Municipal Election (September, 2013)

[mrjanejacobs]

I think how they would manage that is that you would have to show your licence and it says your address i dunno :shrug:

No, I don't think so. That system would require huge amount of manpower to check IDs - it would end up costing more to run the tolls than the profit itself.

Smart tolls usually are via GPS and are licensed to car registration somehow. It's quite technologically advanced and modern. If we imposed anything else, we would be investing in forsaken technologies which would be pretty lame/pathetic.

[Architype]

A better way than tolls to deal with the transportation cost sharing issue is just to impose a gas tax for the entire Northeast Avalon like there is in Metro Vancouver. Unfortunately St. John's residents could likely not get out of paying it as well, but the tax would go towards upkeep of all roads, etc. in the region.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2011/10/07/bc-metro-vancouver-gas-tax.html

[PoscStudent]

I think how they would manage that is that you would have to show your licence and it says your address i dunno :shrug:

Still something like going on a Sunday drive will cost people, because if St. John's does this all communities will. If you go for a drive most likely you'll be going through multiple communities.

[PoscStudent]

A better way than tolls to deal with the transportation cost sharing issue is just to impose a gas tax for the entire Northeast Avalon like there is in Metro Vancouver. Unfortunately St. John's residents could likely not get out of paying it as well, but the tax would go towards upkeep of all roads, etc. in the region.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2011/10/07/bc-metro-vancouver-gas-tax.html
I agree with the gas tax idea. I think St. John's should get more powers from the province to allow this. If St. John's added 1 cent to the price of gas it would likely bring in significant revenue. Even if other municipalities didn't have a gas tax it's unlikely their residents would completely refuse to fill up in St. John's, the east end of the city is already a fair bit cheaper than Mount Pearl anyways. This could help lower property and business taxes.

[Architype]

I think it would only work if it were imposed in the whole region, otherwise you would have people driving to Torbay or Paradise to fill up. In Vancouver the municipalities voting system is weighted by population, so St. John's would have the most votes in proportion to its population.

[PoscStudent]

See I don't think people would change their habits completely to avoid 1 cent. Torbay has charged 1 cent less that St. John's for several years, CBS also has cheaper gas prices. Though obviously having it in the whole region is fine too. I don't know how it'd be administered though.

[mrjanejacobs]

A better way than tolls to deal with the transportation cost sharing issue is just to impose a gas tax for the entire Northeast Avalon like there is in Metro Vancouver. Unfortunately St. John's residents could likely not get out of paying it as well, but the tax would go towards upkeep of all roads, etc. in the region.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2011/10/07/bc-metro-vancouver-gas-tax.html

I actually don't agree with a gas-tax at all. At least not yet.

Transportation is already grossly unaffordable in this province. In fact, a number of studies have come out in recent years showing that in Canada, lower-middle income suburban families often spend more on transport than they do on housing. This is backwards.

I don't think we can make transportation any more unaffordable until people in this region have an alternative (like enhanced regional transit). Unless we have an alternative, we are just screwing people over as there is nothing they can do other than drive less, if a gas tax was imposed.

With that said, if regional transit was achieved, I would be first in line to support a large gas tax, tolls and ludicrous parking fees on every parking space in the City. But I am also pretty extremist when it comes to transit... haha. Until then, a don't believe a gas tax will have that huge of an effect other than acting as a tax-grab (usually on those members of society who can least afford it).

[PoscStudent]

1 or 2 cents in the gas tax would not cost people a whole lot extra and it will provide another source of revenue outside of property taxes. Property taxes going up annually is a lot worse than 1 or 2 cents more on gas.

[BigRedSpecial]

A gas tax of ANY magnitude would be political suicide... regardless of how much it actually impacted people. It's just something that's always on the front of people's minds... Look at the number of people willing to burn $5 to drive to Costco, burning $3 idling the whole time they're in line, in order to save $6 per tank.

[mrjanejacobs]

A gas tax of ANY magnitude would be political suicide... regardless of how much it actually impacted people. It's just something that's always on the front of people's minds... Look at the number of people willing to burn $5 to drive to Costco, burning $3 idling the whole time they're in line, in order to save $6 per tank.

hahahaa - or the folks who drive 30km to CBS to buy a tank of gas that is modestly cheaper.

[SignalHillHiker]

I have relatives like that. Like my mother says, "You're going to save yourself poor."

[PoscStudent]

A gas tax of ANY magnitude would be political suicide... regardless of how much it actually impacted people. It's just something that's always on the front of people's minds... Look at the number of people willing to burn $5 to drive to Costco, burning $3 idling the whole time they're in line, in order to save $6 per tank.

That's why you got four years in office. St. John's could probably make enough off a small gas tax from the outsiders that a lot of people could be in money through property tax reductions.

People say raising taxes is political suicide but city/town councils do it regularly, and how often do their members change?

[BigRedSpecial]

hahahaa - or the folks who drive 30km to CBS to buy a tank of gas that is modestly cheaper.
Hahaha... I'm living in CBS right now and I rarely get gas there. The extra $2.50 won't break me

I have relatives like that. Like my mother says, "You're going to save yourself poor."

Hahaha totally stealing that saying. Reminds me of my old roommate's saying, "You'd be out money if you didn't buy it"

That's why you got four years in office. St. John's could probably make enough off a small gas tax from the outsiders that a lot of people could be in money through property tax reductions.

People say raising taxes is political suicide but city/town councils do it regularly, and how often do their members change?

The one flaw in your argument is you're basing it on logic. All logic goes out the window when it comes to gas prices.:haha:

[PoscStudent]

It would be simple enough for the city to figure out a range of how much money there is to be made in having an extra cent or two on gasoline in the city.

[jeddy1989]

Criminal Activity Exceeds Municipal Authority


St. John's Mayor Dennis O'Keefe says the city is limited in what it can do to address complaints about problem properties. A public meeting is planned on Friday to address the concerns of residents of Tessier Place, who had been complaining about a property in the area for some time.

Activity at the house culminated with the death of a 47-year-old man who succumbed to injuries recieved in a vicious beating at the residence last week.

O'Keefe says the city acts on property complaints, but its hands are tied when it comes to alleged criminal activity. Neighbours say they have raised concerns about the property for some time, but to no avail. O'Keefe says he has regular contact with the RNC on criminal matters that come to light as a result of city property inspections.



And in the case of Tessier Place, it was city inspectors who alerted the RNC to some alleged illegal activity at the property on March 11th.

O'Keefe says the city has received numerous property complaints about 8 Tessier Place dating back some time, but in each case the matters were addressed.



O'Keefe says in the case of some problem property owners, council has taken to threatening to name the property owner in council in an effort to shame them into action.
http://www.vocm.com/newsarticle.asp?mn=2&id=32200

[mrjanejacobs]

Criminal Activity Exceeds Municipal Authority



http://www.vocm.com/newsarticle.asp?mn=2&id=32200

Dennis O'Keefe is uninspired. If he really wanted to do something about any matter within the City, some action could be taken. It's a lack of will that determines his inactivity and it's a ploy of evading responsibility by saying 'my hands are tied' - Doc is tying his own hands.

