Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug
Nenshi seems the most naive of the bunch, like one of those people who run for student politics focusing on the what rather than the how of their proposals.
|
I couldn't disagree more. In fact he's the only candidate that with each proposal has expained not only what he wants, but how.
A few examples of the 5 policy platforms he has released:
What he wants - secondary suites city-wide
How:
Conditions:
◦All provincial building code rules must be met, notably the need for fire safety (e.g. fire walls between suites, smoke alarms that ring on all floors)
◦One off-street parking spot must be provided for the suite, in addition to the spots required for the main dwelling. This rule would be waived for suites within 500 metres of an LRT or BRT station.
◦The owner must occupy any home with a suite; both units cannot be rented simultaneously.
What he wants - an independent auditor:
How:
◦Strengthen the independence of the auditor, by clarifying that the office reports to Council, while being guided and mentored by the audit committee
◦Change the terms of the auditor position to enhance independence (e.g. in Toronto, the Auditor General is appointed for one non-renewable seven-year term, and Council may add, but not remove, audits from the A-G’s workplan.)
◦End the practice of having auditor reports vetted by City management prior to being presented to Council
◦Change the composition of the Audit Committee to include more citizen experts, and investigate the feasibility of a majority of the committee being non-Council members
◦Fully fund the auditor’s office and insist on a high standard of work quality, including a peer review (external audit) of the auditor’s office itself every three years.
What he wants - to get airport tunnel built:
How:
a. Borrow the money now, in the realm of an additional $250 million (part of the consequence of City Hall dithering is that no one has a real cost estimate). It appears that the City has the debt capacity currently, and our discussions with provincial officials have suggested that they are willing to approve this funding.
b. Explore options for paying back the loan, including partnerships with the federal and provincial governments, as well as with the Calgary Airport Authority. Both senior levels of government have indicated that they need a signal that the City takes this tunnel seriously, and moving forward would certainly provide that assurance. (Interest rates are still low, and a 10-year loan through the Alberta Capital Finance Authority would cost about $50 million in interest, so there is an incentive to paying back early where possible).
c. Negotiate to delay the closure of Barlow Trail from April 2011 to summer 2011, when Metis Trail is complete. Although the Airport Authority has said it is not willing to negotiate, the City has leverage that it has not yet chosen to use.
In the case of the airport tunnel, yes it is an expensive item - and ideally the city would have prioritized this project in the TIIP over other road projects like the Bowfort interchange, which will have an equivilant cost, but in no way is as urgent as the airport tunnel.
Regarding the imminent budget shortfall - Nenshi is one of the only candidates that actually demanded that the Police budget undergo the same scrutiny as every other department in order to find some cuts to reduce the shortfall. Meanwhile, McIver, Hehr, Connelly and others fought to exempt the police from any cuts, despite them being the largest department in the city, and whose administrative costs have risen at a much higher rate than the actual increase in uniformed officers in the past 5 years. McIver also purports a zero-based budgeting process, yet at the same time wants to pre-approve budgets without even seeing them. How can you have both?
Prev
Linear Mode
