Thank you Mr. Joe Fiorito !
---------------------------
The High Cost of Running for Council
By Joe Fiorito, City Columnist THE TORONTO STAR - Wednesday, April 6, 2011
weblink
Ken Wood sat in the Tim’s at Lansdowne and College with a binder, a sheaf of papers, a cup of coffee and a plate of humble pie on the table in front of him.
Ken ran for city council in Ward 18 and he never stood a chance. That’s not the point — that’s never the point — but now he’s in a jam because his backers are out of pocket, and they’re miffed.
First things first.
His bona fides? “I remember going to a free trade protest in Quebec City and getting tear-gassed. And I was at the convention that elected Trudeau.”
He was beaten by police at a rally in Toronto in 2001, after which he sued and was awarded a tidy settlement. Oh, and he chained himself to a tree during the construction mess on Lansdowne Ave. a couple of years ago; he saved the tree.
Not bad bona fides.
Why did he run? “I’d had some issues in the neighbourhood, and my councillor wasn’t much help.” So Ken, who is on disability, decided to enter the race. It cost him a hundred bucks.
“It gave me a platform to talk about poverty, housing — issues that don’t get addressed.” The ward skews poor. “Maybe poverty isn’t being talked about because poor people aren’t running . . . I figured I could reinforce the messages.” Which is what he did, at four or five public debates.
How did it feel to debate? “It was a bit scary. I wondered whether I should polish a speech. In the end I decided that I know my issues, so I just responded from the heart.”
How did his heart poll? “I got 101 votes; less than one guy who didn’t even campaign — a guy who had no flyers, didn’t come to the debates, and no one could reach him.”
Ken’s votes are not the point, the process is the point. On election day, he was his own scrutineer; later that evening, he attended a party held by the Green candidate and talked politics all night.
What did he learn about running? “That it’s not as difficult as most people might think.”
His problem? “When I registered, I attended the city’s orientation session. They talked about donor contributions, how people would get 75 per cent of their donations back.”
Ken cheerfully raised $745 from four donors: his sister, a friend, a neighbour, and a guy he knows who is a fellow cat rescue volunteer.
“I couldn’t afford signs. I ran flyers off at home, or at the copy shop. I spent the money on ink and paper, and on my cellphone — a pay-as-you-go plan.”
He spent precisely what he raised, but when he went to file his expenses in time for the March 24 deadline, he was reminded that he had to submit an audited statement if his contributors were to get their rebates.
The rules, according to city by-laws: “Candidates are required to hire an auditor if they are:
• participating in the contribution rebate programme (mayor and councillors only)
• accepting contributions or incurring expenses over $10,000.” (end italics)
Ken said, “I read that as not a worry because I wasn’t over $10,000.” An innocent, but costly, mistake. “I was told there’s no appeal.”
He has filed provisionally, and has until September; but an audited statement would cost him $500 and he isn’t sure if he can raise the money.
He’d be grateful if council would consider changing the audit rule from “will require” to “may require,” which is how the province does it.
Why should council make the change? Because we don’t need barriers to democracy in Toronto.
Joe Fiorito appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Email: jfiorito@thestar.ca
-----------
Update: Some followup from the article release... (Still feels strange to be heard)
Tweet: 416647905 @KenWood_ward18 good article, i usually rag on Fiorito, but i appreciate ur plight,i'm willing to donate some $ if needed #topoli #tocouncil
Tweet: 416647905 @TOMayorFord If you can do something to fix this, please do. Thank you. http://tinyurl.com/3e49wgk #ward18 #topoli #TOCouncil
Tweet: rbmorra @KenWood_ward18 Why don't you get @Ward18AnaBailao working on this very worthy issue! #ward18
(Note: I spoke with her and she is looking into it. Also I hope Joe Mihevc and Josh Matlow will help)
A comment in the Star: A nice guy. Ken Wood sounds honest and sincere and what’s more he really seems to care about the issues - in other words a nice guy. Unfortunately and in the traditional sense nice guys come where? LAST!! Good luck Mr. Wood - don’t give up the fight - remember, the current administration at City Hall is not philosophically in tune with the issue’s you care about - the poor and the disadvantaged!! adrian
------
UPDATE (April 18): Since the Star article, I have had 2 other people contact me that are in the same boat. No doubt there are othere (47 people did not file in time for the March 24th deadline - speculating whether it was because of this discouragement)
Showing posts with label about running. Show all posts
Showing posts with label about running. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Closing the Election Campaign
My Campaign Literature From the Election Campaign
Someone suggested I should have posted my campaign literature on the blog, as a kind of record of why I was running and what ideas/issues I had hoped to have an impact on. Here they are:
My First Attempts, using the "Tree Guy" photo one of the newspapers published when I chained myself to a tree to save it from clear cutting during the Lansdowne narrowing fiasco in 2007 (you could say I fought city hall and - surprisingly - won!):
The business card I took to using.... >
Text of the very first Pamphlet I Had Sent Out: CONTENT !
I am running as a candidate for Toronto City Councillor for our ward because I believe we need someone who not only listens to our residents but also informs them of city actions that concern them and consults before actions that affect us are taken. Please support me.
THE ISSUES:
* RESPECT FOR RESIDENTS: We need to consult more with people before actions are taken
* TAXES and BUDGETS: We need to become better, smarter and more open at planning as a city
* DEMOCRACY: We need more fairness in how we elect those who represent us. More choice. Term limits.
* BETTER QUALITY OF LIFE: We need to make our city more pleasant to live in. Better parks like Dufferin Grove that allow community involvement. More accessible, low cost and reliable public transit. Bike lanes that share the road intelligently with cars. Respect for pedestrians. Cleaner air, electric not diesel trains. Protect housing for families and tenants. Build safer, more secure communities. Better animal control and pet bylaws.
* POVERTY, HUNGER, HOMELESSNESS: We need to take more steps to reduce poverty, hunger and homelessness in our city. Too many of our neighbours are suffering. Many are working, but still poor. Food banks are being overwhelmed and are just a bandaid solution. There are still too many without a home.
ELECTION and WARD INFORMATION:
VOTING day is Monday, October 25, 2010. In the last election (2006), only 35% of eligible voters actually cast a ballot while city-wide turnout was only 39%. Please VOTE ! Election signs are not permitted until October 4
Did You Know?
- One-third of the households in our ward have an income under $30,000.
- There are over 180 languages spoken in Toronto. In our ward, less than 40% of the people said English was their mother tongue. 25% of the ward speaks Portugese. Other languages include Spanish, Chinese, Italian, Vietnamese, French, Punjabi. We are, like the whole city, very diverse and come from different cultures
I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT: Donations may be sent to: Ken Wood, 3-355 Lansdowne Avenue, Toronto Ontario M6H 3Y2. Maximum donation allowable is $750, but any amount is welcome. Receipts will be given and rebates up to 75% on donations over $25 will be refunded by the city within a year. You may also contribute goods and services. I also welcome volunteers to help with the campaign. Thank you for your attention. - KEN WOOD
----
It would actually be a good idea, it occurs to me, to have ALL candidates who are elected required by law to post their election campaign materials, complete with promises, so we can all hold the winners accountable !
----
As I posted in this blog just prior to voting day:
KEN WOOD - I'll leave it to others to describe or remember me in this election.
All I know is that when I first registered to run 20 minutes before we knew if Giambrone would run in the ward or for mayor, what I wanted was:
1. To See Adam Giambrone out of office (Thanks, Adam)
2. To have an impact on the issues and nature of the debate in the ward
3. To offer a real choice to voters of someone truly independent
4. To contribute to increasing voter response and turnout
5. To test myself to see if I could be more than what I was
---
On the Junction Triangle website , I was happy to get this praise:
"Most Surprising Platform: Hands down this belongs to Ken Wood. His platform was the most detailed on municipal issues that relate to the average citizen. When Ken calms down and stops chaining himself to things he has some good ideas. I found that I agreed with almost all of his ideas to some extent and I encourage people to look again. If he stays focused on ideas then he has something to contribute via his blog. Special kudos for being basically the only candidate to state clearly that poverty is an issue and that not all ward residents have the relative luxury that I have. As well if we had a Hunter S. Thompson look a like award he would get it." By Scott D.
Someone suggested I should have posted my campaign literature on the blog, as a kind of record of why I was running and what ideas/issues I had hoped to have an impact on. Here they are:
My First Attempts, using the "Tree Guy" photo one of the newspapers published when I chained myself to a tree to save it from clear cutting during the Lansdowne narrowing fiasco in 2007 (you could say I fought city hall and - surprisingly - won!):
Using the 'new me' photo, after a $67 hairtcut, hair colouring and shave... I agonized over this decision to 'look normal' like other candidates, when why I was running was to represent the marginalized poor.
Text of the very first Pamphlet I Had Sent Out: CONTENT !
I am running as a candidate for Toronto City Councillor for our ward because I believe we need someone who not only listens to our residents but also informs them of city actions that concern them and consults before actions that affect us are taken. Please support me.
THE ISSUES:
* RESPECT FOR RESIDENTS: We need to consult more with people before actions are taken
* TAXES and BUDGETS: We need to become better, smarter and more open at planning as a city
* DEMOCRACY: We need more fairness in how we elect those who represent us. More choice. Term limits.
* BETTER QUALITY OF LIFE: We need to make our city more pleasant to live in. Better parks like Dufferin Grove that allow community involvement. More accessible, low cost and reliable public transit. Bike lanes that share the road intelligently with cars. Respect for pedestrians. Cleaner air, electric not diesel trains. Protect housing for families and tenants. Build safer, more secure communities. Better animal control and pet bylaws.
* POVERTY, HUNGER, HOMELESSNESS: We need to take more steps to reduce poverty, hunger and homelessness in our city. Too many of our neighbours are suffering. Many are working, but still poor. Food banks are being overwhelmed and are just a bandaid solution. There are still too many without a home.
ELECTION and WARD INFORMATION:
VOTING day is Monday, October 25, 2010. In the last election (2006), only 35% of eligible voters actually cast a ballot while city-wide turnout was only 39%. Please VOTE ! Election signs are not permitted until October 4
Did You Know?
- One-third of the households in our ward have an income under $30,000.
- There are over 180 languages spoken in Toronto. In our ward, less than 40% of the people said English was their mother tongue. 25% of the ward speaks Portugese. Other languages include Spanish, Chinese, Italian, Vietnamese, French, Punjabi. We are, like the whole city, very diverse and come from different cultures
I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT: Donations may be sent to: Ken Wood, 3-355 Lansdowne Avenue, Toronto Ontario M6H 3Y2. Maximum donation allowable is $750, but any amount is welcome. Receipts will be given and rebates up to 75% on donations over $25 will be refunded by the city within a year. You may also contribute goods and services. I also welcome volunteers to help with the campaign. Thank you for your attention. - KEN WOOD
----
It would actually be a good idea, it occurs to me, to have ALL candidates who are elected required by law to post their election campaign materials, complete with promises, so we can all hold the winners accountable !
----
As I posted in this blog just prior to voting day:
KEN WOOD - I'll leave it to others to describe or remember me in this election.