[PoscStudent]

Dennis O'Keefe is uninspired. If he really wanted to do something about any matter within the City, some action could be taken. It's a lack of will that determines his inactivity and it's a ploy of evading responsibility by saying 'my hands are tied' - Doc is tying his own hands.

Like what?

[Chew]

Dennis O'Keefe is uninspired. If he really wanted to do something about any matter within the City, some action could be taken. It's a lack of will that determines his inactivity and it's a ploy of evading responsibility by saying 'my hands are tied' - Doc is tying his own hands.

The city absolutely has no jurisdiction in criminal matters. Heck, municipalities in NL even have a hard time with jurisdiction for moving violations. Anyone else remember all the court challenges a few years back to the Mt Pearl city cops giving tickets for moving violations?

What exactly are you suggesting he should be doing or should have done?

[mrjanejacobs]

Like what?

You find one! I have no damn clue! haha

Why can't he more actively liaison with the RNC and the province to get the ball rolling on this. And if it's a recurring problem, then the City should have more powers to act on the matter. Why isn't he pushing the agenda for a more empowered City?

[mrjanejacobs]

St.John's is one of the most disempowered Cities in this country (thanks mainly to the Provincial government). If instances like this are recurring, it just strengthens the argument that the City SHOULD have more power devolved to it in order to act within it's own political jurisdiction.

Point being: I don't know what could be done, but if a politician says there's nothing they can do, they're just not being sufficiently creative.

[PoscStudent]

I guess Doc's point is, that this is the RNC's responsibility. He can't tell them what to do, though he could speak out for the need for the RNC to provide more enforcement in this area.

[Marty_Mcfly]

I guess Doc's point is, that this is the RNC's responsibility. He can't tell them what to do, though he could speak out for the need for the RNC to provide more enforcement in this area.

It probably doesn't help that the RNC barely want to help you when you're in need.

[krc321]

I think it's highly inappropriate for O'Leary to involve herself in that matter. People don't look favourably on that kind of political posturing. I think Doc is making the right choice of sitting back and letting her become her own worst enemy.

[PoscStudent]

It will be interesting to see if more focus is given to O'Leary over the next several months, and if it helps or hurts her. She doesn't seem to have a great a relationship with many councillors, has taken odd positions on issues, and has made some, what i would consider, inappropriate comments.

[mrjanejacobs]

What inappropriate comments are you talking about? Because I could say the same for Doc...

I really think we're over-analyzing O'Leary's involvement in the investigation. At the same time, I also wish she should quit some of the over-zelous political posturing.

In the same breath, I am going to counter-argue many commentators in their claims that O'Leary is not leader material. How isn't she? She speaks better than doc (or any other councillor), she articulates better than any other councillor, she is firm and assertive and has original ideas. Moreover, how is DOC a leader? He is not firm at all, he epitomizes what I perceive as a 'follower'.

For anyone who watched the video today on the Glencrest development, it's a great example. Other councillors stood to kind of incoherently utter a couple lines that were total posturing.

Duff spoke well and reasonably.

O'Leary stood and seemed very on point. She spoke loudly, clearly and articulated her points, touching on her particular portfolio on the Environment committee. She was also reasonable and supported the project yet fairly, where necessary, raised cautions (as Duff did as well).

Doc finishes off with his usual, exhausting political rhetoric about some anecdote of two girls sitting in the stands and this development is for them, blah blah blah. Total nonsense that had nothing to do with anything.

[Copes]

Honest question (because maybe I just don't know).

What are all these great, original ideas O'Leary has? (Aside from the bad tree idea)

[Marty_Mcfly]

O'Leary's most notable ideas to date:

-Approve funding for the harbour fence before knowing anything about the proposal. Upon learning more she decides to flip-flop and lead an angry mob over the whole idea.

-Be against the Mariott Hotel extension: a perfectly nice, low-rise building that was mindful of its presence in the historic district of the city. May as well keep a parking lot there, right?

-Against the Encanex waste treatment laboratory to be built on a currently vacant, industrial piece of land downtown. Without knowing anything about the proposal, she took what would have been a two-storey building much like the others in the surrounding area, and painted the public image of a huge water treatment plant like the one across the harbour, and was worried about the pumping of toxic waste into the harbour. Complete fear mongering.

[SignalHillHiker]

I had the same mistaken reaction to your third point. That's one of my worries about O'Leary - that she jumps to confusions (typo - but it stays because it's perfect) - even if out of love and passion for the city. But I'm learning not to do it, I'm sure she could as well.

The political posturing is deeply annoying, and disappointing. I have tremendous respect for her community activism record. She's been fighting for groups of people (gays and lesbians, for example) long before it was en vogue to do so. But that doesn't mean someone will be a good mayor.

I'm mostly worried about what the tone will be like if she wins. Developers are just starting to gain a little bit of confidence that they can propose better than the Hilton here. I don't want to lose momentum.

Our boom isn't going to last forever. We need people who aren't afraid to dream REALLY big, people who will protect our heritage areas but still be VERY pro development. Someone, somewhere, is really going to benefit from our resource wealth. And council is a HUGE part of making sure that's us and not equally suitable mainland cities.

[krc321]

I had the same mistaken reaction to your third point. That's one of my worries about O'Leary - that she jumps to confusions (typo - but it stays because it's perfect) - even if out of love and passion for the city. But I'm learning not to do it, I'm sure she could as well.

The political posturing is deeply annoying, and disappointing. I have tremendous respect for her community activism record. She's been fighting for groups of people (gays and lesbians, for example) long before it was en vogue to do so. But that doesn't mean someone will be a good mayor.

I'm mostly worried about what the tone will be like if she wins. Developers are just starting to gain a little bit of confidence that they can propose better than the Hilton here. I don't want to lose momentum.

Our boom isn't going to last forever. We need people who aren't afraid to dream REALLY big, people who will protect our heritage areas but still be VERY pro development. Someone, somewhere, is really going to benefit from our resource wealth. And council is a HUGE part of making sure that's us and not equally suitable mainland cities.


Signal, you completely summed up my feelings about O'Leary! I think she is a lovely lady and a great community figure but I think she will be completely lost in the mayors chair. I agree that Doc is not necessarily a strong figure for our city but sometimes it's better to choose your battles wisely and I think O'Leary feels like she has to shout about everything even if she doesn't have a strong opinion about it.

[Copes]

Signal, you completely summed up my feelings about O'Leary! I think she is a lovely lady and a great community figure but I think she will be completely lost in the mayors chair. I agree that Doc is not necessarily a strong figure for our city but sometimes it's better to choose your battles wisely and I think O'Leary feels like she has to shout about everything even if she doesn't have a strong opinion about it.

My concern is that O'Leary is a step more than that. That she chooses what to shout about based on what she thinks the public will shout about, so she can be perceived as the only one willing to stand up to the man. I think this leads her to jump into things, and make mountains out of molehills. It is my number one concern.

I don't for a moment doubt her passion, or the fact that she is a good person. I don't like her clear political posturing (which she does far more of than Doc). I do doubt her ability to pick her battles and lead the city and local businesses in a time of great economic prosperity.

[PoscStudent]

What inappropriate comments are you talking about? Because I could say the same for Doc...

