Archive for September, 2009
Why I Support Banning Developers From Donating to Municipal Candidates – Exhibit A
This bizarre proposal to demolish an occupied heritage building that is currently serving its purpose to build a condo development that does not comply with current planning rules, and frankly isn’t practical enough to make sense is a pretty clear example of why developers should not be allowed to donate to municipal campaigns.
Planning staff at City Hall did not endorse the concept stating quite rightly that failing to uphold the planning by-laws would set a negative precedent and undermine their purpose. They were correct, the political decision by the Toronto and East York Community Council to overrule the professional staff in the planning department was not correct.
While I support intensification of the downtown core, I strongly support preserving our architectural legacy and believe all planning must be realistic. Having a building with absolutely no parking available on a street where no parking is available is a bad idea. Demolishing a well maintained, well used heritage building to accommodate a building that does not meet the legal requirements of planning in our City is a bad idea. Having City Councillors overrule professionals to assist a developer in getting around the rules is even worse.
There needs to be a clear separation between development proposals and municipal councillors. That’s why we have a planning department. Councillors should set the Official Plan with planning staff and then stick to it for the next few years and refuse to bow to pressure from folks who want to do something that is in their best financial interest, but not in the interest of our City.
In short, Councillors should set policy, planners should evaluate projects and developers shouldn’t be able to weasel their way between the two.
For more about this read: ‘Car-free’ condo: 42 storeys, no parking. – Toronto Star
8 Comments »By-Election Excellent Opportunity For Voters to Judge ‘Summer of Scandal’
I am going to start by saying that I love the idea of elections. Having been involved in many I appreciate the amount of work that politicos put into ‘framing’ election issues for voters, and all the behind the scenes work that goes into elections as well. While I do believe the actions of many, in particular some incumbent’s inappropriate use of public resources for partisan, negatively impacts the ability of the people’s messages to be heard – my hope is that St. Paul’s will be different.
With the impending HST – a tax that will screw up any economic recovery underway when it adds 8% to the cost of nearly everything; the eHealth scandal; OLG scandal; and the other issues all flapping around with blame squarely laying at the Premier’s feet – I’m not sure the Liberals could win this under any circumstances.
I have gone canvassing in St. Paul’s and the voters are angry. The HST, government waste and arrogance seem to be the key drivers of anger with the Premier. Eric Hoskins’ name recognition is weak and voters seem fairly neutral on the merits of his candidacy.
Liberals will say, ‘But Eric Hoskins is a really good guy’. That isn’t a point I will argue, but politically speaking he is proving to be a coward. No one deserves to be represented by a coward. Who seeks to be a voice for a community hides from a debate? What Liberal panders to a large ethic community by promising to support religious funding for private religious schools – especially after McGuinty’s handling and voters response to that issue in the last election? We all know that isn’t a position that is going to change simply because Hoskins thinks voters are stupid enough to believe his election will change the ridicule the Premier put that idea and its supporters through during the 2007 campaign. It goes deeper – this is the second time Eric Hoskins as sought office this year, and neither time has been in his community. What does Eric Hoskins have against local representation? A community needs a strong, local voice. One that is prepared to stand up and go to bat for the residents. No one cares about the anti-democratic mechanisms and fear tactics party leaders call ‘caucus solidarity’ – they want a voice for them. As Rick Johnson said in the last By-election Ontario saw ‘local matters’.
When a government is failing it’s people, it should be replaced. There is no doubt Premier McGuinty has failed beyond belief in his second term. Voters in St. Paul’s have an early opportunity to tell the Premier enough is enough and this is one former Ontario Liberal hoping they do just that this Thursday. I know members of Save the Toronto Bluffs – an organization close to my heart will be out speaking with voters between now and then about the importance of a local voice, and the Liberal party’s refusal to allow any communities to have one.
While I do not hold a membership in any provincial political party, I frankly hope Sue-Ann Levy cleans the Liberal’s clock in this fight, and will be doing my part to ensure that Toronto has at least one MPP in advance of the next election who has the courage to stand up and defend the interests of real people against the abuses of this government.