All I know is that when I first registered to run 20 minutes before we knew if Giambrone would run in the ward or for mayor, what I wanted was:
1. To See Adam Giambrone out of office (Thanks, Adam)
2. To have an impact on the issues and nature of the debate in the ward
3. To offer a real choice to voters of someone truly independent
4. To contribute to increasing voter response and turnout
5. To test myself to see if I could be more than what I was
---
On the Junction Triangle website , I was happy to get this praise:
"Most Surprising Platform: Hands down this belongs to Ken Wood. His platform was the most detailed on municipal issues that relate to the average citizen. When Ken calms down and stops chaining himself to things he has some good ideas. I found that I agreed with almost all of his ideas to some extent and I encourage people to look again. If he stays focused on ideas then he has something to contribute via his blog. Special kudos for being basically the only candidate to state clearly that poverty is an issue and that not all ward residents have the relative luxury that I have. As well if we had a Hunter S. Thompson look a like award he would get it." By Scott D.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Toronto City Elections Discriminates Against the Poor
I'm In A Funk - Poor People Discouraged From Running
When I ran for election in ward 18, it was because I wanted to connect to my community and have an impact on the issues raised during the city election campaign. I had no illusions of winning first time running, but thought I had some perspectives and ideas to offer, and I wanted in on the public debates.
I was testing myself, but also testing whether someone not part of any partisan party elites or having networked money backers could really run and make some small difference. To put it another way, I wondered if someone in the low income bracket (ie., "poor") could participate in the democratic process by more than just by voting. My initial take was yes, since it seemed anyone with $100 could run for city councillor ($200 for mayor).
My conclusion, sadly, is that the system is definitely biased against those of us considered 'poor', which according to various statistics is somewhere around 15-20% of the general population.
* The biggest shock I got when I went to file my campaign expenses (and why I have been in a funk for a while) is that in order to participate in the "Contribution Rebate Program" (where the city refunds about 75% of any political donation), was that I needed to have an AUDITED financial statement by a licenced auditor. This was not something explained at the initial city hall orientation meeting; I thought it applied evenly to all candidates.
That means, of the $745 I had in donations and ran on (against partisan party competitors who easily raised the $28,747.30 maximums allowed), the current Toronto city bylaw expects me to pay an auditor between $500-$1000 to audit my meager revenue and expenditures. Anyone can see this makes no sense and is inherently unfair.
So, when I went to file my financial statement, I was not allowed to arrange for contribution rebates to be paid out. Thus, the four donors who I had honestly thought would get city funded rebates paid out by this September will NOT be paid by the city.
Now I am in a dilemma of how someone like me, who is on Ontario Disability and has about $1,000 a month to pay rent, food and all other expenses is ever going to come up with the $518.75 that my four contributors were promised and expecting. I am left feeling embarrassed and depressed that this situation is happening. I am also angry that the city has not thought their bylaws and procedures through to be inclusive in the democratic process.
As I wrote on my filing:
As someone on low income (Ontario Disability), I protest strongly that the requirement for me to pay a licenced auditor (est. cost $500-$1000) is at its core, anti-democratic. The net effect is to disenfranchise a large segment of the population who must exist on low income. Therefore, the city bylaw requiring this is discriminatory in the extreme. - Ken Wood March 24, 2011
----
Note: I spoke with my duly elected City Councillor, Ana Bailao, about this on March 24th and she has agreed to look into the bylaw at my request. I am hoping that there will be a change to eliminate this roadblock to democracy.
------
* This is from an email I received from the Toronto city elections office:
Candidates participating in the Contribution Rebate Program must submit:
- Financial Statement;
- Auditor's Report (provided by a licensed auditor);
- Photocopies of expense invoices (the Clerk will not accept originals);
- Pink copies of Contribution Rebate forms (if using EFFS, these are submitted electronically and do not need to be provided with the financial statement); and
- Any surplus reported on the financial statement (cash, cheque, money order – payable to "Treasurer, City of Toronto").
If any of these documents are not submitted at the time of filing, contribution rebates will not be paid out.
---
Candidates NOT participating in the Contribution Rebate program must submit:
- Financial Statement;
- Auditor's Report (if raised or spent over $10,000); and
- Any surplus reported on the financial statement (cash, cheque, money order – payable to "Treasurer, City of Toronto").`
---
Notes: The city bylaw in question is No. 1257-2009 and the only reference to the suditor's report I find was 11 d) The Clerk is satisfied that the candidate has filed any financial statement AND AUDITOR REPORT ...
Reference is made to the Ontario provincial Municipal Elections Act 1996 which has a lot of legalese, but states this: "Exception re auditor’s report - (5) No auditor’s report is required if the total contributions received and total expenses incurred in the election campaign up to the end of the relevant period are each equal to or less than $10,000. 1996, c. 32, Sched., s. 78 (5)."
Thus, there is nothing provincially that requires an audited report.
It is only a city requirement for an audited report to participate in the donor contribution program !
When I ran for election in ward 18, it was because I wanted to connect to my community and have an impact on the issues raised during the city election campaign. I had no illusions of winning first time running, but thought I had some perspectives and ideas to offer, and I wanted in on the public debates.
I was testing myself, but also testing whether someone not part of any partisan party elites or having networked money backers could really run and make some small difference. To put it another way, I wondered if someone in the low income bracket (ie., "poor") could participate in the democratic process by more than just by voting. My initial take was yes, since it seemed anyone with $100 could run for city councillor ($200 for mayor).
My conclusion, sadly, is that the system is definitely biased against those of us considered 'poor', which according to various statistics is somewhere around 15-20% of the general population.
* The biggest shock I got when I went to file my campaign expenses (and why I have been in a funk for a while) is that in order to participate in the "Contribution Rebate Program" (where the city refunds about 75% of any political donation), was that I needed to have an AUDITED financial statement by a licenced auditor. This was not something explained at the initial city hall orientation meeting; I thought it applied evenly to all candidates.
That means, of the $745 I had in donations and ran on (against partisan party competitors who easily raised the $28,747.30 maximums allowed), the current Toronto city bylaw expects me to pay an auditor between $500-$1000 to audit my meager revenue and expenditures. Anyone can see this makes no sense and is inherently unfair.
So, when I went to file my financial statement, I was not allowed to arrange for contribution rebates to be paid out. Thus, the four donors who I had honestly thought would get city funded rebates paid out by this September will NOT be paid by the city.
Now I am in a dilemma of how someone like me, who is on Ontario Disability and has about $1,000 a month to pay rent, food and all other expenses is ever going to come up with the $518.75 that my four contributors were promised and expecting. I am left feeling embarrassed and depressed that this situation is happening. I am also angry that the city has not thought their bylaws and procedures through to be inclusive in the democratic process.
As I wrote on my filing:
As someone on low income (Ontario Disability), I protest strongly that the requirement for me to pay a licenced auditor (est. cost $500-$1000) is at its core, anti-democratic. The net effect is to disenfranchise a large segment of the population who must exist on low income. Therefore, the city bylaw requiring this is discriminatory in the extreme. - Ken Wood March 24, 2011
----
Note: I spoke with my duly elected City Councillor, Ana Bailao, about this on March 24th and she has agreed to look into the bylaw at my request. I am hoping that there will be a change to eliminate this roadblock to democracy.
------
* This is from an email I received from the Toronto city elections office:
Candidates participating in the Contribution Rebate Program must submit:
- Financial Statement;
- Auditor's Report (provided by a licensed auditor);
- Photocopies of expense invoices (the Clerk will not accept originals);
- Pink copies of Contribution Rebate forms (if using EFFS, these are submitted electronically and do not need to be provided with the financial statement); and
- Any surplus reported on the financial statement (cash, cheque, money order – payable to "Treasurer, City of Toronto").
If any of these documents are not submitted at the time of filing, contribution rebates will not be paid out.
---
Candidates NOT participating in the Contribution Rebate program must submit:
- Financial Statement;
- Auditor's Report (if raised or spent over $10,000); and
- Any surplus reported on the financial statement (cash, cheque, money order – payable to "Treasurer, City of Toronto").`
---
Notes: The city bylaw in question is No. 1257-2009 and the only reference to the suditor's report I find was 11 d) The Clerk is satisfied that the candidate has filed any financial statement AND AUDITOR REPORT ...
Reference is made to the Ontario provincial Municipal Elections Act 1996 which has a lot of legalese, but states this: "Exception re auditor’s report - (5) No auditor’s report is required if the total contributions received and total expenses incurred in the election campaign up to the end of the relevant period are each equal to or less than $10,000. 1996, c. 32, Sched., s. 78 (5)."
Thus, there is nothing provincially that requires an audited report.
It is only a city requirement for an audited report to participate in the donor contribution program !
Friday, February 4, 2011
Ana Bailao Having a Ruprecht Moment ?
Please - We Don't Need Another Liberal Photo-Op Queen/King
Ward18AnaBailao Ana Bailao Privileged to have the opportunity to participate in the 2011 Heart & Stroke Ontario Fundraiser event yesterday. http://bit.ly/gz5MH0%20#fb
First questions" Why was Ana there at Yonge-Dundas, shouldn't it have been that area's Councillor?
Second questions: Is she being taught to have her face out there as much as possible to duplicate do-nothing MPP Liberal Tony Ruprecht's astonishing ability to get re-elected - while doing nothing?
sigh...
* Update: Met with Ana today (Sat Feb 5) at her slightly hard to find, but excellent disabled access location at the Abrigo Centre ground floor of Dufferin Mall. She said she was at the photo op because she was in her office and Heart and Stroke organizers could not find anyone else. So, she did it as a favoursince any councillor has to be seen as a representative of the city.
By the way, Ana's assistants are very personable and accessible, particularly Michael Vieira. I pointed out that I heard from more than a few sources that people are a little surprised their councillor is so reachable - a good sign.
Ward18AnaBailao Ana Bailao Privileged to have the opportunity to participate in the 2011 Heart & Stroke Ontario Fundraiser event yesterday. http://bit.ly/gz5MH0%20#fb
First questions" Why was Ana there at Yonge-Dundas, shouldn't it have been that area's Councillor?
Second questions: Is she being taught to have her face out there as much as possible to duplicate do-nothing MPP Liberal Tony Ruprecht's astonishing ability to get re-elected - while doing nothing?
sigh...
* Update: Met with Ana today (Sat Feb 5) at her slightly hard to find, but excellent disabled access location at the Abrigo Centre ground floor of Dufferin Mall. She said she was at the photo op because she was in her office and Heart and Stroke organizers could not find anyone else. So, she did it as a favoursince any councillor has to be seen as a representative of the city.
By the way, Ana's assistants are very personable and accessible, particularly Michael Vieira. I pointed out that I heard from more than a few sources that people are a little surprised their councillor is so reachable - a good sign.
Friday, January 21, 2011
City Councillor Websites
Curious to See Who Has a Website?