Inappropriate in my opinion for a councillor. When the whole Fortis controversy over their Water Street building was going on I remember her criticizing Fortis. I'm fine with her opposing the proposal, like most councillors did, but I don't think it's appropriate to criticize our province's most successful company when they want to invest tens of millions into the city.

[mrjanejacobs]

Honest question (because maybe I just don't know).

What are all these great, original ideas O'Leary has? (Aside from the bad tree idea)

Hey - the tree idea is a great idea. The tree-fee I am not convinced by, but some policy that requires developers to plant trees in baron sub-divisions… this is an amazing concept and we need it (basically every major Canadian city has a similar policy).

Have you consulted the RoadMap2021? It's a strategic masterplan for St.John's. You should check it out. It is a pretty concise and pretty convincing. O'Leary led the execution of this policy document.

This is the "Highlights" summary of the document:

http://www.stjohns.ca/sites/default/files/files/publication/Roadmap2021Highlights_0.pdf

Full document:

http://www.stjohns.ca/sites/default/files/files/publication/Roadmap2021.pdf

— How aren't these ideas original ideas? What kind of vision has Doc offered beyond noisy rhetoric?


O'Leary's most notable ideas to date:

-Approve funding for the harbour fence before knowing anything about the proposal. Upon learning more she decides to flip-flop and lead an angry mob over the whole idea.

-Be against the Mariott Hotel extension: a perfectly nice, low-rise building that was mindful of its presence in the historic district of the city. May as well keep a parking lot there, right?

-Against the Encanex waste treatment laboratory to be built on a currently vacant, industrial piece of land downtown. Without knowing anything about the proposal, she took what would have been a two-storey building much like the others in the surrounding area, and painted the public image of a huge water treatment plant like the one across the harbour, and was worried about the pumping of toxic waste into the harbour. Complete fear mongering.

The harbour fence is a total cluster f**k. No one on council looks good when we talk about the harbour fence. It's still unclear what's best. High-profile residents came out, mis-information was shared - to sum, it's a total mess and so it's hard to criticize anyone for it. Sure, I think it's fair to criticize her for approving funding before knowing all the details. But I think it's also fair for a councillor to flip-flop after their is spontaneous public outcry…

I would have also rejected a pedway development in the east end of duckworth street… Pedways are cheesy. You can't accept every crappy proposal just because it's a proposal. You still need aesthetic standards…. So council should approve every bad proposal?

I would have also rejected the Encanex waste treatment laboratory… Why should council lose a valuable piece of land on the harbour front to a treatment facility that could literally go in any other community?

The political posturing is deeply annoying, and disappointing…

I'm mostly worried about what the tone will be like if she wins. Developers are just starting to gain a little bit of confidence that they can propose better than the Hilton here. I don't want to lose momentum.

Our boom isn't going to last forever. We need people who aren't afraid to dream REALLY big, people who will protect our heritage areas but still be VERY pro development. Someone, somewhere, is really going to benefit from our resource wealth. And council is a HUGE part of making sure that's us and not equally suitable mainland cities.

On your first point, Signal - couldn't agree more. Her posturing also annoys me and there is really no way I'll try to excuse her for it. It's kind of 'over-doing-it', if you ask me. It's one thing to put yourself out there and whole other to be like 'look at me, look at me!'

The second point I believe to be total fear-mongering. And I think it's a little arbitrary. There has been no development in downtown St.John's for 25 years… most projects proposed have still been accepted. I really am not under the impression that developers are lacking confidence… and if she is not in support of a project, there is usually pretty good reason. Moreover, she often supports developments. Let's stop treating her like some anti-development witch (not to say you do, Signal, haha, I know you appreciate aspects of Sheilagh's approach).

Inappropriate in my opinion for a councillor. When the whole Fortis controversy over their Water Street building was going on I remember her criticizing Fortis. I'm fine with her opposing the proposal, like most councillors did, but I don't think it's appropriate to criticize our province's most successful company when they want to invest tens of millions into the city.

Not to say I don't agree with you, but that's pretty anecdotal. I didn't like it when MetroBus was on strike and Doc said something along the lines of, 'well we all did just fine without having a bus system'… I found that insensitive and inappropriate.

[PoscStudent]

^ That's fine. Personally I can't stand O'Leary and most of the views she has taken on stuff I think are horrible, and I'll be glad to see her gone. I'm not a big fan of Doc but he's by far better than O'Leary IMO.

[Marty_Mcfly]

The harbour fence is a total cluster f**k. No one on council looks good when we talk about the harbour fence. It's still unclear what's best. High-profile residents came out, mis-information was shared - to sum, it's a total mess and so it's hard to criticize anyone for it. Sure, I think it's fair to criticize her for approving funding before knowing all the details. But I think it's also fair for a councillor to flip-flop after their is spontaneous public outcry…

I would have also rejected a pedway development in the east end of duckworth street… Pedways are cheesy. You can't accept every crappy proposal just because it's a proposal. You still need aesthetic standards…. So council should approve every bad proposal?

I would have also rejected the Encanex waste treatment laboratory… Why should council lose a valuable piece of land on the harbour front to a treatment facility that could literally go in any other community?


-That's my point. She jumped the gun on the fence before knowing anything about the proposal. Is that really what we want in a mayor? Not at all.

-The "pedway" development she was against was approved, though I will agree that a pedway over east Duckworth wasn't the best idea. The developers were then mindful of this and redesigned the extension without the pedway and then she decided to have a problem with the height. Aesthetics aren't a problem with the Mariott, it's very mindful of its surroundings and tries its best to blend in with the historic properties in the area. If this is a crappy proposal, then all of east Duckworth is "crappy".

-The land where this building was proposed is for industrial use. If this isn't built there, another warehouse development will go there. We're not talking prime residential land here. St. John's has been reaping the benefits of the offshore oil industry for years. It's time to also deal with the dirtier side of the industry as well. If she's against the development, she has to state why and back it up with fact. Instead she's spewed shit out of her mouth that she has no idea about.

[mrjanejacobs]

-That's my point. She jumped the gun on the fence before knowing anything about the proposal. Is that really what we want in a mayor? Not at all.

-The "pedway" development she was against was approved, though I will agree that a pedway over east Duckworth wasn't the best idea. The developers were then mindful of this and redesigned the extension without the pedway and then she decided to have a problem with the height. Aesthetics aren't a problem with the Mariott, it's very mindful of its surroundings and tries its best to blend in with the historic properties in the area. If this is a crappy proposal, then all of east Duckworth is "crappy".

-The land where this building was proposed is for industrial use. If this isn't built there, another warehouse development will go there. We're not talking prime residential land here. St. John's has been reaping the benefits of the offshore oil industry for years. It's time to also deal with the dirtier side of the industry as well. If she's against the development, she has to state why and back it up with fact. Instead she's spewed shit out of her mouth that she has no idea about.

I think any action taken over the harbour fence is not worth labelling or outcasting a political candidate. As I said, it was a cluster-f**k (can we swear on the forum? I put the asterisks in but it's annoying, haha). I'd rather a mayor who flip-flops on an issue rather than one who doesn't give a shit one way or another...

I don't know details on the Mariott proposal. And when I say 'crappy' proposals, I'm talking generally about all developments. Not uniquely the Mariott... so don't be presumptuous.

