2014 Mayoral Election

[Jon Dalton]

BACKGROUNDER: Campaign Finances
January 30, 2014 · by specvotes

dollar-sign Mayor Bob Bratina’s $15,000 presentation on amalgamation this month prompted grumbling about the propriety of using City of Hamilton funds for what some councillors considered straight-up electioneering.

Bratina is viewed as a mayoralty candidate who hasn’t yet declared, and opponents objected to the use of his office budget to take care of an unfulfilled 2010 election promise. (See Andrew Dreschel column )

The situation prompts a look at what the rules actually are, and a review of what the major mayoralty candidates in Hamilton and Burlington spent in 2010.

Under the Municipal Elections Act, contributions can only be accepted and expenses incurred during the campaign period, which begins on the day the nomination is filed.

In Hamilton, only four candidates have filed for mayor: one-time councillor Don Ross, sitting councillor Brian McHattie, perennial candidate Michael Baldasaro and landscaping company owner Crystal Lavigne. Bratina has said he sees no reason not to run, and it is expected that former mayor Fred Eisenberger will also run.

The cost of running for mayor is high, but expenditures are governed by the Elections Act. All goods & services purchased or donated must be declared. Candidates can spend a maximum that’s based on a formula.

For mayors in every city, it’s $7,500 per candidate, plus 85 cents per elector. Here are the figures for major mayoralty candidates in 2010.
HAMILTON

Maximum allowed to spend: $308,312.

Bob Bratina: 52,684 votes, spent $103,565

Larry Di Ianni: 40,091votes, spent $224,282

Fred Eisenberger: 38,719 votes, spent $93,787
BURLINGTON

Maximum allowed to spend: $115,074

Rick Goldring: 21,797 votes, spent $98,182

Carol D’Amelio: 11,285 votes, spent $98,805

Cam Jackson: 10,055 votes, spent $82,500

Philip Papadopolous: 2,069 votes, spent $99,900

See more about Burlington election races at Joan Little’s column on thespec.com

http://specvotes.com/2014/01/30/back...aign-finances/

Apparently new candidate Crystal Lavigne is the owner of a local landscaping company? That should lend some financial / budgeting experience as an asset.

[ScreamingViking]

The latest Dreschel piece, this one is on Bratina


Dreschel: Bratina adept at the politics of division

Too bad there isn't such a thing as a Jell-O nail gun. If there was, it might actually be possible to pin Mayor Bob Bratina down when he indulges in one of his slippery political manoeuvres.

You know what I'm talking about.

A mayor who can say, in one breath, he's not out to rip Hamilton apart and, in the next, refuse to say he's against deamalgamation.

Or his oldie but goldie claim that a private investor gave him a $10 million commitment to the Pan Am stadium project and then minutes later deny having said it.

Well, Bratina is at it again.

This time he's skittering around the issue of the city's ward boundary review, suggesting on his blog at http://mayorbratina.com that it could lead to the creation of another inner city ward.

You probably don't need a directional arrow to tell you what he's up to. Yes, it a crafty variation on his old suburban vote-getting amalgamation trick.

Bratina suggests if an extra ward is added to the old city, the "very delicate balance" on council between the eight inner city votes and the seven suburban votes will be upset, taking away the mayor's ability to decide an issue in the case of a split vote.

Bratina says he proposed an amendment calling for public input into the review's terms of reference so people in the "amalgamated areas" could express their concerns.

He writes: "In any case, I still voted against the review along with Councillors Partridge, Pearson, Ferguson and Johnson."

Actually, he didn't. The record clearly shows he voted for the review.


Read the rest here: http://www.thespec.com/opinion-story...s-of-division/

[Dr Awesomesauce]

^I still question whether or not it's intentional. Either way, it's amazing to watch.

Part of me will be sad to see him leave municipal politics - I don't think he'll pull off this next election. I think many voters have now seen behind the curtain and despite that melodious voice and his background on CHML, the elderly may put their vote elsewhere.