(All Official City Councillor Contacts can be found HERE
Mayor Rob Ford = no
Councillors:
Ainslie = http://www.paulainslie.com/ Ward 43 Scarborough East
Augimeri = http://www.mariaaugimeri.com/ Ward 9 York Centre
Bailao = no Ward 18 Davenport (but she's working on one)
Berardinetti = no Ward 35 Scarborough Southwest
Caroll = http://www.shelleycarroll.ca/ Ward 33 Don Valley East
Cho = http://www.raymondcho.com/ Ward 42 Scarborough-Rouge River
Colle = no Ward 15 Eglinton-Lawrence
Davis = http://www.janetdavis.ca/ Ward 31 Beaches-East York
De Baermaeker = no Ward 38 Scarborough Centre
del Grande = http://www.mikedelgrande.ca/ Ward 39 Scarborough-Agincourt
Di Giorgio = http://www.fdigiorgio.ca/ Ward 12 York South-Weston
Doucette = no Ward 13 Parkdale-High Park
Filion = http://www.johnfilion.ca/ Ward 23 Willowdale
Fletcher = no Ward 30 Toronto-Danforth
Ford, Doug = no Ward 2 Etobicoke North
Fragedakis = councillor_fragedakis@toronto.ca Ward 29 Toronto-Danforth
Grimes = http://www.markgrimes.ca/ Ward 6 Etobicoke-Lakeshore
Holyday = no Ward 3 Etobicoke Centre
Kelly = http://www.normkelly.com/ Ward 40 Scarborough-Agincourt
Layton = no Ward 19 Trinity-Spadina
Lee = no Ward 41 Scarborough-Rouge River
Lindsay Luby = no Ward 4 Etobicoke Centre
Mammoliti = councillor_mammoliti@toronto.ca Ward 7 York West
Matlow = http://www.joshmatlow.ca/ Ward 22 St. Paul's
McConnell = pammcconnell.ca Ward 28 Toronto Centre-Rosedale
McMahon = no councillor_mcmahon@toronto.ca Ward 32 Beaches -East York weblink BlogTO
Mihevc = http://www.joemihevc.com/ Ward 21 St. Paul's
Milczyn = http://www.petermilczyn.com/ Ward 5 Etobicoke-Lakeshore
Minnan-Wong = http://www.denzilminnan-wong.com/ Ward 34 Don Valley East
Moeser = councillor_moeser@toronto.ca Ward 44 Scarborough East
Nunziata = no Ward 11 York South-Weston
Palacio = http://www.cesarpalacio.com/ Ward 17 Davenport
Parker = no Ward 26 Don Valley West
Pasternak = no Ward 10 York Centre
Perks = http://www.gordperks.ca/ Ward 14 Parkdale-High Park
Perruzza = no Ward 8 York West
Robinson = no Ward 25 Don Valley West
Shiner = no Ward 24 Willowdale
Stintz = http://www.karenstintz.com/ Ward 16 Eglinton-Lawrence
Thompson = no Ward 37 Scarborough Centre
Vaughan = http://www.ward20.ca/ Ward 20 Trinity-Spadina
Wong-Tam = no Ward 27 Toronto Centre-Rosedale
--------------
About HALF of our representatives have no constituency website listed on main city site, although several still have their election campaign websites active. Shouldn't there be a 'past due' date on those?
... and, of course, negligent and disrespectful Adam Giambrone still has a website active saying he is still councillor for ward 18... here sigh.
* Update: Here is an excellent video about social media, its use and misuse during the past city elections and comments about the usefulness of Twitter: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/12574267 Yorkville Media Centre 02/09/11, intelligent discussions by people like Dave Meslin, Jonathon Goldsbie, Kelly Grant, etc
Tweet: Jonathan Goldsbie In which @kellygrant1, @meslin, @sbaranski, @heybrettbell (aka @toelectionews), and I finally had a #voteTO debrief:.
In summary - social media was not a 'magic bullet' for anyone to get elected, although it might be the place to re-energize and involve young voters. The majority of voters who actually show up to vote are over 45 and not that connected.
(All Official City Councillor Contacts can be found HERE
Mayor Rob Ford = no
Councillors:
Ainslie = http://www.paulainslie.com/ Ward 43 Scarborough East
Augimeri = http://www.mariaaugimeri.com/ Ward 9 York Centre
Bailao = no Ward 18 Davenport (but she's working on one)
Berardinetti = no Ward 35 Scarborough Southwest
Caroll = http://www.shelleycarroll.ca/ Ward 33 Don Valley East
Cho = http://www.raymondcho.com/ Ward 42 Scarborough-Rouge River
Colle = no Ward 15 Eglinton-Lawrence
Davis = http://www.janetdavis.ca/ Ward 31 Beaches-East York
De Baermaeker = no Ward 38 Scarborough Centre
del Grande = http://www.mikedelgrande.ca/ Ward 39 Scarborough-Agincourt
Di Giorgio = http://www.fdigiorgio.ca/ Ward 12 York South-Weston
Doucette = no Ward 13 Parkdale-High Park
Filion = http://www.johnfilion.ca/ Ward 23 Willowdale
Fletcher = no Ward 30 Toronto-Danforth
Ford, Doug = no Ward 2 Etobicoke North
Fragedakis = councillor_fragedakis@toronto.ca Ward 29 Toronto-Danforth
Grimes = http://www.markgrimes.ca/ Ward 6 Etobicoke-Lakeshore
Holyday = no Ward 3 Etobicoke Centre
Kelly = http://www.normkelly.com/ Ward 40 Scarborough-Agincourt
Layton = no Ward 19 Trinity-Spadina
Lee = no Ward 41 Scarborough-Rouge River
Lindsay Luby = no Ward 4 Etobicoke Centre
Mammoliti = councillor_mammoliti@toronto.ca Ward 7 York West
Matlow = http://www.joshmatlow.ca/ Ward 22 St. Paul's
McConnell = pammcconnell.ca Ward 28 Toronto Centre-Rosedale
McMahon = no councillor_mcmahon@toronto.ca Ward 32 Beaches -East York weblink BlogTO
Mihevc = http://www.joemihevc.com/ Ward 21 St. Paul's
Milczyn = http://www.petermilczyn.com/ Ward 5 Etobicoke-Lakeshore
Minnan-Wong = http://www.denzilminnan-wong.com/ Ward 34 Don Valley East
Moeser = councillor_moeser@toronto.ca Ward 44 Scarborough East
Nunziata = no Ward 11 York South-Weston
Palacio = http://www.cesarpalacio.com/ Ward 17 Davenport
Parker = no Ward 26 Don Valley West
Pasternak = no Ward 10 York Centre
Perks = http://www.gordperks.ca/ Ward 14 Parkdale-High Park
Perruzza = no Ward 8 York West
Robinson = no Ward 25 Don Valley West
Shiner = no Ward 24 Willowdale
Stintz = http://www.karenstintz.com/ Ward 16 Eglinton-Lawrence
Thompson = no Ward 37 Scarborough Centre
Vaughan = http://www.ward20.ca/ Ward 20 Trinity-Spadina
Wong-Tam = no Ward 27 Toronto Centre-Rosedale
--------------
About HALF of our representatives have no constituency website listed on main city site, although several still have their election campaign websites active. Shouldn't there be a 'past due' date on those?
... and, of course, negligent and disrespectful Adam Giambrone still has a website active saying he is still councillor for ward 18... here sigh.
* Update: Here is an excellent video about social media, its use and misuse during the past city elections and comments about the usefulness of Twitter: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/12574267 Yorkville Media Centre 02/09/11, intelligent discussions by people like Dave Meslin, Jonathon Goldsbie, Kelly Grant, etc
Tweet: Jonathan Goldsbie In which @kellygrant1, @meslin, @sbaranski, @heybrettbell (aka @toelectionews), and I finally had a #voteTO debrief:.
In summary - social media was not a 'magic bullet' for anyone to get elected, although it might be the place to re-energize and involve young voters. The majority of voters who actually show up to vote are over 45 and not that connected.
Monday, October 25, 2010
AFTERMATH
TORONTO HAS SPOKEN
#WARD18:
1. Ana Bailao = 6,277 votes = 44 %
2. Kevin Beaulieu = 4,911 votes = 34% 1,366 votes behind
#WARD18:
1. Ana Bailao = 6,277 votes = 44 %
2. Kevin Beaulieu = 4,911 votes = 34% 1,366 votes behind
3. Frank de Jong = 869 votes = 6%
------------------ Top 3 candidates belong to political parties
4. Hema Vyas = 776 votes = 5%
5. Joe MacDonald = 669 votes = 5%
6. Kirk Russell = 326 votes = 2%
7. Nha Le = 154 votes = 1%
-- Above all had significant election signs and/or campaign offices
------------------ Top 3 candidates belong to political parties
4. Hema Vyas = 776 votes = 5%
5. Joe MacDonald = 669 votes = 5%
6. Kirk Russell = 326 votes = 2%
7. Nha Le = 154 votes = 1%
-- Above all had significant election signs and/or campaign offices
8. Ken Wood = 106 votes = 0.8%
9. Mohammed Muhit= 74 votes = 0.7% ???
9. Mohammed Muhit= 74 votes = 0.7% ???
... Mohammed did not even campaign, never met ???
10. Joanna Teliatnik= 70 votes = 0.5%
11. Doug Carroll = 54 votes = 0.4%
12. Abdirazak Elmi= 42 votes = 0.3%
----------- TOTAL VOTES = 14, 346 out of 26,737 eligible voters
10. Joanna Teliatnik= 70 votes = 0.5%
11. Doug Carroll = 54 votes = 0.4%
12. Abdirazak Elmi= 42 votes = 0.3%
----------- TOTAL VOTES = 14, 346 out of 26,737 eligible voters
VOTER TURNOUT = 53.7% !!!!!!!
Wow! Up from 35% last city election
---------------------------------------
So we could say Ana was elected by 23.5% of all eligible voters... if we assume that the 12,391 eligible voters who did NOT vote were of the 'None of the Above' persuasion.
--------------------------------
So.... Why did 12, 391 people decide NOT to vote at all?
Lazy? Just didn't care? Weren't aware an election was on? This baffles me.
---
I do know from anecdotal experience that at a few polling stations I saw voters come in to say "I just want to vote for Mayor" Maybe they didn't know any of the other candidates? I wonder if the mayor race captured their attention because the media kept saying it was so close.
--------
Assuming Ana expended the maximum limit allowed (she likely went way over), it cost her about $4.58 per vote she received. Just.... interesting.
------------
MAYORAL RACE:
1. Rob Ford = 381,803 votes = 47%
2. George Smitherman = 288, 104 = 36%
3. Joe Pantalone = 95, 0844 = 12%
----------------------- Again top 3 belong to political parties.