And I think you're being a little dramatic about the waste water plant... just because you don't agree with what she is saying doesn't mean she doesn't know what she's talking about. Are you somehow qualified to know what you're talking about? haha (honest question)

Did the wastewater plant pass, council? Was she the ONLY one opposed it.....? Why do you care so much about some water treatment facility? It's not a highrise or something that would actually help the City...

[Marty_Mcfly]

And I think you're being a little dramatic about the waste water plant... just because you don't agree with what she is saying doesn't mean she doesn't know what she's talking about. Are you somehow qualified to know what you're talking about? haha (honest question)

Did the wastewater plant pass, council? Was she the ONLY one opposed it.....? Why do you care so much about some water treatment facility? It's not a highrise or something that would actually help the City...

I am 100% qualified to know what would happen in that building. I have a B.Sc.(Hons) in Chemistry, and it would have translated to a potential job in the city for me. Waste would be delivered in where it would be purified, filtered, etc. and run through quality control testing and then released. If anything, the largest vessels they'd need would maybe be a few 2-storey reactors. In comparison to the city water treatment plant it'd be minuscule, and completely housed inside; the two are not comparable.

The rest of council decided that they'd make a decision after reviewing environmental impact studies. Logical decision on their part. Anything that is released from the plant into the harbour will obviously have to meet high standards and council probably will scrutinize reports heavily before making individual decisions. O'Leary however took exception to this project immediately, before reviewing anything.

You're right: diversifying an economy and creating jobs won't help a city. Because right now, unless you're an engineer or a public service worker, job prospects aren't great. I've been a huge advocate of economic diversification during the oil boom so that once the oil is gone there'll still be a reason to be here. Projects like this are a start. There's no reason why St. John's can't have high-tech industry, biotechnology, pharmaceutical manufacturing, etc. companies calling us home. Especially with MUN and CONA spitting out thousands of fresh, educated graduates a year.

[mrjanejacobs]

I am 100% qualified to know what would happen in that building. I have a B.Sc.(Hons) in Chemistry, and it would have translated to a potential job in the city for me. Waste would be delivered in where it would be purified, filtered, etc. and run through quality control testing and then released. If anything, the largest vessels they'd need would maybe be a few 2-storey reactors. In comparison to the city water treatment plant it'd be minuscule, and completely housed inside; the two are not comparable.

The rest of council decided that they'd make a decision after reviewing environmental impact studies. Logical decision on their part. Anything that is released from the plant into the harbour will obviously have to meet high standards and council probably will scrutinize reports heavily before making individual decisions. O'Leary however took exception to this project immediately, before reviewing anything.

You're right: diversifying an economy and creating jobs won't help a city. Because right now, unless you're an engineer or a public service worker, job prospects aren't great. I've been a huge advocate of economic diversification during the oil boom so that once the oil is gone there'll still be a reason to be here. Projects like this are a start. There's no reason why St. John's can't have high-tech industry, biotechnology, pharmaceutical manufacturing, etc. companies calling us home. Especially with MUN and CONA spitting out thousands of fresh, educated graduates a year.


All great remarks (I really don't know much about the facility in question other than what I read in the news). I totally agree that it's unacceptable that she has been so quick on the gun with emotional reactions before hearing all the facts. It's a bit stubborn, but lots of our favourite politicians are stubborn - Danny Williams, Andy Wells, Pierre Elliott Trudeau, etc. Is being stubborn a deal-breaking quality for a politician?

And if I recall correctly, it would only have 2 full-time employees... that's going to revolutionize the economic portfolio of the region, you're right........

You're surely qualified on what's going on in the building, but are you really qualified to say "she doesn't know what she's talking about and she's spewing shit from her mouth..."? I think you're being a little extremist...

I absolutely agree that economic diversification is important and should be a top priority. But this, as you said, is a small facility and will do very little. Not to mention - how will this diversify the economy away from oil & gas if this facility is particular to oil and gas...?

I think you're really over-stating the impact that either accepting or refusing this facility would have...

[Marty_Mcfly]

All great remarks (I really don't know much about the facility in question other than what I read in the news).

And if I recall correctly, it would only have 2 full-time employees... that's going to revolutionize the economic portfolio of the region, you're right...

I absolutely agree that economic diversification is important and should be a top priority. But this, as you said, is a small facility and will do very little. Not to mention - how will this diversify the economy away from oil & gas if this facility is particular to oil and gas...?

I think you're really over-stating the impact that either accepting or refusing this facility would have...

Somewhere along the line someone threw out the number "5 employees". Such a facility would never be able to run with that number of employees. At minimum they'd need people who run the processes of cleaning, who will need managers/superiors. Then there will need to be another hand-full of people to run QC, who in turn will need other people to report to. It'd be an operation comparable to Petroforma (across the harbour) and if it wants to be done right will probably need about 10-15 full-time employees. Not to mention the jobs during construction.

Encanex actually does a number of things. While this particular facility will be primarily for water purification the option will be there to expand its Environmental testing and monitoring section in St. John's. With the extensive mining in Labrador, plus Muskrat Falls looming, it'd be very worth their time to look into this. Especially considering Muskrat Falls will require large amounts of testing (hydro electricity isn't as clean as most people think it is).

[Townie709]

GOOD GOD! Walter Harding drives me insane! If that fool gets elected we're all fucked. There, I said it.

[PoscStudent]

Don't worry Bruce Tilley will be re-elected!

[Townie709]

Don't worry Bruce Tilley will be re-elected!

Oh, good! Bruce Tilley is running in that region. For some reason I thought Walter was the only candidate for that ward. Phew!

[Copes]

Hey - the tree idea is a great idea. The tree-fee I am not convinced by, but some policy that requires developers to plant trees in baron sub-divisions… this is an amazing concept and we need it (basically every major Canadian city has a similar policy).

There are lots of great ideas that are ruined with awful execution. Sure, planting trees is a good idea, but her suggestion as to how to make it happen was bad. Therefore, in my opinion, the idea as a whole was bad.

A leader consults. A leader gathers data. A leader weighs to opinions of all stakeholders. Then a leader tries to implement policy. O'Leary did not do these things. She came up with an idea and threw it into the spotlight without even considering the repercussions. Once people started criticizing her idea, it became very clear that it was a bad one. Because of how she handled it, people are going to be weary any time someone mentions any sort of tree-planting policy over the next year or two. Her execution hurt her cause.


The harbour fence is a total cluster f**k. No one on council looks good when we talk about the harbour fence. It's still unclear what's best. High-profile residents came out, mis-information was shared - to sum, it's a total mess and so it's hard to criticize anyone for it. Sure, I think it's fair to criticize her for approving funding before knowing all the details. But I think it's also fair for a councillor to flip-flop after their is spontaneous public outcry…


While I agree all Councillors look bad, O'Leary looks the worst. Not because she flip-flopped. It was the way in which she handled the situation that turned me off.

