Municipal Politics

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by artvandelay

Hopefully one of the challengers presents a viable option to Nenshi. I'm not sure if I can bring myself to vote for him again.

We need term limits. Two for mayor and three for councilors would help to keep things fresh. And we definitely need runoff elections.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Do you have any evidence for your clear claim that there are potential candidates violating the rules? Or are you just launching preemptive strikes against anyone who might threaten Nenshi?

Do you have evidence that Nenshi has broken any rules, or are you just a Sean Chu fan by nature?

[UofC.engineer]

Originally Posted by suburbia

Do you have evidence that Nenshi has broken any rules, or are you just a Sean Chu fan by nature?

I see you're a little sensitive when it comes to criticism of Nenshi

Are you Ismaili by any chance?

Originally Posted by Corndogger

It's the hypocrisy and confrontational attitude that will hurt him the most. Last night Jason Markusoff tweeted an image of a column Nenshi wrote in 2008 about the need for campaign finance reform. Nenshi said it was the number one issue that needed to be dealt with! Markusoff bolded the sections where Nenshi is completely contradicting himself now.

That's the thing with most politicians in power. Why dismantle the structure that keeps them in power? I remember Harper wanted to make the Senate electable. Trudeau wanted proportional democracy. Both reneged on their promises.

I don't mind Chabot, but there is nothing spectacular about him. It'll be an interesting election. Who will be best to steer the ship in a post-oil Calgary?

[MalcolmTucker]

Oh, iirc the city doesn't have the powers under the old MGA to regulate campaign finance. Might come in city charters?

[Cage]

Peter Demong and Brian Pincott have switched seats. Apparently (from what I gather on twitter) the reason is that Peter Demong is Nenshi's new go to Councillor when the chair needs a minor procedural motion moved or seconded.

The more immediate question, Demong was among the councillor that frequently voted against secondary suite applications. Pincott was Nenshi's go to person if the local councillor was planning to vote against Admin's recommendation. Who will be the new Cllr to handle these motions? Alternately, will we see more motions to go directly to file and abandon?

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by Cage

Peter Demong and Brian Pincott have switched seats. Apparently (from what I gather on twitter) the reason is that Peter Demong is Nenshi's new go to Councillor when the chair needs a minor procedural motion moved or seconded.

The more immediate question, Demong was among the councillor that frequently voted against secondary suite applications. Pincott was Nenshi's go to person if the local councillor was planning to vote against Admin's recommendation. Who will be the new Cllr to handle these motions? Alternately, will we see more motions to go directly to file and abandon?

Demong is one of the last people I would have expected Nenshi to ask.

[suburbia]

Nenshi's media scrum today clears the air of misinformation:
• Video Link

And this is the one from yesterday where there were some similar questioning:
• Video Link

[outoftheice]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

We need term limits. Two for mayor and three for councilors would help to keep things fresh. And we definitely need runoff elections.

I agree that term limits would be beneficial and I wouldn't be surprised if this gets voted in shortly after the next election. I think 3 terms is the perfect term limit for councillors. I'm curious as to why you feel the mayor should only have 2?

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

We need term limits. Two for mayor and three for councilors

That would certainly help those who want to replace the mayor, no doubt.

His comments in the scrums yesterday and the day before (I posted the videos I found on YouTube) were interesting that he said he will do his utmost best to speak to any groups of people - just ask. That's why the comment about access from Rick Bell was so ironic. There has never been a Calgary Mayor as accessible as Nenshi. Maybe the forum should invite him to the next meet up and people can converse with him directly (unless anyone sees this as a negative)?

Bigtime/Josh/others - you probably know how best the mechanism works. Could you investigate? If he is warm to it, could share here and then people can launch into him how they want when we get together. I'm certain it would be attractive to forum members, particularly chronic detractors like Corndogger and others who will have questions for him that he can answer in public and over a conversation. We could actually do something similar for other candidates (who have announced and are not waiting in the shadows, that is). This would actually make the next meet-up meaningful in a different way.

[rotten42]

Originally Posted by suburbia

That would certainly help those who want to replace the mayor, no doubt.

His comments in the scrums yesterday and the day before (I posted the videos I found on YouTube) were interesting that he said he will do his utmost best to speak to any groups of people - just ask. That's why the comment about access from Rick Bell was so ironic. There has never been a Calgary Mayor as accessible as Nenshi. Maybe the forum should invite him to the next meet up and people can converse with him directly (unless anyone sees this as a negative)?

Bigtime/Josh/others - you probably know how best the mechanism works. Could you investigate? If he is warm to it, could share here and then people can launch into him how they want when we get together. I'm certain it would be attractive to forum members, particularly chronic detractors like Corndogger and others who will have questions for him that he can answer in public and over a conversation. We could actually do something similar for other candidates (who have announced and are not waiting in the shadows, that is). This would actually make the next meet-up meaningful in a different way.

The issue isn't about accessibility. The issue is about preferred exclusive accessibility. Exactly the thing he got his panties in a knot over with Cal Wenzel and the residential developers. Hey, but commercial developers are different right? Get your head out of the sand. It is pure hypocrisy.

[MalcolmTucker]

So, the mayor being invited to a fundraising dinner for the United Way, where his presence might help sell tickets, is that wrong too? preferred exclusive accessibility!!!!

And if the voters want term limits, they have every right to stop electing people after they win two or three terms.