4. Rocco Rossi (who dropped out) = 5000 votes = 0.7% of vote followed by many others.
More resuilts here: http://election.toronto.ca/epr/eprDetail.do?000,#1288067357187
Himy Syed = 576 votes = 0.07% of vote
----------
CITY COUNCIL MAKEUP:
Ward 1 = Vincent Crisanti
Ward 2 = Doug Ford
Ward 3 = Doug Holyday
Ward 4 = Gloria Lindsay-Luby
Ward 5 = Peter Milczyn CLOSE VOTE
Ward 6 = Mark Grimes
Ward 7 = Giorgio Mammoliti
Ward 8 = Anthony Perruzza
Ward 9 = Maria Augimeri CLOSE VOTE
Ward10= James Pasternak
Ward11= Frances Nunziata
Ward12= Frank Di Giorgio
Ward13= Sarah Doucette
Ward14= Gord Perks
Ward15= Josh Colle
Ward16= Karen Stintz
Ward17= Cesar Palacio
Ward18= Ana Bailao
Ward19= Mike Layton
Ward20= Adam Vaughan
Ward21= Joe Mihevc
Ward22= Josh Matlow
Ward23= John Filion
Ward24= David Shiner
Ward25= Jaye Robinson
Ward26= John Parker
Ward27= Krystyn Wong-Tam
Ward28= Pam McConnell
Ward29= Mary Fragedakis
Ward30= Paula Fletcher
Ward31= Janet Davis
Ward32= Mary-Margaret McMahon
Ward33= Shelley Carroll
Ward34= Denzil Minnan-Wong
Ward35= Michelle Berardinetti
Ward36= Gary Crawford
Ward37= Michael Thompson
Ward38= Glenn De Baeremaeker
Ward39= Mike Del Grande
Ward40= Norm Kelly
Ward41= Chin Lee
Ward42= Raymond Cho
Ward43= Paul Ainslie
Ward44= Ron Moeser
-------------
Not a Ford Majority council, but some may change their colours to get plum positions the Mayor gets to dole out.... Wonder WHO will be TTC Chair? Mammolitti?
--------------
Women jumped from 22% to 33% of council.... will things be more compromise seeking rather than competitive?
Saturday, October 23, 2010
LAST CHANCE WEEKEND - and My Predictions
DESPERATION DRIVES DESIRE in Ward 18
... or is it the other way around?
It's Saturday before the Monday vote, and I see signs of desperation in campaigns everywhere.
* An old guy by himself in a purple Smitherman T-Shirt exorting busy shoppers outside No-Frills at Dundas and Lansdowne to vote for George....
* The sudden appearance of 'Ford for Mayor' signs in bizarre locations, outside coin car wash at College/Lansdowne, on vacant offices ... along with home-made signs on hydro poles telling us "Ford is the Man"
* A sudden influx of "newsletters" and announcements of endorsements that appear at first glance to be delivered by The Star or The Villager
* Mailboxes jammed with flyers, cards and notices trying to be seen and read
* Call after call on my home phone as well as my cell phone telling me why I should vote for Joe MacDonald in ward 18 or for Kirk Russell in ward 18... or Smitherman... or - you get the picture.
* The sudden appearance of never before heard Twitter accounts telling us why Kevin Beaulieu or Ana Bailao or Hema Vyas are the greatest
* Tweet after tweet reminding everyone who endorsed whom in this elections (even if the endorsements came at the last minute or from predictably partisan sources like the Liberal Toronto Star or the NDP Spacing or Now sites)
* Candidates standing outside busy subway stations in the cold rain trying to buttonhole voters who rush by heads bowed, their body language saying 'leave me alone'
What a strange thing an election campaign is!
10 months for candidates to get out their platform, be seen and heard. Some 70 debates for the Mayors (with not much new said after the first one) and 8 opportunities for voters in ward 18 to get out and see candidates. I hesitate to call them 8 "debates" because the first 6 were really coming out parties where everyone was oh-so-Canadian and polite. It wasn't until the 7th gathering - the on air live Rogers TV debate, "The Local Campaign" where any fireworks ensued and any attempts were made by candidates to challenge competitors' platforms. The very last debate ended with a vitriolic attack and the words, "...You lying bitch!" after some equally testy moments.
Throughout this campaign, everything has been defined by the MEDIA, not the candidates or the voters' wants. Big news media from the beginning told us there were only a handful of people running for Mayor, and we all watched as they self-destructed or dropped out one by one due to poor polling - usually an indication no one is interested in them. Yet, big news media kept the field restricted as it shrank to what most Torontonians think are choices between disasterous, terrible and least worst.
------
PREDICTABLE PREDICTIONS ?
In the local ward 18 campaign, Ana Bailao bought the election from even before day one. She lined up all her Liberal ducks and donors, raised at least twice the maximum expense limit and proceeded to deluge ward 18 mailboxes with expensive and glitzy multi-colour flyers, brochures, cards and letters. Of all the candidates, she must have done at least 20 mailings per household, judging by the mailboxes at my place. Ana used her big red Liberal machine to its maximum capacity and had kids erecting election signs before the start date/time and made sure her campaign was seen everywhere by the important people. She used the Portugese ethnic card to maximum advantage (possibly even exceeding use of resources, a la Senso) and got everyone to buy in that Ana is the only community activist and city builder worth paying attention to. She is the Goliath in the ward, but it will come with a price when she is elected: favours requires payback. Developers are 'partying hardy'over her positioning and licking their lips in anticipation. If she doesn't win this, I'll be surprised.
The likely second runner-up, Kevin Beaulieu, never really let himself be known to those that didn't already know him. As the NDP 'medium-big' party machine choice, his campaign seems terribly tightly controlled by backroom politicos and co-campaign managers. getting (and proudly proclaiming) both Adam Giambrone and Mayor Miller endorsements likely will hurt more than help him in a divided ward with pockets of real hate-ons for the Miller-Giambrone twins. During the campaign, I've learned Kevin does have a solid grasp of details of how city hall works, and likely some creative ideas of his own, but alas - his soul belongs to the NDP as much as Ana's belongs to the Liberals. If Kevin wins this, I'll be (slightly) less worried for ward 18.
Who comes in third or 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th,11th, 12th (Ward 18 can never say they didn't have choices!) is a toss-up.
While Hema Vyas is liked and loved by the Maytree-cultural-diversity-fixer lobby, as an individual she has not yet stood up to challenges. In a Metro Morning radio interview she admitted to being scared of debates. Not bad in itself as all candidates who are human have a twinge of fear at being in the spotlight, but in my view she has not performed well in challenging situations. Having seen countless council debates, our political representative has to have the warrior beast in them to stand up for the ward and for their principles. She needs a lot of seasoning; a campaign is not just about reading a resume or a list of endorsements.
Frank de Jong is probably the most comfortable campaigner I have ever met. I suppose he should be given his 13 or so runs at office at all levels and his stint as President of the Green Party, but I got a really good sense of him as a person. He really is WYSIWYG : "What You See Is What You Get" - a genuine person comfortable in his own skin and happy with himself. Would he ever get elected, I'm pretty sure voters would re-elect him and be happy with his work. Why he can't break the ice is a puzzle to me.
Kirk Russell is an enigma to me. He seems the dark horse candidate in the race. A serious contender, he went all out with e-signs, campaign office and web presence and was smart enough to get himself a Portugese speaking campaign manager with a lot of street smarts. Yet, although he seems to have a major problem with Ana Bailao (youtube videos calling her a liar, always on the scene when Ana did something scandalous or bordering on it) - he appears to be a fellow Liberal in many aspects of his candidacy. Contrast this with his last minute support of Rob Ford for Mayor (huh ?) and I really wonder what his game plan was. A nice guy whom I admire, but still don't get. Ana Bailao is being mostly slagged for her ties to the development and construction industry - yet Kirk is IN that industry?
Joe MacDonald was a relative latecomer to the campaign and his beginning presence was only felt in the Big on Bloor Festival in the summer. Despite his many protestations that he is not a 'career politician' or part of the big NDP party machine, he is really exactly that. Just because the party chose to back Kevin rather than him doesn't negate that he was in the inner power circles of the Big Bob Rae NDP government. His self-proclaimed credentials tells us he was involved in many party campaigns. What he has contributed to this campaign most positively is an intelligent and experienced-backed knowledge of what it takes to be a political representative. He has honestly spoken about his views and challenged other candidates. What is unfortunate was his attacks on Hema Vyas for not living in the ward she wants to represent and questioning her motives for running in ward 18. It wasn't the challenge, which was fair, it was the way and tone in which he delivered it. He probably lost himself a lot of potential support there. His e-signs were very underplayed with muted purple on white but his website was professional and well done.
Doug Carroll is someone who was clear on the area of the campaign he wanted to contribute to: the process of government and city-building. He is an articulate man with a depth of understanding that at times was amazing. He didn't really campaign in the same way as the election-sign-proven-candidates above, didn't really have a website to speak of, or any campaign literature I saw - yet he still made a significant positive impact on the quality of debate.
NHA LE is persistent, I'll give him that, but not much else. He's run a few times before, getting about 250 votes and although he has real English language communication problems, he impressed me as sincere about his wants for ward 18. I just never got a good handle on what those were. That he lives outside the ward, is a card carying Liberal and proud to have been working and mentored by Tony Ruprecht, the do-nothing Liberal MPP for Davenport makes me automatically reject him. His recent promise to cut down trees on Lansdowne to beautify it was a killer too.
Abdirazak Elmi was about the strangest candidate I've ever run into. Opening his introduction at the last debate with "I have two wives...." says it all. Although I stress that he did at least try - he spent his own money on flyers and delivered them, he could never have won. He lives WAY outside the ward, only jumped in here because it was a non-incumbent ward and Mammoliti had dropped out of the mayor race and returned to the ward he was originally going to run in. He has zero understanding of what is going on in ward 18 and was constantly calling me to ask about how he should campaign. A nice guy, but very confused about elections here.
Joanna Teliatnik is perhaps the second strangest candidate I've run into. She joined at the last minute, lives way out at Kipling and 401 and - told me she was "trying to run a campaign under the radar" when I met her campaigning on my street. Over coffee I got the impression she was a career bureaucrat who wanted to change things, but didn't know how. Why she ran here, I'll never know.
Mohammed Muhit had better get last place in votes! He was absolutely invisible in the ward, although I discovered his email address and that he lived a few streets over from Joe MacDonald in the ward. Zero campaigning, no literature, no show at debates, no response to any news media enquiries. Why?
------
KEN WOOD - I'll leave it to others to describe or remember me in this election.
All I know is that when I first registered to run 20 minutes before we knew if Giambrone would run in the ward or for mayor, what I wanted was:
1. To See Adam Giambrone out of office (Thanks, Adam)
2. To have an impact on the issues and nature of the debate in the ward
3. To offer a real choice to voters of someone truly independent
4. To contribute to increasing voter response and turnout
5. To test myself to see if I could be more than what I was
-----
Whatever happens on Monday, I hope the results are conclusive and the winner remembers that:
... or is it the other way around?
It's Saturday before the Monday vote, and I see signs of desperation in campaigns everywhere.
* An old guy by himself in a purple Smitherman T-Shirt exorting busy shoppers outside No-Frills at Dundas and Lansdowne to vote for George....
* The sudden appearance of 'Ford for Mayor' signs in bizarre locations, outside coin car wash at College/Lansdowne, on vacant offices ... along with home-made signs on hydro poles telling us "Ford is the Man"
* A sudden influx of "newsletters" and announcements of endorsements that appear at first glance to be delivered by The Star or The Villager
* Mailboxes jammed with flyers, cards and notices trying to be seen and read
* Call after call on my home phone as well as my cell phone telling me why I should vote for Joe MacDonald in ward 18 or for Kirk Russell in ward 18... or Smitherman... or - you get the picture.