O'Leary votes and has no problem with the proposal. Once it became completely clear that there were some citizens that had issue with it, O'Leary not only flip-flopped, but she dove right into the pot so she could stir it as wildly as possible. She ignored any effort of trying to present a unified answer to the public, or to work with the Port Authority. She simply saw an opportunity to get some of the public behind her, and so she jumped all over the issue. She was even called out on Twitter by Debbie Hanlon for her blatant political positioning.

http://www.vocm.com/photos/609501_Twitter%20fight.png

Acting like she was the only one standing up for "the people" was garbage, because she voted for it along with everyone else. She made this into a major issue, was talking to the press, and instead of working on a solution was protesting in the streets like a nincompoop. She left a bad taste in the mouth of all her colleagues. They were trying to calmly get to the bottom of it with the Port Authority. O'Leary was loudly calling out everyone and turning it into a "me versus them" political issue that, in my opinion, was based entirely on her desire to get her name out there for her mayor candidacy.

She handled the harbour fence differently than every single councilor, and as such, she can be judged differently than every single councilor. Further, she showed to me that she is on the side of picketing and making noise instead of quiet discourse and finding a solution.

O'Leary's continued political positioning is, quite frankly, the reason I won't vote for her, unless she busts out some ground-breaking ideas over the coming months that I can't turn away from.

On another note, when I ask about O'Leary's ideas, "what are Doc's ideas" or "where is Doc's vision" is not a reasonable answer. No one is claiming that Doc is running around toting a bunch of fresh ideas. Personally, I am claiming Doc is a quiet mediator, an intelligent man that weighs his options before offering an opinion, and someone who has a pro-development vision for the city. He's not the best we could possibly have, but he's better than O'Leary for the role, simply due to O'Leary's track record of making noise before thinking and political posturing.

So, back to O'Leary's ideas... we have the pooly thought out tree-planting idea and a RoadMap she guided, but which was largely put together by civil servants. I'll give her credit for the RoadMap. I think the RoadMap is a good backbone for ideas, but I don't think it itself can be considered an idea.

I'll leave you with two quotes about the RoadMap, posted by posters other than myself when it was released in 2011:

The roadmap is largely about the process of making the roadmap:

We will continue to consult with our partners
as we work towards concrete actions and goals.

The City took a hands‐on approach – leading the
effort, but drawing heavily upon the wealth of
knowledge and expertise from partners.

This document is the result of considerable research,
analysis, and consultation.

To focus efforts, two committees were formed to guide
the development of the roadmap.


It also goes on to list many obvious things, like:


St. John’s has an “it” factor, a uniqueness and vibe that
makes the city different and distinct.

A vibrant downtown is
essential to building an attractive and livable city

George Street is iconic.

Here are some of the more concrete statements about density:


Density in the urban core reduces sprawl, creates
efficiencies, lessens environmental impacts and
directly affects the vibrancy, attractiveness and
livability of a city. Density is also particularly
important to young people who generally wish to live,
work and play in a compact urban core. Encouraging
density in St. John’s will help build a vibrant city.

There is a need to encourage density in residential and commercial
development in the downtown and city core.

Commercial development in the downtown is often contentious.

Young people are attracted to cities that embrace density and have a
vibrant urban core.

http://www.stjohns.ca/pdfs/Roadmap2021.pdf


It's all about process, ideals, generalities and stating the obvious. There is no indication of what the actual results of the process would look like, that would come more from the municipal plan. Much of what is said here could apply anywhere, but I think that's all it was meant to be.

I wasn't impressed with the roadmap. There's nothing great in it, I think it may have been a waste of money.

So the jury seems to still be out on whether or not the RoadMap is filled with great ideas or not.

[PoscStudent]

She guided the roadmap?

[Copes]

From what I've read (which honestly isn't much) she was the driving force behind the need for the document? And I assume involved throughout the process of its creation.

[PoscStudent]

I can't remember? I think Shannie Duff had talked about it, and I remember Debbie Hanlon seemed to be very involved when it was getting put together.

[mrjanejacobs]

There are lots of great ideas that are ruined with awful execution. Sure, planting trees is a good idea, but her suggestion as to how to make it happen was bad. Therefore, in my opinion, the idea as a whole was bad.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. The tree-policy is fine by me. The tree-fee is less appetizing. In all, I am happy with any similar policy that imposes some standard on developers. Can you honestly say that we don't need trees in these new clear-cut, cookie-cutter sub-divisions? For ecological reasons, aesthetic reasons and livability reasons.

While I agree all Councillors look bad, O'Leary looks the worst. Not because she flip-flopped. It was the way in which she handled the situation that turned me off... O'Leary's continued political positioning is, quite frankly, the reason I won't vote for her, unless she busts out some ground-breaking ideas over the coming months that I can't turn away from...

I have said it many times, I will not defend O'Leary for her political posturing. It bothers me too, and it's certainly over-reaching and bad-politics.

I don't live in the City so it's really hard for me to relate to your complaints of her in-your-face political games. I understand though, they don't surprise me. I am just not exposed to them so readily to be irritated by them.

On another note, when I ask about O'Leary's ideas, "what are Doc's ideas" or "where is Doc's vision" is not a reasonable answer. No one is claiming that Doc is running around toting a bunch of fresh ideas. Personally, I am claiming Doc is a quiet mediator, an intelligent man that weighs his options before offering an opinion, and someone who has a pro-development vision for the city. He's not the best we could possibly have, but he's better than O'Leary for the role, simply due to O'Leary's track record of making noise before thinking and political posturing.

So, back to O'Leary's ideas... we have the pooly thought out tree-planting idea and a RoadMap she guided, but which was largely put together by civil servants. I'll give her credit for the RoadMap. I think the RoadMap is a good backbone for ideas, but I don't think it itself can be considered an idea.

I'll leave you with two quotes about the RoadMap, posted by posters other than myself when it was released in 2011... So the jury seems to still be out on whether or not the RoadMap is filled with great ideas or not.

haha, Sorry, but "the jury"? Are you kidding? The jury is composed of two SSP forumers? Architype is, by and large, in support of the document. But:

Originally Posted by PoscStudent, November 30, 2011
I wasn't impressed with the roadmap. There's nothing great in it, I think it may have been a waste of money.

Hahaha that's not a jury-assessment. That's just a bunch of hot air. He 'wasn't impressed', 'nothing great in it', 'waste of money' - this is one person's views. It's also lacking any rationale for that position.

The RoadMap2021 is great! It's visionary! And sure, it may not be full of concrete ideas, as Architype said, but it also isn't the document designed for concrete ideas.

Some excerpts:

"GOALS:

A location of choice for business and investment. - Very vague

A magnetic and desirable city for newcomers and young professionals. - A much more clear goal, but still somewhat vague.

A global leader in ocean technology and a global centre for offshore energy expertise. - Very concrete goal.

A destination of choice for people seeking authentic visitor experiences. - A concrete goal.

A leading Canadian artistic metropolis. - A concrete goal.

--

I don't care what PoscStudent thinks. This is a great vision and framework for the direction the City is going in.

[mrjanejacobs]

She guided the roadmap?

Yes, she was the leading force. Shannie and other councillors were involved, but O'Leary was the one who lead this document.

[mrjanejacobs]

And I will continue to use "where is Doc's vision?" as a counter-argument to those who rag on O'Leary. O'Leary is very vocal and puts herself out there. Doc just lingers in the shadows, oozing his populist rhetoric to stimulate some emotional sentiment, but offers nothing other than a steady hand. I think your criticism of O'Leary jumping to conclusions is totally justified. It also makes me look at her more critically. We want someone who can, with a level-head, judge all information before making a decision. I will not be so quick to label O'Leary incapable of doing so.