9 Comments »Smitherman or Tory Pre-Election Decision Highlights the Problem
Simply put, our municipal election system sucks. There are some very real challenges in guarenteeing a free and fair municipal election. There are legitimacy concerns in the eyes of some when turn out is so low. Many aspects of election procedure in Toronto favour incumbents and hurt the chances of a first time challenger to an incumbent Mayor or Councillor. There is also the flagrant use of staff, promotional materials and media advantage that sees incumbents able to steam roll weaker opponents. I recall meeting many voters in the 2006 election who told me that the Constituency Assistant to the Councillor for their area was making calls on behalf of the incumbent. The idea being if the incumbent had helped someone, the staff member who had done the helping would call the voter to remind them and put some pressure on them to support their boss. Not only does it breach ethics rules at City Hall, it’s also so transparently gross, I don’t know how anyone with any sense of integrity can do it. That being said, it demonstrates how perverted our municipal democracy has become.
I have a number of views on reform to the municipal system that I would support. Broadly speaking – a broader ability for Toronto residents to participate through ease of registration, location of polling stations, earlier access to the voters list, and a ‘Challenger’s advocate’ working at City Hall ensuring no abuse of public resources or unfair incumbency advantage are used by incumbents. But in this post, I’m going to focus on the voting system as it seems to the the unmentioned reality that is causing this ‘Smitherman/Tory’ thing in the first place.
The voting system allows for a first past the post result that allows someone to win office in an election where a minority of voters vote, and a minority of the minority who chose to vote elect the winner. David Miller’s 2006 election saw him win with 56% of ballots cast by just 39% of the eligible voting population. 56% of the vote in the context of the 2006 municipal election represents the will of just 22% of the eligible voting public.
In an election where nearly forty candidates sought the office of Mayor, and at least three of them staged very serious campaigns – first past the post isn’t cutting it. Consider that 61% of voters are so disallusioned they currently don’t bother to vote. Is the solution for two serious candidates to get together and decide how best to solidify the 1 in 5 Torontonians it would take to defeat the current Mayor ? Or, is the solution to adopt a voting system where voters could rank candidates for Mayor, Council and Trustee by order of preference, embracing the diversity of grassroots opinion found in a municipal election?
I expect no one will be surprised to know casting a ballot for George Smitherman isn’t something I am prepared to do under any circumstances. He and Dalton McGuinty are equally responsible for my current status as a political independent as it relates to the Provincial scene. Smitherman attacked my community, calling residents absurd, accused them of working themselves into an ‘artificial lather’ in addition to lying about the conduct of Toronto Hydro. He politicized an issue we had not, he attacked us as he tried to legislate our rights to participate in our democracy, through decision making, away.
The day before Smitherman’s first attack on Scarborough residents – I still considered myself an Ontario Liberal and was preparing to renew my membership. The day after, with virtually no time to think about it, as I was doing a flurry of press to defend my community, I wrote:
“As someone who has traditionally been a Liberal both in the card carrying sense and the ideological sense, being pitted between my community and party is not a comfortable position to be in. I joined the Liberal Party when I was 14. I came home from the hospital to Guildwood. Choosing between the two was not difficult. It was principled.” On the Conservative Payroll? NIMBY? Nuclear Lobbyist? Unemployed and Without a Life? No, Not Me. – February 11th 2009
My refusal to support George Smitherman for any electoral office is equally principled.
I don’t want a backroom deal to deprive me of my right to have a choice between all interested candidates for Mayor, while knowing my vote won’t be either ‘wasted’ or part of a vote split that elects the person I don’t want to office.
As I wait for Smitherman and Tory to work it out, I can only imagine how positive an impact electoral reform at the municipal election would have at engaging voters, strengthening our democracy and ending the strangle hold incumbents have on democracy in our City.
I can say with some certainty, should George Smitherman seek the office of Mayor, I will be actively involved in that campaign in addition to the by-election to replace him in the legislature. I know I will not be alone. I encourage anyone else with strong views on this to contact me and get involved in the future of our City.
My hope is that our next municipal council, or provincial legislature will decide after this election to modernize our voting system in Toronto, something I support and hope you do too.
No Comments »