* The sudden appearance of never before heard Twitter accounts telling us why Kevin Beaulieu or Ana Bailao or Hema Vyas are the greatest
* Tweet after tweet reminding everyone who endorsed whom in this elections (even if the endorsements came at the last minute or from predictably partisan sources like the Liberal Toronto Star or the NDP Spacing or Now sites)
* Candidates standing outside busy subway stations in the cold rain trying to buttonhole voters who rush by heads bowed, their body language saying 'leave me alone'
What a strange thing an election campaign is!
10 months for candidates to get out their platform, be seen and heard. Some 70 debates for the Mayors (with not much new said after the first one) and 8 opportunities for voters in ward 18 to get out and see candidates. I hesitate to call them 8 "debates" because the first 6 were really coming out parties where everyone was oh-so-Canadian and polite. It wasn't until the 7th gathering - the on air live Rogers TV debate, "The Local Campaign" where any fireworks ensued and any attempts were made by candidates to challenge competitors' platforms. The very last debate ended with a vitriolic attack and the words, "...You lying bitch!" after some equally testy moments.
Throughout this campaign, everything has been defined by the MEDIA, not the candidates or the voters' wants. Big news media from the beginning told us there were only a handful of people running for Mayor, and we all watched as they self-destructed or dropped out one by one due to poor polling - usually an indication no one is interested in them. Yet, big news media kept the field restricted as it shrank to what most Torontonians think are choices between disasterous, terrible and least worst.
------
PREDICTABLE PREDICTIONS ?
In the local ward 18 campaign, Ana Bailao bought the election from even before day one. She lined up all her Liberal ducks and donors, raised at least twice the maximum expense limit and proceeded to deluge ward 18 mailboxes with expensive and glitzy multi-colour flyers, brochures, cards and letters. Of all the candidates, she must have done at least 20 mailings per household, judging by the mailboxes at my place. Ana used her big red Liberal machine to its maximum capacity and had kids erecting election signs before the start date/time and made sure her campaign was seen everywhere by the important people. She used the Portugese ethnic card to maximum advantage (possibly even exceeding use of resources, a la Senso) and got everyone to buy in that Ana is the only community activist and city builder worth paying attention to. She is the Goliath in the ward, but it will come with a price when she is elected: favours requires payback. Developers are 'partying hardy'over her positioning and licking their lips in anticipation. If she doesn't win this, I'll be surprised.
The likely second runner-up, Kevin Beaulieu, never really let himself be known to those that didn't already know him. As the NDP 'medium-big' party machine choice, his campaign seems terribly tightly controlled by backroom politicos and co-campaign managers. getting (and proudly proclaiming) both Adam Giambrone and Mayor Miller endorsements likely will hurt more than help him in a divided ward with pockets of real hate-ons for the Miller-Giambrone twins. During the campaign, I've learned Kevin does have a solid grasp of details of how city hall works, and likely some creative ideas of his own, but alas - his soul belongs to the NDP as much as Ana's belongs to the Liberals. If Kevin wins this, I'll be (slightly) less worried for ward 18.
Who comes in third or 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th,11th, 12th (Ward 18 can never say they didn't have choices!) is a toss-up.
While Hema Vyas is liked and loved by the Maytree-cultural-diversity-fixer lobby, as an individual she has not yet stood up to challenges. In a Metro Morning radio interview she admitted to being scared of debates. Not bad in itself as all candidates who are human have a twinge of fear at being in the spotlight, but in my view she has not performed well in challenging situations. Having seen countless council debates, our political representative has to have the warrior beast in them to stand up for the ward and for their principles. She needs a lot of seasoning; a campaign is not just about reading a resume or a list of endorsements.
Frank de Jong is probably the most comfortable campaigner I have ever met. I suppose he should be given his 13 or so runs at office at all levels and his stint as President of the Green Party, but I got a really good sense of him as a person. He really is WYSIWYG : "What You See Is What You Get" - a genuine person comfortable in his own skin and happy with himself. Would he ever get elected, I'm pretty sure voters would re-elect him and be happy with his work. Why he can't break the ice is a puzzle to me.
Kirk Russell is an enigma to me. He seems the dark horse candidate in the race. A serious contender, he went all out with e-signs, campaign office and web presence and was smart enough to get himself a Portugese speaking campaign manager with a lot of street smarts. Yet, although he seems to have a major problem with Ana Bailao (youtube videos calling her a liar, always on the scene when Ana did something scandalous or bordering on it) - he appears to be a fellow Liberal in many aspects of his candidacy. Contrast this with his last minute support of Rob Ford for Mayor (huh ?) and I really wonder what his game plan was. A nice guy whom I admire, but still don't get. Ana Bailao is being mostly slagged for her ties to the development and construction industry - yet Kirk is IN that industry?
Joe MacDonald was a relative latecomer to the campaign and his beginning presence was only felt in the Big on Bloor Festival in the summer. Despite his many protestations that he is not a 'career politician' or part of the big NDP party machine, he is really exactly that. Just because the party chose to back Kevin rather than him doesn't negate that he was in the inner power circles of the Big Bob Rae NDP government. His self-proclaimed credentials tells us he was involved in many party campaigns. What he has contributed to this campaign most positively is an intelligent and experienced-backed knowledge of what it takes to be a political representative. He has honestly spoken about his views and challenged other candidates. What is unfortunate was his attacks on Hema Vyas for not living in the ward she wants to represent and questioning her motives for running in ward 18. It wasn't the challenge, which was fair, it was the way and tone in which he delivered it. He probably lost himself a lot of potential support there. His e-signs were very underplayed with muted purple on white but his website was professional and well done.
Doug Carroll is someone who was clear on the area of the campaign he wanted to contribute to: the process of government and city-building. He is an articulate man with a depth of understanding that at times was amazing. He didn't really campaign in the same way as the election-sign-proven-candidates above, didn't really have a website to speak of, or any campaign literature I saw - yet he still made a significant positive impact on the quality of debate.
NHA LE is persistent, I'll give him that, but not much else. He's run a few times before, getting about 250 votes and although he has real English language communication problems, he impressed me as sincere about his wants for ward 18. I just never got a good handle on what those were. That he lives outside the ward, is a card carying Liberal and proud to have been working and mentored by Tony Ruprecht, the do-nothing Liberal MPP for Davenport makes me automatically reject him. His recent promise to cut down trees on Lansdowne to beautify it was a killer too.
Abdirazak Elmi was about the strangest candidate I've ever run into. Opening his introduction at the last debate with "I have two wives...." says it all. Although I stress that he did at least try - he spent his own money on flyers and delivered them, he could never have won. He lives WAY outside the ward, only jumped in here because it was a non-incumbent ward and Mammoliti had dropped out of the mayor race and returned to the ward he was originally going to run in. He has zero understanding of what is going on in ward 18 and was constantly calling me to ask about how he should campaign. A nice guy, but very confused about elections here.
Joanna Teliatnik is perhaps the second strangest candidate I've run into. She joined at the last minute, lives way out at Kipling and 401 and - told me she was "trying to run a campaign under the radar" when I met her campaigning on my street. Over coffee I got the impression she was a career bureaucrat who wanted to change things, but didn't know how. Why she ran here, I'll never know.
Mohammed Muhit had better get last place in votes! He was absolutely invisible in the ward, although I discovered his email address and that he lived a few streets over from Joe MacDonald in the ward. Zero campaigning, no literature, no show at debates, no response to any news media enquiries. Why?
------
KEN WOOD - I'll leave it to others to describe or remember me in this election.
All I know is that when I first registered to run 20 minutes before we knew if Giambrone would run in the ward or for mayor, what I wanted was:
1. To See Adam Giambrone out of office (Thanks, Adam)
2. To have an impact on the issues and nature of the debate in the ward
3. To offer a real choice to voters of someone truly independent
4. To contribute to increasing voter response and turnout
5. To test myself to see if I could be more than what I was
-----
Whatever happens on Monday, I hope the results are conclusive and the winner remembers that:
DAVENPORT DESERVES BETTER
Monday, October 18, 2010
How to Fix An Election
How To Fix Our Elections
TEN IDEAS for next time we try the democratic thing, so that the choice of the majority actually gets elected and we have a level field for all:
*Update: More voices being heard in the major disappointment the media has been in this election: http://oct25.ca/mediamessup
TEN IDEAS for next time we try the democratic thing, so that the choice of the majority actually gets elected and we have a level field for all:
- Ban newspapers from deciding on who they call the front-runners: require that they report on all the candidates at the start of the campaign when registrations close. Short profiles.
- Use a Ranked Ballot system where voters prioritize who they'd like to see elected... 1,2,3, etc. This might avoid 20% deciding who gets elected - the way it is now.
- Ban public polling being released from January 1 to Election Day: candidates may have their own polls, but would be severely financially penalized if they released information.
- Make voting day a statuatory holiday, but make voting mandatory with financial penalties, only exceptions require valid medical waivers. Advance polls would still be available. Would require a 'None of the Above' option for voters to express dissatisfaction.
- Ban political parties from endorsing candidates and close the loophole whereby paid party staffers can work on campaigns as 'free volunteers' and inflate election war chests.
- City should erect 'Election Kiosks' at intersections and in public spaces like parks, libraries and community centres. Require candidates to post 8x10 sign outlining their platform, same size for all. No more waste production than necessary.
- Ban anyone from doing outside work (erecting signs, dispensing litereature, etc.) unless they are over 18 years of age. No more oops! mistakes about flouting election laws.
- City of Toronto Election Website should devote a web page to each of the candidates to upload their platforms and information. Allow 311 or a voicemail service to connect callers to 60 second audio pitch of candidates running in their wards.
- Limit mayoral debates to one a week in each of the city's 44 wards.
- Prohibit a sitting Mayor from publicly endorsing any candidates.
*Update: More voices being heard in the major disappointment the media has been in this election: http://oct25.ca/mediamessup
Saturday, October 16, 2010
INCLUSION A PROBLEM IN WARD 18
PERCEPTION OF BIAS EXISTS IN THE MEDIA AND ...
As many who read this blog site know, I've been very concerned with the lack of inclusion of all candidates by mainstream media - and also by self-proclaimed online social media (eg Spacing, Torontoist), but there has also been serious bias expressed by organizations one would normally expect to be diligently un-biased.
I refer to the Friends of Dufferin Grove Park website: http://www.dufferinpark.ca/home/wiki/wiki.php which for the past two months has had on its main page a photo of only 8 of the registered 12 candidates for City Councillor for ward 18.
(The photo is from the Active18 so-called "All Candidates Debate" which in fact the organizers only invited and allowed into the debate 9 of the 12 candidates - another exclusionary exercise by a seemingly public community group)
In addition, there were only 6 in depth interviews done (Ana Bailao, Kevin Beaulieu, Doug Carroll, Frank de Jong, Joe MacDonald and Hema Vyas).
Missing is any mention of: Abdirazak Elmi, Nha Le, Joanna Teliatnik, Mohammed Muhit, Kirk Russell and myself Ken Wood).
*Update: As of Monday, Oct 18 the Friends of Dufferin Grove website indicates 7 not 6 interviews and rediirects to the CELOS site where my additional written response interview is posted. Still missing is any mention of the 5 other candidates.