[Copes]

I said many times I want trees and we need them. However, her plan is possibly the worst possible way that the city could implement trees. So yeah, its a bad idea. Any hack can call for trees (not saying O'Leary is a hack by the way, just saying its easy enough to say "WE NEED TREES"). An intelligent politician will find a proper way to ensure we get them. O'Leary failed.

Considering it is the SSP community you are trying to sell O'Leary to, then it's the opinions of the SSP community that matter, at least for this debate.

The RoadMap is not visionary. I heard about the Oil and Gas industry's plan to turn St. John's into a global leader of ocean technology, as well as arctic exploration technology, in 2010 at a NOIA Conference. This isn't revolutionary, nor can it be considered O'Leary's idea. On top of that, I'm looking for ideas telling us how we are going to get there. What are we, as a city, going to change an implement to reach these goals?

I want to make $10,000,000 before I turn 30. That is a goal of mine. It's something I really want to do. Does me saying it give you confidence that I am going to be able to achieve it? You're a critical thinker, and a smart guy. That's not hard to tell. So why are you drinking the KoolAid instead of asking how? If I were to state my goal, that would be the first question you would ask me before you would begin to throw your support behind me and say I'm someone who is capable of achieving it. That is essentially how I view the RoadMap. It is a great document for vision, its not a good document for idea generation. That's all I'm trying to press in regards to the RoadMap.

EDIT: Poorly worded argument there. I retract. The plan is VISIONARY, however I will personally credit someone with great ideas when they can explain how to implement a vision. Sorry for my poorly worded argument, I would like to hear your thoughts on what I was trying to say as opposed to how I contradicted myself by saying "the plan is not visionary" and then "its a great document for vision". Haha. I admit defeat on that one.

[mrjanejacobs]

Copes - before we can generate ideas, we need a vision. O'Leary is on her way. Doc has offered neither.

[Copes]

Copes - before we can generate ideas, we need a vision. O'Leary is on her way. Doc has offered neither.

Fair enough. At this point in the campaign, for me personally, there have been no really good, concrete ideas from either side. No really bad ideas either. Really, no ideas at all. Just a lot of talk. So it comes down to what you look at, and what is important to you individually.

You look at RoadMap 2021 and see O'Leary's vision. I look at the Harbour Fence debacle and see O'Leary's political positioning. Neither of us are necessarily wrong in what we are choosing to focus on, we just prioritize differently while also having different notions of good qualities in a leader, issues important to us, and political leanings.

Hey, sounds like an election to me! :P

[mrjanejacobs]

And I take offence to your suggestion that O'Leary is unintelligent. It is clear from council meetings that she is one of the brightest council members involved in the discussion.

O'Leary... over-zealous? Sure. Overly-eager? Yes. Annoyingly over-eager? Perhaps (haha). Intelligent? Absolutely.

We also need a young face for the sake of branding the City. We will never attract young people to this City if we continue on our same road of electing 60-70 year old retirees with a populist agenda.

I also think you need to consider the context of a campaign. It's when politicians are most volatile, and are most likely to do something stupid. O'Leary has been in a campaign mind-set for over a year...

[mrjanejacobs]

And political leanings, in this case, hold absolutely no bearing on my decision to support O'Leary.

It's about an image of the City. It's about rebranding the City. It's about a leader who can inspire residents. It's about charisma and passion and vision.

Doc offeres none of the above.

[Copes]

If I came across as suggesting O'Leary is unintelligent, I apologize, it was not my intention, nor my belief. I may think some of her strategies, or positions, are not the best... but I am well aware that she is an intelligent woman.

If something I said actually offended you, I am sorry.

[Copes]

I also think you need to consider the context of a campaign. It's when politicians are most volatile, and are most likely to do something stupid. O'Leary has been in a campaign mind-set for over a year...

Exactly the problem. She should have been trying to lead the city and work with the Councillors. Not become political for the sake of differentiating herself from the pack.

And in terms of my options, I choose annoingly over-eager to the point of being off-putting.

[mrjanejacobs]

Exactly the problem. She should have been trying to lead the city and work with the Councillors. Not become political for the sake of differentiating herself from the pack.

And in terms of my options, I choose annoingly over-eager to the point of being off-putting.

I agree with you. My point is that her behaviour in a campaign-environment doesn't necessarily reflect her behaviour once elected.

[mrjanejacobs]

Another very strong argument that I will put forward on behalf of O'Leary is her commitment to Public Transit. An interest that Doc not only isn't pushing for, but he doesn't care much about at all.

Public transit, as we all know, is foundational to society. It is the first step in a long line of problems the region is facing: it will curb urban sprawl, traffic congestion, reduce need for new car-based infrastructure (roads), addresses unaffordability of the region, reduces need for parking downtown (therefore eliminating hinderance on development), makes communities/the entire region more livable, promotes social engagement, primes sustainable planning and development, facilitates tourism, helps the environment, creates jobs, stimulates the local economy, etc. etc. (the list is literally endless)

Any candidate that doesn't have transit as a core priority is not worthy of being elected. Promoting development downtown is a waste of fucking time until we can get transit in order.

[jeddy1989]

Another very strong argument that I will put forward on behalf of O'Leary is her commitment to Public Transit. An interest that Doc not only isn't pushing for, but he doesn't care much about at all.

Public transit, as we all know, is foundational to society. It is the first step in a long line of problems the region is facing: it will curb urban sprawl, traffic congestion, reduce need for new car-based infrastructure (roads), addresses unaffordability of the region, reduces need for parking downtown (therefore eliminating hinderance on development), makes communities/the entire region more livable, promotes social engagement, primes sustainable planning and development, facilitates tourism, helps the environment, creates jobs, stimulates the local economy, etc. etc. (the list is literally endless)

Any candidate that doesn't have transit as a core priority is not worthy of being elected. Promoting development downtown is a waste of fucking time until we can get transit in order.

I think you need have a conversation with him about this, I have and I think you would be surprised :)

[mrjanejacobs]

Oh yeah? Tell me more. In the media or in public, he only ever downplays it. It could be for his populist-mayor approach.

[mrjanejacobs]

Someone should ask O'Leary on her facebook page, "Miss O'Leary, what is your position on development? Moreover, how do you plan to accommodate high-density development in the downtown CBD (such as high-rise development)?"

I am a supporter of O'Leary so I don't want to antagonize her in public. However, I want to see her response to this question. I think all voters do. Would anyone like to volunteer to antagonize her (as in, ask tough questions in public)? At the worst, she will have some time to prepare her response to this question leading up to the election. Depending on her response, follow-up questions can be crafted, such as: "What are your thoughts on liberalizing height restrictions in the west-end of downtown in order to accommodate burgeoning demand?"

Thoughts?

[Townie709]

She DEFINITELY needs to answer those questions. Honestly too, not in a public setting where she will just say what she thinks to be the opinion of most people in the room.

[PoscStudent]

Well O'Leary seems to have completely ruled out any modern/ high-rise development in the CBD. Don't know what her vision for west end is.

