ties are meaningless.

The shift of the ward 4 south towards Brentwood, Collingwood, Rosemont and Queen's Park and possibly Winston Heights are also areas I suspect that Sean Chu's agenda nor abilities are going to resonate well with...

[Radley77]

It's still early days before the October 2017 election, but all of these factors are increasingly pointing to a struggle for Sean Chu to retain his seat on council:

• PC party (and Sean's political allies) losing power
• Ward 4 boundaries moving south
• Sean Chu's loss of personal credibility through gaffes

I suspect a lot of media and journalists are also aligned against Sean Chu. He has burned a lot of bridges with the public including even blocking journalists from viewing his twitter account.

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by Cage

Kevin Taylor, the conservative super PAC candidate for Ward 7 in the 2013 election, won both Dalhousie and Brentwood. With these communities going to Ward 4 he is more of a shoe-in for re-election.

Kevin Taylor "won" those two communities with 32% and 38% of the votes respectively, with the remainder being split between Druh Farrell and Brent Alexander, who promised to to 80% of what Farrell would do, being more centrist on 10% and not loony left on 10%.

[Spring2008]

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...relief-request

NDP better get their act together if they want to stand any chance of re-election (last polls show less than 20% approval In cgy). All the new taxes target even more revenue primarily from Calgary, and now they say no to snowtember disaster relief, not sure they're funded any of the flood diversion infrastructure either. No word on funding the provincial portion of the green line either. All opposition parties are pro funding btw.

[UofC.engineer]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...sand-1.3365311

[Chealion]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...sand-1.3365311

Still slated to go to a jury trial in February. The $10K is to cover legal fees of a failed bid by Wenzel to go for summary judgement and avoid a jury trial. I'd generally consider it good news; I doubt Wenzel would prefer it to go to trial.

[mersar]

Originally Posted by Chealion

Still slated to go to a jury trial in February. The $10K is to cover legal fees of a failed bid by Wenzel to go for summary judgement and avoid a jury trial. I'd generally consider it good news; I doubt Wenzel would prefer it to go to trial.

Most news sites are reporting they've settled out of court: Mayor Nenshi and homebuilder Wenzel settle lawsuit out of court, Naheed Nenshi and Cal Wenzel agree to settle lawsuit

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by mersar

Most news sites are reporting they've settled out of court: Mayor Nenshi and homebuilder Wenzel settle lawsuit out of court, Naheed Nenshi and Cal Wenzel agree to settle lawsuit

I hope people don't make a massive deal about the city possibly needing to help Naheed out with legal costs. He is not independently wealthy (like Cal) and at the end of the day, that 6-figure bullet that will need to be swallowed is a direct result of Cal pursuing in court instead of just sitting down with Naheed and working this out.

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by suburbia

I hope people don't make a massive deal about the city possibly needing to help Naheed out with legal costs. He is not independently wealthy (like Cal) and at the end of the day, that 6-figure bullet that will need to be swallowed is a direct result of Cal pursuing in court instead of just sitting down with Naheed and working this out.

I'm torn about it. Obviously if a member of council was sued due to a council decision, the city should cover the legal costs. But if it's due to something inflammatory said in the media, unsure.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

I'm torn about it. Obviously if a member of council was sued due to a council decision, the city should cover the legal costs. But if it's due to something inflammatory said in the media, unsure.

He was sued for making a statement about possible rail-roading of the municipal government process, and was speaking as mayor. The mayor is the public voice-box for the city, and a massive part of the role is speaking to the media about the city and municipal issues including municipal processes. To say a mayor's role is just speaking within chambers is to not understand what a mayor is.

Frankly, it would show massive credibility if Cal stepped in here. He is worth 9 figures, and the green line decisions make him all the richer (made a whack in Walden already). Like I said previously, Cal refused to sit down and talk this out, instead pulling the legal process along till just before trial, and then agreeing to sit down. The only result of this from Cal was that some lawyers made a lot of money, and now we have to have this discussion here.

This should be dealt with, and then we move on.

[UofC.engineer]

These ding-bats just don't give up...

CBC story:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...ch-2-1.3473123

[Chealion]

Looks like Jeromy Farkas is running for Ward 11 in 2017:

http://www.jeromy.ca

Really cool to see him run for council, not so stoked about his support for Ready2Enrage.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Chealion

Looks like Jeromy Farkas is running for Ward 11 in 2017:

http://www.jeromy.ca

Really cool to see him run for council, not so stoked about his support for Ready2Enrage.

I like Jeromy. Had many good debates with him on twitter. Very libertarian leaning, but not in a ridiculous way. Seems generally balanced.

But.... his support for ReadyToEngage and their underhanded and misinformed tactics is very disappointing.

[Radley77]

Originally Posted by fusili

I like Jeromy. Had many good debates with him on twitter. Very libertarian leaning, but not in a ridiculous way. Seems generally balanced.

But.... his support for ReadyToEngage and their underhanded and misinformed tactics is very disappointing.

I'm not in Ward 11 where Jeromy is running against Pincott. That being said, I don't see much value in voting for him.

He generally seems supportive of secondary suites and cycling. But, so is Pincott.

And he is most likely heavily supported by developer financing due to his ties to the Manning Foundation. That means, that once he is elected, that he could be pushed to do things that aren't in the public interest. Like the billion dollars of debt that was accrued due to insufficient levies. Also, Sean Chu and Joe Magliocca were associated with the Manning Foundation and have generally been a disaster. The other thing is have seen the Manning Foundation and associated organization Common Sense Calgary putting out research that has been worse than just biased, but completely fabricated or hyberbolic.

It's too bad Jeromy wasn't running in a ward where there was a poor-performing/dysfunctional councillor.