I had communicated via emails with Jutta Mason, the central force behind much of what is great about Dufferin Grove Park, who has a website that receives support from celos.ca through the Trillium Foundation (public tax dollars at work). My concern was that the heavily accessed website was passing on a perception of limited choice of candidates and that was neither fair nor possibly legal.
The CELOS ( Centre for Local Research into Public Space) website http://celos.ca/wiki/wiki.php shows 9 of the 12 local ward 18 city councillor candidates and if you follow the cues to Read More, you will come across a detailed survey response from 7 of the 12 candidates running. The response is regarding the MacGregor Park field house and the situation it finds itself in with federal stimulus funding not really helping where the community needs it most.
-----
To her credit, Jutta had intended to include all of us in the interviews, which are a LOT of work to be transcribed and posted, but volunteer time is at a premium with so many wonderful things going on at Dufferin Grove Park. I offered an alternative suggestion: that questions be posed and response from the six who were not able to be interviewed be posted on the website.
Although I sent in my response October 6, it seems the best we can do is to have it posted on the wall at the park clubhouse. An uneven playing field. Unfair.
*Update: Informed via email from one of Jutta's volunteers that my interview and photo is on the wall at Dufferin Grove (Oct 17). On the website by Oct 18.
It seems this election, exclusion has become the norm in much of the visibility that candidates might get. At the mayoral level, there were 40 people running, but we still see the media focussing on their arbitrary 6..5...4...3 peoiple without including any other choices. When voter apathy has been so low (35% in ward18 last election), shouldn't we be encouraging MORE choice rather than less?
I went back to 2003 and was intrigued to see what happened with Friends of Dufferin Grove Park and came across this:
The line which stands out and needs to be featured prominently on any discussion of Who To Vote For or anything dealing with discussing or presenting candidates during an election is:
HERE IN WARD 18 TOO ?
I refer to the Friends of Dufferin Grove Park website: http://www.dufferinpark.ca/home/wiki/wiki.php which for the past two months has had on its main page a photo of only 8 of the registered 12 candidates for City Councillor for ward 18.
(The photo is from the Active18 so-called "All Candidates Debate" which in fact the organizers only invited and allowed into the debate 9 of the 12 candidates - another exclusionary exercise by a seemingly public community group)
In addition, there were only 6 in depth interviews done (Ana Bailao, Kevin Beaulieu, Doug Carroll, Frank de Jong, Joe MacDonald and Hema Vyas).
Missing is any mention of: Abdirazak Elmi, Nha Le, Joanna Teliatnik, Mohammed Muhit, Kirk Russell and myself Ken Wood).
*Update: As of Monday, Oct 18 the Friends of Dufferin Grove website indicates 7 not 6 interviews and rediirects to the CELOS site where my additional written response interview is posted. Still missing is any mention of the 5 other candidates.
I had communicated via emails with Jutta Mason, the central force behind much of what is great about Dufferin Grove Park, who has a website that receives support from celos.ca through the Trillium Foundation (public tax dollars at work). My concern was that the heavily accessed website was passing on a perception of limited choice of candidates and that was neither fair nor possibly legal.
The CELOS ( Centre for Local Research into Public Space) website http://celos.ca/wiki/wiki.php shows 9 of the 12 local ward 18 city councillor candidates and if you follow the cues to Read More, you will come across a detailed survey response from 7 of the 12 candidates running. The response is regarding the MacGregor Park field house and the situation it finds itself in with federal stimulus funding not really helping where the community needs it most.
-----
To her credit, Jutta had intended to include all of us in the interviews, which are a LOT of work to be transcribed and posted, but volunteer time is at a premium with so many wonderful things going on at Dufferin Grove Park. I offered an alternative suggestion: that questions be posed and response from the six who were not able to be interviewed be posted on the website.
Although I sent in my response October 6, it seems the best we can do is to have it posted on the wall at the park clubhouse. An uneven playing field. Unfair.
*Update: Informed via email from one of Jutta's volunteers that my interview and photo is on the wall at Dufferin Grove (Oct 17). On the website by Oct 18.
It seems this election, exclusion has become the norm in much of the visibility that candidates might get. At the mayoral level, there were 40 people running, but we still see the media focussing on their arbitrary 6..5...4...3 peoiple without including any other choices. When voter apathy has been so low (35% in ward18 last election), shouldn't we be encouraging MORE choice rather than less?
I went back to 2003 and was intrigued to see what happened with Friends of Dufferin Grove Park and came across this:
The line which stands out and needs to be featured prominently on any discussion of Who To Vote For or anything dealing with discussing or presenting candidates during an election is:
"...It's quite true that it's not in the interests of the Friends of Dufferin Grove Park (including me) to endorse any of the local candidates..."
---
Yet, mistakenly or not, with good reasons or not, that seems to be precisely what has been done: limiting the choice presented to voters down to half.
We need to all be fair and even when presenting voters their options.... because..
DAVENPORT DESERVES BETTER
PARTY POLITICS AT CITY HALL and MY CHOICE FOR MAYOR
October 16: YIMBY Visits and A Historical Perspective on Party Politics
I visited YIMBY (Yes in My Back Yard) today and all I got was ... a lot of energy! Passionate people who'd done their research and could back up their stands on their diverse concerns.
YIMBY website: http://www.gladstonehotel.com/events/exhibitions/yimby
Wouldn't it be great if before the elected City Council took the stage and began their motions, votes and changes - they held a city-wide YIMBY at City Hall with the same flavours?
Call it Job Preparation Training, required for all councillors before they even took an oath of office. That way, once the business of being a councillor began, they would each and every one be starting on the same page insofar as what the communities saw as concerns.
Yes, election campaigns are also supposed to be about candidates listening at the doors of every voter - and many proudly proclaim they have done that - but how can we be sure they've heard all the voices and reasearch that is out there?
We all remember a famously short-lived Conservative Prime Minister who said "Elections are not a time to discuss serious issues" - and yes, she paid dearly for that. But the context was that some issues take more than superficial campaign debates with simple slogans and not much depth.
It concerns me that at the Mayoral level, the media-chose so-called front-runners have been given an enormous amount of media attention while providing little of substance. There are so many holes in their respective platforms that some media do backup stories to investigate bold claims with no depth of truth. http://www.thestar.com/Topic/smelltest
That's why after a lot of inner conflict that involved questions I think most Torontonians share:
- should I vote strategically, pick the least worst of the bad front-runners I see?
- will strategic voting even work to keep out the one I dislike the most?
- should I vote with my heart or with my head?
I have decided to use BOTH my head and my heart and will vote for and have endorsed
He has a very well thought out platform and is extremely knowledgeable about the city ( and I mean city-wide not just a section or two). He believes in himself and the power of the people in Toronto and is an articulate, intelligent man who would represent Toronto well on the world stage. An element, albeit not an over-riding one, is that he can help to represent the diversity that is Toronto and can be proof that our Toronto includes everyone.
I urge voters to have a look at him as an antidote to the same old party political 'bash the other guy' that Ford, Pantalone and Smitherman have been doing. I want a Mayor with depth not silly sound bytes.
To learn more about HIMY SYED : http://oct25.ca/aobtd and http://himysyed.com/
---
Torontoist's Historicist does a great look back to 1969 when power-player Liberal Keith Davey tried to initiate full blown party politics at the municipal level http://torontoist.com/2010/10/historicist_looking_for_a_liberal_to_lead_us.php
'BigWig' Davey argued that " a slate of candidates running on a common program would provide voters with a higher quality of choices than picking out the platforms they liked the best from the divergent personalities that tended to run for office... We'll end the era of two-bit politics"
* Really? two-bit politics? That's 25 cents worth and seems to say local politics is kid stuff.
Read the article for the full story, but in essence because of backroom promises and power brokers, it failed miserably. This should be a lesson we need to remember, not re-learn by making new old mistakes.
I particularly like the phrase " divergent personalities ", because that is exactly what we have in pretty much every local ward level campaign, as voters try to get to know the candidates at a core level, past the slogans. platitudes and promises.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if we knew as much about the character, behaviour and tendencies of the people we welect as we do about contestants on reality/survivor shows? Then voters would how they might vote on things that affect us that have not happened or been dreamed of yet.
Until then, let us at least learn from the past that party politics do not belong at City Hall in its current structure. We need a City Councillor who is notr beholden to any party machinery, because...
I visited YIMBY (Yes in My Back Yard) today and all I got was ... a lot of energy! Passionate people who'd done their research and could back up their stands on their diverse concerns.
YIMBY website: http://www.gladstonehotel.com/events/exhibitions/yimby
Wouldn't it be great if before the elected City Council took the stage and began their motions, votes and changes - they held a city-wide YIMBY at City Hall with the same flavours?
Call it Job Preparation Training, required for all councillors before they even took an oath of office. That way, once the business of being a councillor began, they would each and every one be starting on the same page insofar as what the communities saw as concerns.
Yes, election campaigns are also supposed to be about candidates listening at the doors of every voter - and many proudly proclaim they have done that - but how can we be sure they've heard all the voices and reasearch that is out there?
We all remember a famously short-lived Conservative Prime Minister who said "Elections are not a time to discuss serious issues" - and yes, she paid dearly for that. But the context was that some issues take more than superficial campaign debates with simple slogans and not much depth.
It concerns me that at the Mayoral level, the media-chose so-called front-runners have been given an enormous amount of media attention while providing little of substance. There are so many holes in their respective platforms that some media do backup stories to investigate bold claims with no depth of truth. http://www.thestar.com/Topic/smelltest
That's why after a lot of inner conflict that involved questions I think most Torontonians share:
- should I vote strategically, pick the least worst of the bad front-runners I see?
- will strategic voting even work to keep out the one I dislike the most?
- should I vote with my heart or with my head?
I have decided to use BOTH my head and my heart and will vote for and have endorsed
HIMY SYED for Mayor
He has a very well thought out platform and is extremely knowledgeable about the city ( and I mean city-wide not just a section or two). He believes in himself and the power of the people in Toronto and is an articulate, intelligent man who would represent Toronto well on the world stage. An element, albeit not an over-riding one, is that he can help to represent the diversity that is Toronto and can be proof that our Toronto includes everyone.
I urge voters to have a look at him as an antidote to the same old party political 'bash the other guy' that Ford, Pantalone and Smitherman have been doing. I want a Mayor with depth not silly sound bytes.
To learn more about HIMY SYED : http://oct25.ca/aobtd and http://himysyed.com/
---
Torontoist's Historicist does a great look back to 1969 when power-player Liberal Keith Davey tried to initiate full blown party politics at the municipal level http://torontoist.com/2010/10/historicist_looking_for_a_liberal_to_lead_us.php
'BigWig' Davey argued that " a slate of candidates running on a common program would provide voters with a higher quality of choices than picking out the platforms they liked the best from the divergent personalities that tended to run for office... We'll end the era of two-bit politics"
* Really? two-bit politics? That's 25 cents worth and seems to say local politics is kid stuff.
Read the article for the full story, but in essence because of backroom promises and power brokers, it failed miserably. This should be a lesson we need to remember, not re-learn by making new old mistakes.