[mrjanejacobs]

It would be interesting to see how she reacts in both contexts - publicly and privately.

[mrjanejacobs]

Well O'Leary seems to have completely ruled out any modern/ high-rise development in the CBD. Don't know what her vision for west end is.

No, she hasn't man. The West-end of downtown is still the CBD. Don't put forward views on her behalf that aren't true...

[PoscStudent]

No, she hasn't man. The West-end of downtown is still the CBD. Don't put forward views on her behalf that aren't true...

If you consider the west end the CBD that's your view, I don't. O'Leary was uncomfortable with the Marriott Hotel expansion being 4 metres over and has said in the last she doesn't want any changes made to heigh restrictions.

[mrjanejacobs]

If you consider the west end the CBD that's your view, I don't. O'Leary was uncomfortable with the Marriott Hotel expansion being 4 metres over and has said in the last she doesn't want any changes made to heigh restrictions.

That absolutely does not mean that she "has ruled out modern/high rise development" - you're putting words in her mouth.

[PoscStudent]

That absolutely does not mean that she "has ruled out modern/high rise development" - you're putting words in her mouth.

She supports the current height rules. The current height rules limit the height of building beyond 15 metres in the vast majority of the downtown.

If I wasn't such a big fan of O'Leary though I'd ask her the tough question of where she stands on development, just to clarify.

[Townie709]

Just saw this tweet by Amy Stoodly in th CBC live blog

Geoff Chaulk interrupts city council meeting. Tells mayor O'Keefe "if you can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen. #cbcnl

Hahaha this guy seems like a nut. I'm sure we will hear more on this later tonight or tomorrow. Just thought I'd share that. I find it funny :haha:

[J_Murphy]

Just saw this tweet by Amy Stoodly in th CBC live blog



Hahaha this guy seems like a nut. I'm sure we will hear more on this later tonight or tomorrow. Just thought I'd share that. I find it funny :haha:

The St. John's city council meeting was halted this afternoon as a Mayoral candidate made a stand against council. Geoff Chaulk held a sign reading "Planning Shame." Chaulk is referring to leaked documents which showed that Glencrest wasn't as welcomed as public documents made seem. When Chaulk was asked to leave, he said "Dennis, if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. This is a democracy."



Chaulk's sign was taken down, but he was allowed to stay. Mayor Dennis O'Keefe explained that council and the chamber needs to be respected




http://www.vocm.com/newsarticle.asp?mn=2&id=32393&latest=1

[Townie709]

So to answer Statbass's question.. yes, I guess something exciting did happen in council today! I guess O'Keefe's career as a teacher prepared him to deal with these types of situations! how many times did I hear, "Please quiet down or leave the room," or the respect speech in highschool! Once a teacher, always a teacher :haha:

We'll have to tune in to the council broadcast at 9:00 tonight on rogers to see it go down in real life :D

[mrjanejacobs]

haha. wow. And we say O'Leary is posturing and making issues out of non-issues. This guy is trying to make the Glencrest thing into a scandal so that he can seem like a hero fighting for democracy (lol).

[Townie709]

I'm pretty sure we can all agree that this guy is just looking for attention. I doubt very many will buy into it :haha:

[jeddy1989]

and guess which candidate wants toll booths :P

[Townie709]

and guess which candidate wants toll booths :P

Please don't mention tolls again. I've read enough about tolls the past few days to last me a lifetime :haha:

[Chew]

Tolling the roads and trolling city hall... interesting platform from Mr. Chaulk.

It seems like we have our Ray O'Neill for this election cycle. We may actually have two of them, cause I hear the original is gonna run as well.

[JHikka]

"This is a democracy."?

Clearly this guy's never spent any amount of time around municipal politics. :haha:

[Copes]

Haha, yeah, trying to turn Glencrest into some outrageous scandal. I'm not buying in.

[jeddy1989]

Mayoral candidate ignites ruckus at St. John's meeting

Geoff Chaulk, one of the three declared candidates for the St. John's mayoralty, raised the volume level at Monday evening's council meeting when he rose with a homemade placard.

Chaulk stood in the public gallery holding a sign that said "Planning Shame?" at the beginning of the meeting, as Mayor Dennis O'Keefe entered council chambers.

As demonstrations in the gallery are not allowed, O'Keefe — who is facing off against Chaulk and Coun. Sheilagh O'Leary — asked security to remove him.

"Isn't this a democracy?" Chaulk called out to councillors. "I have a right to ask questions."

As a matter of fact, people sitting in the public gallery do not have the right to address council directly.

When O'Keefe explained the rules, Chaulk raised his voice.

"You can't stand the heat, Dennis — get out of the kitchen."

Chaulk wasn't removed, but a security guard did take his sign. And he got a warning from the mayor.

"Your point is well taken, and there will be zero tolerance for any disturbances that take place in this chamber," O'Keefe said. "And that's the end of that."

Message irritated council: Chaulk
Chaulk, who had alerted the media that he would be attending the meeting, said he believed O'Keefe was angered by his message, regardless of the rules.

"I just don't think they liked what I had to say," Chaulk told CBC News after the meeting.

Chaulk said he is concerned about recent revelations, particularly a rezoning decision for the enormous Glencrest development near Southlands.

"I've been coming to council meetings now regularly for the past couple of months and there've been four planning missteps, and last week's leaked documents about a planning decision concerned me greatly," said Chaulk, referring to a CBC News report that showed how city staff had had concerns about the proposed rezoning of Glencrest.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2013/03/26/nl-geoff-chaulk-poster-council-326.html

[jeddy1989]

Ellsworth Announcing Intentions Today

Ron Ellsworth will announce his intentions regarding the St. John's municipal election this afternoon. The former deputy mayor unsuccessfully ran against Mayor Dennis O'Keefe in the last municipal election four years ago. Ellsworth, who will be making his announcement at Pippy Park at noon, is said to be leaning toward deputy mayor.

http://www.vocm.com/newsarticle.asp?mn=2&ID=32434&latest=1

[jeddy1989]

http://ellsworth2013.com/

[PoscStudent]

http://ellsworth2013.com/

Yay! :notacrook:

[krc321]

thoughts on ellsworth running?

personally, I think it's great that such an integral part of our volunteer community decided to throw his hat in the ring. I really like how business savy he is. I also saw that he had a huge turnout at his launch yesterday. One of the VOCM reporters said something like 200 people which was way more than Sheliagh. Seemed interesting to me.

do you also think it was a good idea to run for DM or should he have tried something else? what do you think his chances are against Duff if she runs?

[jeddy1989]

thoughts on ellsworth running?

personally, I think it's great that such an integral part of our volunteer community decided to throw his hat in the ring. I really like how business savy he is. I also saw that he had a huge turnout at his launch yesterday. One of the VOCM reporters said something like 200 people which was way more than Sheliagh. Seemed interesting to me.

do you also think it was a good idea to run for DM or should he have tried something else? what do you think his chances are against Duff if she runs?

I've spoken to him and he seems like a REALLY nice guy!

[Chew]

Ellsworth is great.

The problem for me is I also like Shannie. But, it may be time for change (even though he has already been there before himself.

At the same time, I think Shannie's voice is an important one to have there, and I don't think there is anyone else running who is likely to fill that void.