To me, he's an amalgam of Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld: he's got a bit of swagger; he's really crusty; and he's a beer or two short of a six-pack.

This election plans to be fascinating!

[thistleclub]

With McHattie’s goal of a $250,000 campaign budget, it’s interesting to consider the efficiency of campaign spending.

2010 MUNICIPAL ELECTION

Bratina: Spent $103,565, garnered 52,684 votes = $1.96/vote

Di Ianni: Spent $224,282, garnered 40,091 votes, = $5.59/vote

Eisenberger: Spent $93,787, garnered 38,719 votes = $2.42/vote

Money definitely helps, but depending on your handicap and the way the ballot breaks, it might not be a decisive factor.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

^Interesting. DiIanni really went for it. I wondered how he got all those votes.

Methinks Bratina will have to up his spending this time round - hope his war chest doth overflow.

[thistleclub]

Date of entry is another consideration.

Eisenberger: Registered June 1, 2010 and spent $93,787 on a 145-day campaign at $714.24/day.

Diianni: Registered July 26, 2010 and spent $224,282 on a 91-day campaign at $2,464.64/day.

Bratina: Registered Sept 3, 2010 and spent $103,565 on a 52-day campaign at $1,991.64/day.

Assuming he sees it through, McHattie's 2014 campaign will be more than twice as long as Eisenberger's 2010 re-election bid.

[HillStreetBlues]

Originally Posted by Dr Awesomesauce

Part of me will be sad to see him leave municipal politics - I don't think he'll pull off this next election. I think many voters have now seen behind the curtain and despite that melodious voice and his background on CHML, the elderly may put their vote elsewhere.

I think this might be wishful thinking. While I’ll be hoping for the same, I’d give him better-than-even odds at re-election. This isn’t based on any particular knowledge and feel free to correct me if this is wrong, but I feel like the incumbent has a heightened advantage in a crowded field.

I can’t see who would beat him. Not McHattie. Maybe Eisenberger.

Anyway, concur that it seems like an interesting race. We’ll have to get a pool going later this year when everyone has declared.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

Yeah, it's true that incumbents have an advantage in any election. But both McHattie and Eisenberger are known commodities, however, so we'll see. Speaking of Eisenberger, you just know that whole stadium fustercluck will be brought up time and time again by Bobra. It's going to be fun!

[ScreamingViking]

Bobra is starting to cover his bases. Now he has become champion for the lower city by speaking out against school closures (better late than never, I suppose )

Mayor criticizes Parkview, Sir John A., Delta closures
http://www.thespec.com/news-story/43...elta-closures/

And the man hasn't even registered yet. Who knows what he has in his election bag... a little something for everyone?

[CaptainKirk]

Originally Posted by Dr Awesomesauce

. Speaking of Eisenberger, you just know that whole stadium fustercluck will be brought up time and time again by Bobra. It's going to be fun!

I wouldn't if I were Bobra.

If anything, I think people hate the new stadium and its location, and Eisenberger was proven right when the Tiger-Cats settled for a site they lambasted and blamed for their losses all these years.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

He could use the issue to illustrate his ability to 'get things done.' It will come up; the question is what they do with it. I'm not sure Eisenberger can put a positive spin on the West Harbour stadium plan, no matter how many of us saw it that way. Anyway, we shall see.

[CaptainKirk]

Originally Posted by Dr Awesomesauce

He could use the issue to illustrate his ability to 'get things done.' It will come up; the question is what they do with it. I'm not sure Eisenberger can put a positive spin on the West Harbour stadium plan, no matter how many of us saw it that way. Anyway, we shall see.

Gotta disagree my good Doctor.

Council was duped into believing that there was only enough money for half of a stadium. The reason the acquiesced to the old site was because they were led to believe that the north stands were to remain intact, and that there was only enough money to demolish and reconstruct the south stands.