I particularly like the phrase " divergent personalities ", because that is exactly what we have in pretty much every local ward level campaign, as voters try to get to know the candidates at a core level, past the slogans. platitudes and promises.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if we knew as much about the character, behaviour and tendencies of the people we welect as we do about contestants on reality/survivor shows? Then voters would how they might vote on things that affect us that have not happened or been dreamed of yet.
Until then, let us at least learn from the past that party politics do not belong at City Hall in its current structure. We need a City Councillor who is notr beholden to any party machinery, because...
DAVENPORT DESERVES BETTER
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Last Ward18 Debate and - Another Scandal ?
"Scandal to Handle" This Time Belongs to Kevin Beaulieu ?
Just got home from a spiritied, sometimes vicious debate and find this tidbit on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MTSG0pr0-g Titled Kevin Beaulieu Campaign: Caught Red-Handed shows 42 seconds of what looks like very young Kevin supporters getting caught taking other candidates literature as they drop their own?
Unverified - you be the judge. ( rbmorra on Twitter posted the link. )
It's got to be hard when the two media-chosen frontrunners have such (seemingly) immature youth doing their utmost to help their star win. (Ana was in trouble for her team getting caught putting up election signs too early). I guess hero/heroine worship can go too far...
----
72 Perth Church of the Firstborn Debate Held tonight
Too tired right now, will post more tomorrow..
*Update: Covered by Toronto Observer: http://www.torontoobserver.ca/2010/10/15/residents-demand-greater-attention-from-ward-18-candidates/ who seem to think only 4 candidates are running - there are 12. (sigh..)
10 Candidates who attended: Abdirazak Elmi; Ana Bailao; Doug Carroll; Frank de Jong; Hema Vyas; Joe MacDonald; Ken Wood; Kevin Beaulieu; Kirk Russell; Nha Le. (the way they were seated from left to right frfom audience perspective).
Missing and have not attended ANY of the 8 debates held:
Mohammed Muhit; Joanna Teliatnik.
From my recollection, here's the short and sweet:
35 or so audience, Most of the 12 candidates there, Detailed audience questions, several bouts of fireworks and passionate accusations and rebuttals, sometimes like a World Wrestling Matchup, a few choice swearwords, people really got to see their choices under fire (some more than others) - covered by various social media types...
ended with most making nice at Zocalos over a brew or coffee.
Surreal in a way but comforting to be reminded every one of the candidates are real people underneath with something to contribute... I'm hopeful for ward18's future with such substance....
*Update: Here's what did NOT happen at the debate.... (maybe we can all learn something from them)
Just got home from a spiritied, sometimes vicious debate and find this tidbit on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MTSG0pr0-g Titled Kevin Beaulieu Campaign: Caught Red-Handed shows 42 seconds of what looks like very young Kevin supporters getting caught taking other candidates literature as they drop their own?
Unverified - you be the judge. ( rbmorra on Twitter posted the link. )
It's got to be hard when the two media-chosen frontrunners have such (seemingly) immature youth doing their utmost to help their star win. (Ana was in trouble for her team getting caught putting up election signs too early). I guess hero/heroine worship can go too far...
----
72 Perth Church of the Firstborn Debate Held tonight
Too tired right now, will post more tomorrow..
*Update: Covered by Toronto Observer: http://www.torontoobserver.ca/2010/10/15/residents-demand-greater-attention-from-ward-18-candidates/ who seem to think only 4 candidates are running - there are 12. (sigh..)
10 Candidates who attended: Abdirazak Elmi; Ana Bailao; Doug Carroll; Frank de Jong; Hema Vyas; Joe MacDonald; Ken Wood; Kevin Beaulieu; Kirk Russell; Nha Le. (the way they were seated from left to right frfom audience perspective).
Missing and have not attended ANY of the 8 debates held:
Mohammed Muhit; Joanna Teliatnik.
From my recollection, here's the short and sweet:
35 or so audience, Most of the 12 candidates there, Detailed audience questions, several bouts of fireworks and passionate accusations and rebuttals, sometimes like a World Wrestling Matchup, a few choice swearwords, people really got to see their choices under fire (some more than others) - covered by various social media types...
ended with most making nice at Zocalos over a brew or coffee.
Surreal in a way but comforting to be reminded every one of the candidates are real people underneath with something to contribute... I'm hopeful for ward18's future with such substance....
*Update: Here's what did NOT happen at the debate.... (maybe we can all learn something from them)
Please vote for Me.......
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Election Signs Confusing?
ELECTION SIGNS - ANOTHER VIEWPOINT
Maybe because I, like most Torontonians, have suddenly seen so many big, small, coloured, creative and bland election signs of late - I've been thinking a lot about them.
In the Ward 19 debate I attended a while ago, one resident was really angry that Mike Layton (son of Jack in Ottawa) had on a corner of his sign: Re-Elect Chris Bolton School Trustee. His point was that people saying okay for a Layton sign were not asked about incumbent Chris Bolton (who was in some trouble of his own, having used school children to send campaign literature home).
The more I though about this the angrier I became. I think its because it is clearly underhanded and does not respect the right of voters to choose. Or - perhaps it is the sense of entitlement Mr Layton exercises even though he is not yet elected. Or both.
I also think of the little CBC Toronto news snippet done a week or so ago in which they talk about the sudden proliferation of signs, using ward 18 as an example. They spoke with Hema Vyas (who has a link on her website that seems dead now * ) who appeared proud of the fact her signs were out there, as well as Frank de Jong, who commented as a seasoned politician that in the home stretch it is an important sign to voters that a candidate has widespread support.
* Here is a better link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eE8cU0UnFI
The telling downside of this was that the CBC news reporter interviewed a woman who had a sign on her lawn and asked "Will you be voting for that person?" Her reply was, "I will vote, for sure not for him!" (no mention or view of which him it was.)
-----
Previous posts have dealt with whether election signs really work http://davenportdemocracy.blogspot.com/2010/10/election-signs.html ...
-----
But today I am wondering if they are sensible. Certainly there is the environmental arguments to consider... This Star story talks about an eco-conscious ward 16 Beaches candidate, Sheila Cary-Meagher, who goes to creative lengths to try to make e-signs useful after e-day: http://www.thestar.com/news/elections/article/874190--election-ephemera-candidate-attacks-himself
I've seen comments on a lot of sites where people suggest outright banning of election signs.
What are we saying as candidates to voters when we just put BIG NAMES on their lawn with nothing else, except perhaps a colour choice (Liberal RED, NDP Orange, Green - Green, Conservative - BLUE - except for some strange reason, NDPers Layton and Beaulieu?). Are we just thinking voters can be programmed if we just pound our names into their heads over and over and over and... you get the picture. Where is the respect for voters?
Some do have slogans, but pretty meaningless ones when you think of it:
Committed to Our Community (you'd better be if you want my vote)
Change for the Better (Rob Davis in Moscoe's old ward - prove it I say)
Works With Us, Works For Us (Isn't that a given for the job?)
and even my own, which is at least a hope: Davenport Deserves Better
There is not a lot of pertinent information given out on e-signs.
Maybe they should be banned - or at least better controlled.
We should also remember that with the city campaign contributions rebate program, 3 out of 4 signs you see for any candidate are likely paid for by taxpayers. Is it right that citizens should pay for candidates to get name recognition? Often a local candidate is just building recognition for another office at more senior levels. Or to get more business connections.
Thinking about it all confuses me. Are we confusingvoters too?
*Update: Here's a wonderful YouTube video that shows some greart post-election uses for all those election signs: http://tinyurl.com/2besre9 (My personal favourite is the frisbee)
Maybe because I, like most Torontonians, have suddenly seen so many big, small, coloured, creative and bland election signs of late - I've been thinking a lot about them.
In the Ward 19 debate I attended a while ago, one resident was really angry that Mike Layton (son of Jack in Ottawa) had on a corner of his sign: Re-Elect Chris Bolton School Trustee. His point was that people saying okay for a Layton sign were not asked about incumbent Chris Bolton (who was in some trouble of his own, having used school children to send campaign literature home).
The more I though about this the angrier I became. I think its because it is clearly underhanded and does not respect the right of voters to choose. Or - perhaps it is the sense of entitlement Mr Layton exercises even though he is not yet elected. Or both.
I also think of the little CBC Toronto news snippet done a week or so ago in which they talk about the sudden proliferation of signs, using ward 18 as an example. They spoke with Hema Vyas (who has a link on her website that seems dead now * ) who appeared proud of the fact her signs were out there, as well as Frank de Jong, who commented as a seasoned politician that in the home stretch it is an important sign to voters that a candidate has widespread support.
* Here is a better link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eE8cU0UnFI
The telling downside of this was that the CBC news reporter interviewed a woman who had a sign on her lawn and asked "Will you be voting for that person?" Her reply was, "I will vote, for sure not for him!" (no mention or view of which him it was.)
-----
Previous posts have dealt with whether election signs really work http://davenportdemocracy.blogspot.com/2010/10/election-signs.html ...
-----
But today I am wondering if they are sensible. Certainly there is the environmental arguments to consider... This Star story talks about an eco-conscious ward 16 Beaches candidate, Sheila Cary-Meagher, who goes to creative lengths to try to make e-signs useful after e-day: http://www.thestar.com/news/elections/article/874190--election-ephemera-candidate-attacks-himself
I've seen comments on a lot of sites where people suggest outright banning of election signs.
What are we saying as candidates to voters when we just put BIG NAMES on their lawn with nothing else, except perhaps a colour choice (Liberal RED, NDP Orange, Green - Green, Conservative - BLUE - except for some strange reason, NDPers Layton and Beaulieu?). Are we just thinking voters can be programmed if we just pound our names into their heads over and over and over and... you get the picture. Where is the respect for voters?
Some do have slogans, but pretty meaningless ones when you think of it:
Committed to Our Community (you'd better be if you want my vote)
Change for the Better (Rob Davis in Moscoe's old ward - prove it I say)
Works With Us, Works For Us (Isn't that a given for the job?)
and even my own, which is at least a hope: Davenport Deserves Better
There is not a lot of pertinent information given out on e-signs.
Maybe they should be banned - or at least better controlled.
We should also remember that with the city campaign contributions rebate program, 3 out of 4 signs you see for any candidate are likely paid for by taxpayers. Is it right that citizens should pay for candidates to get name recognition? Often a local candidate is just building recognition for another office at more senior levels. Or to get more business connections.
Thinking about it all confuses me. Are we confusingvoters too?
*Update: Here's a wonderful YouTube video that shows some greart post-election uses for all those election signs: http://tinyurl.com/2besre9 (My personal favourite is the frisbee)
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Election SIgn Pollution Hits Ward 18
OVERDONE ? IS THERE NOT A BETTER WAY ?
Various signs spotted today around Bloor and Lansdowne and area....
----
And meanwhile, another kind of sign: Neglect at Councillor Adam Giambrone's usually vacant constituency office:
Appropriate, since he neglected large parts of Ward 18. P.S> His campaign issue when he first ran was.... removing graffitti from the ward....