Decisions, decisions.

[Copes]

I wish Ellsworth was running for Mayor.

However, he has my vote in whatever position he runs for, unless he somehow blows this campaign.

I'd much rather have both him and (dare I say it?) Shannie holding the two top seats.

[jeddy1989]

I wish Ellsworth was running for Mayor.

However, he has my vote in whatever position he runs for, unless he somehow blows this campaign.

I'd much rather have both him and (dare I say it?) Shannie holding the two top seats.

please CLARIFY this opinion please just so I understand what you're saying!? :rolleyes:

[SignalHillHiker]

I love Duff. I disagree with her quite often but I love what she's done on council. She's one of the few reasons our whole city doesn't look like Harbour Drive and she prevented us from making so many of the mistakes Maritime cities did.

But... there's a time for everything. The boom we're having right now isn't going to last forever. We need a pro-development council with a strong heritage protection bent. We need people for whom downtown won't always stop at Waldegrave Street. We need people for whom everything outside of Empire Avenue looks like the wasteful expense it is.

Is that Ellsworth? I don't know... but I think he might be closer.

We'll see.

And if O'Leary wins, we'd better hope it's Ellsworth in the Deputy chair.

[SignalHillHiker]

please CLARIFY this opinion please just so I understand what you're saying!? :rolleyes:

He wants Ellsworth for Mayor, Duff for Deputy Mayor. (I spent years there - I speak mainlander as well as Copes speaks Newfoundlander).

[PoscStudent]

Shannie is facing her second health issue in the last year so I wouldn't be surprised to hear that she won't run again. I have heard people say she's running and others say she's not running, so who knows? I am more than fine with seeing her call it quits, the deputy mayors race would be close between the two of hem though.

[Copes]

I love Duff. I disagree with her quite often but I love what she's done on council. She's one of the few reasons our whole city doesn't look like Harbour Drive and she prevented us from making so many of the mistakes Maritime cities did.


Nailed it.

I've tended to be pretty anti-Shannie, however, I've come to appreciate her for an opinion on the opposite side of the fence. I would vote for Ellsworth over any of the Mayor candidates. I might consider a vote for Shannie if she was running against anyone but Ellsworth.

If the election were tomorrow, it'd be a ballot for O'Keefe and Ron.

[mrjanejacobs]

Whether you like it or not, Shannie Duff is the closest figure this City has seen to Jane Jacobs. She is indispensable. The council is in for a huge disappointment if the two loudest voices on sustainable development, livable communities and the environment are not reelected. Ellsworth's platform is painfully vague - weren't many forumers comparing him to Rob Ford?

Will Ellsworth see the importance of sustainable communities? Walkability? Placefullness? Culture? Public transit? Active transportation and bike lanes? Green infrastructure? Attracting innovative and creative young talent?

Or does he only understand how to run a business? Council is not a business. What are his ideas (his web-page offers nothing beyond a couple empty platitudes)?

Shannie is the voice of reason on this council. She is a staple. The unpredictability and sloppy politics we see in O'Leary is something Duff has evolved beyond.

Also - Shannie and Sheilagh are the ones who actively speaks out against urban sprawl and the wasteland communities we're building past Empire Avenue (like Kenmount Terrace). And they are the ones speaking out, actively, for transit and active transport and a creative economy. We need a balance. "Pro-development" (which is kind of an arbitrary label) may also mean the private industry can do whatever the fuck they want, like Houston and Calgary - where suburbs sprawl massive distances, cars rule the City, and environmental remediation will be needed on unprecedented scales. Be careful what you wish for.

[PoscStudent]

This interview from 2009 shows the just because Ellsworth is successful businessman who cares about the cities finances doesn't mean he is not interested in what's important to building a more sustainable city.

http://thescope.ca/election/the-election-questionnaires-by-the-st-johns-mayoral-candidates

[krc321]

Whether you like it or not, Shannie Duff is the closest figure this City has seen to Jane Jacobs. She is indispensable. The council is in for a huge disappointment if the two loudest voices on sustainable development, livable communities and the environment are not reelected. Ellsworth's platform is painfully vague - weren't many forumers comparing him to Rob Ford?

Will Ellsworth see the importance of sustainable communities? Walkability? Placefullness? Culture? Public transit? Active transportation and bike lanes? Green infrastructure? Attracting innovative and creative young talent?

Or does he only understand how to run a business? Council is not a business. What are his ideas (his web-page offers nothing beyond a couple empty platitudes)?

Shannie is the voice of reason on this council. She is a staple. The unpredictability and sloppy politics we see in O'Leary is something Duff has evolved beyond.

Also - Shannie and Sheilagh are the ones who actively speaks out against urban sprawl and the wasteland communities we're building past Empire Avenue (like Kenmount Terrace). And they are the ones speaking out, actively, for transit and active transport and a creative economy. We need a balance. "Pro-development" (which is kind of an arbitrary label) may also mean the private industry can do whatever the fuck they want, like Houston and Calgary - where suburbs sprawl massive distances, cars rule the City, and environmental remediation will be needed on unprecedented scales. Be careful what you wish for.

No one on this forum referred to him as Rob Ford and personally I think that anyone that could make such a shameful assumption is not only highly confused but also severely uninformed.

I like Shannie but I don't think she holds a candle to Ellsworth. Didn't he do that poll a few months back? If he didn't think he had a really good shot I think he would have run for another position. He probably could have announced in ward 4 before Davis and run unchallenged. That's how strongly they feel about him.

[rwspencer38]

Chaulk has dropped out of the Mayor race

[PoscStudent]

Chaulk has dropped out of the Mayor race

Damn you bet me!
http://i993.photobucket.com/albums/af58/Poscstudent/image_zps24a74335.png

[rwspencer38]

hah

WINNING

[PoscStudent]

Hopefully someone else enters to split the left wing vote or Doc could be in trouble.

[Chew]

Just heard about Chaulk dropping out on the radio. Leave it to VOCM to report this a half hour after it broke and act like they got the 'scoop' on it!

I'm not so sure he would have gotten many votes.

What Doc needs is someone with a really similar Rubber Boot Crowd image to run and go after the same constituency as O'Leary. A Mark Wilson type candidate. He ain't gonna run, he's got a great job working for Ryan Cleary these days, and already refers to himself as Mayor anyway.

[J_Murphy]

Sarah Colborne Penney has officially announced plans to run as a candidate in Ward 3 in next fall's St. John's Municipal Election. Colborne says big issues on her plate include affordable housing for seniors and other low-income earners, construction of the new West End High school, an increase in pedestrian safety on Topsail Road, and safeguarding the city's green spaces and watersheds.






http://www.vocm.com/newsarticle.asp?mn=2&id=33001&latest=1

[J_Murphy]

Paradise Deputy Mayor Allan English has announced his intention to run for the mayor's chair in the fast-growing community. English was first elected to Paradise council in 2005, and was re-elected in 2009 when he became Deptuy Mayor. Current Mayor Ralph Wiseman has not yet indicated if he will run for re-election



http://www.vocm.com/newsarticle.asp?mn=2&id=33016&latest=1

Not sure if we are discussing surrounding municipalities in this discussion but figured I would post this here. Anyone know anything about this guy?