Council approved the old IWS site, and then presto! All of a sudden there is enough money to build a whole new stadium.


Remember the Tiger-Cats were all about the driveway to driveway experience, high way visibility, lots of parking and all that went out the window. It didn't matter after all.

Eisenberger can rightfully argue WH is close to the 403, and downtown has tons of parking within walking distance, neither of which can be said for the current IWS site.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

I absolutely agree with you. I just happen to think it'll be easier for BoBra to spin IWS as a victory. For example, he could regurgitate all the BS the TiCats have already spewed, like...

- Eisenberger didn't involve the TiCats in choosing the West Harbour site
- Eisenberger gave the TiCats a de facto ultimatum
- Eisenberger then forced the TiCats to look outside the city for a stadium site (i.e. Aldershot)
- Eisenberger forced the team to consider moving the team (BoBra 'saved' the day with the IWS site)
...and on and on and on.

All the other things you mention are true but in an election scenario, can Eisenberger get those facts out as neat, little sound bites? Even the most ardent TiCats fan is a little confused about what actually took place considering how adroitly Mitchell and Young twisted that whole process. The average TiCats fan is also very forgiving and may see Eisenberger as an enemy to the club. I dunno...

It may not be an election issue at all. Or if it is, perhaps Eisenberger could actually benefit from it. But he'd better be sure to have some clear answers for those potential accusations. If not, BoBra will look like a winner.

[thistleclub]

Poll rates “likability” of possible Hamilton mayors
(specvotes.com, Joan Walters, Feb 14 2014)

A telephone survey asking Hamiltonians to rate the “likability” of seven local politicians set talk ablaze Friday at the water cooler and on social media over who’s doing polling for the mayor’s race.

The automated poll asks voter a series of questions to rate or compare Councillors Tom Jackson, Lloyd Ferguson, Terry Whitehead, incumbent mayor Bob Bratina, mayoralty candidate Brian McHattie, prospective candidate Fred Eisenberger and former mayor Larry Di Ianni.

Di Ianni – defeated by Bratina in the 2010 municipal vote – went on Twitter early Friday to disclaim any knowledge (or interest) in the matter.

Only McHattie – among the group named in the survey – is a registered mayoralty candidate, although it’s anticipated that Eisenberger will also run for mayor. Bratina has so far only said he sees no reason not to run.

Both Whitehead and Ferguson also said Friday they were not behind the poll, conducted by National Public Research Canada.

The poll focused on how voters would look at a candidate for mayor. It asked respondents to rate their familiarity with each of the politicians, from unfamiliar to very familiar. Likability was rated from favourable to very unfavourable.

The survey also wanted to know who the respondent would be most likely to vote for if an election were held today, and then who the person’s second choice would be.

[bigguy1231]

I was one of the people surveyed. I rated McHattie the most likable even though I have no intention of voting of him. Why, just to give him some false hope if the results ever become public.

[durandy]

McHattie's very likable, he's just not a leader (inasmuch as a mayor leads anything)

[Dr Awesomesauce]

^Just out of curiosity, who among our recent Mayors would you describe as being 'a leader'? It's a bit subjective.

[matt602]

I can't say any of them fit that bill. I would vote for McHattie as a progressive, urban candidate but I can't remember the last time a mayoral candidate struck me as a "leader".

[SteelTown]

Take away his political views I do like Di Ianni's leadership skills. Before council meeting he would often have each councillor at his office and try to get a majority vote on each item. Often there were shouting matches in his office, but I rather have that in the Mayors office than in the council chamber.

Eisenberger did the opposite and you can see the mess that lead to, council voted against all of his pilot projects and council meetings were chaotic, often time councillors wondered what they just voted for, example would be the garbage waste.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

I was one of the people surveyed. I rated McHattie the most likable even though I have no intention of voting of him. Why, just to give him some false hope if the results ever become public.

That was so "big" of you

Have they figured out who launched this survey?