-----
Appropriate, since he neglected large parts of Ward 18. P.S> His campaign issue when he first ran was.... removing graffitti from the ward....-----
And.... another kind of sign... CHANGE in Housing on my street
:
TREE SAVER KEN BECOMES DOG HUGGER KEN
BEAUTIFUL STRAY DOG CAUSES SCENE AT BLOOR and LANSDOWNE
(Red and white, Border Collie mix about 2 years old) goes charging down the middle of Bloor headed east, looking scared and lost. No owner in sight. Thanks to the sharp eyes of Terry and George, we were able to rescue him.
After a 4 block chase one way and then the other, we were finally able to grab him, pull him over to the sidewalk in front of the Bloordale Pantry (great food by the way) and kept him safe.
I called 311 and was impressed with their response. Within 25 minutes or so an Animal Services officer took him into custody. No collar or tag, not neutered and probably not microchipped (only sure way to protect your animals, cat or dog). He will be held pending the owner being contacted or looking for him at Toronto Animal Services. *
Note: This was not an abused dog and likely not an irresponsible owner as he was very healthy and looked well cared for. Someone said he is owned by someone in the area (I will put up posters).
I want to thank the many people who tried to help catch him (including two younbg guys who were faster than I was). You all made my day.
Guess it was just one of those "the universe puts you somewhere you're meant to be to do some good" things..... Ken Wood's Scorecard: Saved several trees, Saved one dog... (and other stuff) If nothing else happens, I can live with that.
* IF THIS IS YOUR DOG: He is being kept safe at: City of Toronto Animal Services SOUTH Region - Call 416 338 6668 ID #A568294
About 10:30am I was having coffee at Coffee Time with some people who care about animal issues and wanting to do something to remedy the cat overpopulation problems both here and in Hamilton. We were trying to come up with humane solutions to find homes for abandoned animals, and talking about the need for mandatory spay-neuter of animals to prevent suffering, when.... THIS GUY:
(Red and white, Border Collie mix about 2 years old) goes charging down the middle of Bloor headed east, looking scared and lost. No owner in sight. Thanks to the sharp eyes of Terry and George, we were able to rescue him.
After a 4 block chase one way and then the other, we were finally able to grab him, pull him over to the sidewalk in front of the Bloordale Pantry (great food by the way) and kept him safe.
I called 311 and was impressed with their response. Within 25 minutes or so an Animal Services officer took him into custody. No collar or tag, not neutered and probably not microchipped (only sure way to protect your animals, cat or dog). He will be held pending the owner being contacted or looking for him at Toronto Animal Services. *
Note: This was not an abused dog and likely not an irresponsible owner as he was very healthy and looked well cared for. Someone said he is owned by someone in the area (I will put up posters).
I want to thank the many people who tried to help catch him (including two younbg guys who were faster than I was). You all made my day.
Guess it was just one of those "the universe puts you somewhere you're meant to be to do some good" things..... Ken Wood's Scorecard: Saved several trees, Saved one dog... (and other stuff) If nothing else happens, I can live with that.
* IF THIS IS YOUR DOG: He is being kept safe at: City of Toronto Animal Services SOUTH Region - Call 416 338 6668 ID #A568294
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
VOTE - SERIOUSLY - VOTE !
Will We See More Voters Actually Vote by October 25 ?
2006 Toronto City Election: Voter Turnout in Ward 18 Davenport = 35%
Number of elgible voters in Ward 18 Davenport = 26, 737 out of 45,620 population
----
2006 Election Results: SIX candidates running...
Adam Giambrone = 6,025 votes = elected by about 22% of elegible voters
- or another way to say it is that 78% of voters didn't want him or didn't care
Simon Wookey = 2,089 (running this year in ward 27, TO Centre-Rosedale)
Jim McMillen = 292
Lloyd Ferguson = 262
Nha Le = 252 (running again in ward 18)
Jim Rawling = 87
... 9,006 people voted = only a 35% turnout
----
2003 Election Results: SIX candidates running...
Adam Giambrone = 5,797 votes
Ana Bailao = 4,537 (running again in ward 18 in 2010)
Hotencio Fotopoulus = 387
Nha Le = 234
Cynamin Maxwell = 155
Anna Salaverry-Chuquihuara = 141
.... 11,250 people voted
---
It seems that since only HALF of our ward population can actually vote, and that LESS THAN HALF of those who can vote do vote, and that anyone can get elected with just about TWENTY PER CENT of the people voting for that person...... isn't there something wrong with our democracy?
-
I would advocate mandatory voting, but only if it allows a choice of 'NONE OF THE ABOVE' so we truly know the will of the people.
-
The Better Ballots group http://www.betterballots.to/ has been looking at ways to improve our democracy so that the public will is actually reflected in the people we elect. This group not only questions why a diverse city like Toronto is not reflected in those who sit in power at City Council, but also why we don't find better ways to elect our representatives.
-
RANKED BALLOTS ( or preferential voting) is something I believe in. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferential_voting It essentially means picking your favourites by numbering all candidates 1,2,3,4, and so on. This avoids the 'first past the post' system of whoever gets the most votes in a race wins. Why is that unfair, you ask? Well if you have say - 12 - candidates running, some with similar platforms, 11 of them can split the vote letting the victors slip through, even though if asked voters will not want that dissimilar platform elected.
Until this is a reality, anyone who can get just 5,350 votes can win this election
-
Until that happens, Voters must ALWAYS VOTE SERIOUSLY !
Those that do not even vote can still be hurt by the person they let get elected by not voting
Those that do vote, must carefully compare the promises and platforms of all the candidates and choose the one that best represents what they want. Who is closest, in total, of the one you want to represent you?
===
PLEASE! VOTE CAREFULLY AND SERIOUSLY. EVERY VOTE COUNTS.
WE NEED BETTER VOTER TURNOUT ON OCTOBER 25 .... because ...
DAVENPORT DESERVES BETTER
Not our ward, but next door in Ward 19 they had some fireworks that prove debates aren't always boring: http://tinyurl.com/28yx2qa Example: Incumbent Chris Bolton got caught sending his campaign literature home with school children - bombshell dropped by Michael Sims. And just why is Mike Layton's signs including a vote for Chris Bolton too?
Sunday, October 3, 2010
ELECTION SIGNS - Worth it or Not ?
TRUE OR FALSE 
DO THEY REALLY WORK ? 
(Not election signs, but infamously ignored)
(Not an election sign either, but it was ignored again!)
.... Then again, maybe the above really are UN-election signs ?
=================================================
This is the first sign any candidate who registers at city hall sees, almost as fast as the neutral elections people type it in and often before they ever consent to making their info/emails public....
So after former City Councillor Howard Moscoe and his wife gloria pocket the loot from the army of candidates.... City Hall changes the law which now says no election signs except for campaign offices until 12:01am Monday Octover 4, 2010. Anyone wishing to put up signs in public places must pay the city a little front money: $250 - which will be used to fine candidates who put signs in illegal places - or too early.
* Update: Toronto Sun reports in first 24 hours the city received 67 complaints for a variety of reasons. So far no fines have been levied. http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2010/10/05/15594846.html
*Update: Here's another news story on the E-SIGN BLIGHT http://spacingtoronto.ca/2010/10/09/election-public-space-invaders/-
DO THEY REALLY WORK ? 
(Not election signs, but infamously ignored)
(Not an election sign either, but it was ignored again!).... Then again, maybe the above really are UN-election signs ?
=================================================
This is the first sign any candidate who registers at city hall sees, almost as fast as the neutral elections people type it in and often before they ever consent to making their info/emails public....
So after former City Councillor Howard Moscoe and his wife gloria pocket the loot from the army of candidates.... City Hall changes the law which now says no election signs except for campaign offices until 12:01am Monday Octover 4, 2010. Anyone wishing to put up signs in public places must pay the city a little front money: $250 - which will be used to fine candidates who put signs in illegal places - or too early.--
Some Election Rules: Election signs shall not be illuminated or Attached to Trees.
Election signs are not permitted anywhere on public property other than on...lots of refer subsection this and that ... a whole bunch of picky rules that require tape measures to figure out... signs no larger than (1.2 square meters/12.92 square feet)... must have consent of owner or occupant... No signs within 15 meters of intersection...Take them down in time after election or you get fined. (Thursday Oct 28)
"For candidates, signs should come from engaging the public, getting their support for the candidates platform to improve the city, then the sign goes up indicating a solid voter".... NOT TRUE
...I have been witness to numerous election campaigns where the sign-planter talks to the voter in the language they know they do not speak, using gestures and saying words like 'MUST DO' 'CITY' 'GOVERNMENT' .. and so on, until frustration or confusion kicks in, the sign is planted and that's that. Who knows if the property owner will even vote.
--Most signs have a very simple format: 
Elect some guy/gal cause I saw his/her name somewhere.....
Let's go get a beer ....
Let's go get a beer ....
Standard Colour Choices:
- MR FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY - TAX MAN (Drive a Rob FORD Lately?)
- LIBERAL RED , HAVE LOTS OF FRIENDS WHO KNOW HOW TO SPEND TOO
- PROGRESSIVE - Leaning Left- Maybe Falling out of the Boat- NDP
- ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY GROUP OF 'ECO-NUTS' = THE GREEN PARTY
From Calgary, one woman says: "I think the signs are important because I think for the people who aren't as informed it's what they will remember." Another woman: "If a candidate puts effort into their sign they will put effort into everything else." http://tinyurl.com/24reerp
---
http://tinyurl.com/25e8mdh York University Schulich School Of Business professor of marketing Alan Middleton says: "...elections signs do work... As people walk through a neighbourhood or drive through it, they see a lot of signs for that person. It begins to suggest 'oh, they're more popular than I thought so maybe I should take them seriously"
Melanie Dempsey, associate professor of marketing at Ryerson says signs can sway voters undecided... the size may indicate this is a person of quality.
========
"Experience tells us that there's no corelation between how many signs are up and how many votes you're going to get. I think that a sign on the lawn does not even necessarilymean that the occupoant of that home or residence is even going to support that candidate" Myer Siemiatycki, Ryerson University, an expert on municipal politics told CBC News at 6 TV report (aired Monday, Oct 4 http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/Local_News/Toronto/ID=1607221196)
----
* Update: It seems Ana Bailao is shown to be the only one flouting election laws and pushing the envelope. Many people on Twitter snapped photos of her team erecting signs as early as Sunday evening. Link to story below: http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/Local_News/Toronto/ID=1607221196
===
Some complaints too of people being awoken at 2am by hammers and drills putting up the really big signs (Rossi). Best tweet: "If the number of signs up indiciate who will be elected, ReMax will be our next Mayor"
===
Toronto Star article on campaign signs: http://www.thestar.com/news/article/869978--campaign-signs-invade-toronto "A recent poll showed 25 per cent of Torontonians are not following the election"... "At 12.01 am Monday the race for campaign space began, By the time you read this, the city's streetcorners, sidewalks and shop windows will likely be plastered in these annoying but necessary eyesores."
====
* Update: Toronto Sun reports in first 24 hours the city received 67 complaints for a variety of reasons. So far no fines have been levied. http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2010/10/05/15594846.html
*Update: Here's another news story on the E-SIGN BLIGHT http://spacingtoronto.ca/2010/10/09/election-public-space-invaders/-
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