[rotten42]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

So, the mayor being invited to a fundraising dinner for the United Way, where his presence might help sell tickets, is that wrong too? preferred exclusive accessibility!!!!

And if the voters want term limits, they have every right to stop electing people after they win two or three terms.

Right...the mayor was just invited to this little innocent dinner. It had nothing to do with raising funds for his campaign while giving exclusive access to well healed businessmen. Fuck that! Again...change the venue from Kasian to the Home builders association and you Nensheep with have a stroke.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by outoftheice

I agree that term limits would be beneficial and I wouldn't be surprised if this gets voted in shortly after the next election. I think 3 terms is the perfect term limit for councillors. I'm curious as to why you feel the mayor should only have 2?

Mayor has more influence with administration than do councilors. At least that's my perception. If would make things easier for people we could knock councilors down to two terms as well.

I would actually like to stagger the terms of councilors by having elections every two years. Half the council would be elected each cycle. This would help to keep council more in tune with what the public wants. As for the elections cost a lot of money argument I'm sure some will bring up, my response to that is democracy isn't cheap and it's a small cost compared to how much the city spends now.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by rotten42

The issue isn't about accessibility. The issue is about preferred exclusive accessibility. Exactly the thing he got his panties in a knot over with Cal Wenzel and the residential developers. Hey, but commercial developers are different right? Get your head out of the sand. It is pure hypocrisy.

Of course it's pure hypocrisy but you're asking for the impossible when you ask his staunch supporters to get their heads out of the sand. Suburbia's Sarah Huckabee Sanders' like defense of Nenshi last night is perfect proof of that. Am I the only one really surprised that Suburbia is part of Nenshi's inner circle?

[fusili]

This thread is also a dumpster fire.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

So, the mayor being invited to a fundraising dinner for the United Way, where his presence might help sell tickets, is that wrong too? preferred exclusive accessibility!!!!

And if the voters want term limits, they have every right to stop electing people after they win two or three terms.

"The people must remain ever vigilant against tyrants masquerading as public servants."

George Washington

"My reason for fixing them in office for a term of years, rather than for life, was that they might have an idea that they were at a certain period to return into the mass of the people and become the governed instead of the governors which might still keep alive that regard to the public good that otherwise they might perhaps be induced by their independence to forget."

Thomas Jefferson

"Politicians are like diapers: they must be changed often and for the same reason."

Paul Harvey

[MalcolmTucker]

"My reason for fixing them in office for a term of years, rather than for life"
Is not about term limits, it is about limited terms.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

"My reason for fixing them in office for a term of years, rather than for life"
Is not about term limits, it is about limited terms.

It's about term limits. What Jefferson said wouldn't make sense the way you're interpreting it.

Thomas Jefferson, a student of European history, did not attend the Constitutional Convention of 1787. But upon his return from France, he took one look at the proposed Constitution and spotted a key omission.

“The…feature I dislike, and greatly dislike, is the abandonment in every instance of the necessity of rotation in office, and most particularly in the case of the President,” he wrote.

As President, Jefferson followed George Washington’s precedent by serving only two four-year terms. In a letter penned during his second term, he hoped the precedent would one day lead to a constitutional amendment limiting presidents to eight years in office. This became a reality when the 22nd amendment to the Constitution was ratified in 1951.

Source: https://www.termlimits.com/the-founders-and-term-limits-jefferson/

[artvandelay]

It sounds like Naheed circa '08-09 wouldn't have approved of future Naheed's fundraising tactics. I wonder what happened between then and now.

Originally Posted by Naheed Nenshi, Calgary Herald, 03 Dec 2009

The changes are indeed so small as to be meaningless. A $5,000 cap on donations is so high as to be no cap at all.

Originally Posted by Naheed Nenshi, Calgary Herald, 31 July 2008

Transparency, fairness and participation are the foundation of clean, effective government, and we can't have these without fixing the current non-system of campaign finance.

Let me be clear: I'm not suggesting that there is a simple quid pro quo in place. To argue, as Ald. Linda Fox-Mellway did in last week's Herald, that she can't be bought for $5,000 or $10,000 (would $20,000 be enough, one wonders? Does she ever have a sale?) is reductionist and absurd.

I'm not saying that just because Intergulf-Cidex donated $18,000 to the mayor's campaign, making them the second-largest of his donors, that the city then bought their entire development in Montreux for affordable housing. Yes, that looks bad, but it was also a good decision.

I am saying that Intergulf-Cidex and, indeed, the entire development industry, have the ear of city council. Their phone calls get answered. They can take a meeting with most council members virtually any time they like. Normal citizens don't get this privilege, and to argue that the privilege is not related to the donations is naive.

Originally Posted by Naheed Nenshi, Calgary Herald, 31 July 2008

We need six changes, and we need them now:

1. Limits on contributions. The amount is up for debate, but $1,000 or $1,500 per donor is a good start.

Sure, it's just a wording issue.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by rotten42

Fuck that!

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Of course it's pure hypocrisy but you're asking for the impossible when you ask his staunch supporters to get their heads out of the sand.

Originally Posted by artvandelay

It sounds like Naheed circa '08-09 wouldn't have approved of future Naheed's fundraising tactics.

Sounds like you also agree with inviting him to a forum meet up so you can question him directly, or am I sensing defensive cowardliness at the possibility of actually speaking to him? LOL!