hu·mane/(h)yo͞oˈmān/Adjective
1. Having or showing compassion or benevolence.
2. Inflicting the minimum of pain.
3. Having the feelings and inclinations creditable to man; having a disposition to treat other human beings or animals with kindness; kind; benevolent.
4. Characterized by kindness, mercy, or compassion:
5. Marked by an emphasis on humanistic values and concerns:
6. Civilizing or liberal
Synonyms: compassionate, humanitarian, merciful - These adjectives mean marked or motivated by concern with the alleviation of suffering:
Other 'Google' search results:
humane society - 2 dictionary results
Toronto Animal Control Call Us Today For Professional & Humane Wildlife Removal. http://www.professionalwildlifecontrol.ca/
Animal Control Fast & Effective Wildlife Removal. Same-Day Service. Call Us Today. http://www.allseasonswildlifecontrol.com/
Animal Control Toronto Humane removal of wildlife from your home or business 416 792 5181 http://www.swatwildlife.com/
humane society –noun ( often initial capital letter ) an organization devoted to promoting humane ideals, especially with reference to the treatment of animals.
Origin: 1770–80
A humane society may be a group that aims to stop human or animal suffering due to cruelty or other reasons, although in many countries, it is now used mostly for societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals (SPCAs). In the United Kingdom, it may also be a society that provides a waterways rescue, prevention, and recovery service, or that gives awards for the saving of human life (see: Royal Humane Society). Wikipedia
The first SPCA in Canada was the Canadian SPCA founded in Montreal in 1869. The other societies developed on a regional basis and now 123 societies are represented at a federal level by the Canadian Federation of Humane Societies http://cfhs.ca/
Showing posts with label ideas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ideas. Show all posts
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Ken Wood's "Full Platform Jacket"
Ken Wood's Platform: All the complexity of issues in ward 18 and citywide
* Fair Taxes: Reduce where possible, No more User Fee tax grabs for things like parks & rec; Hold the line on any property tax increase beyond inflation at a minimum
* Smart Budgets: a FIVE year budget plan cycle, which starts with a declaration of VALUES that would inform the rest of the budget cycle.
* Independent Audit of City Budget by January 31 of any year in which an election is to be held with results released publicly
* More transparency: Better involvement of citizens, with an interactive website that encourages budget saving ideas, city-wide; More town Halls explaining the budget process and situation
* Ranked Ballots: Where voters can select preferences by priority (1,2,3,...) to ensure the person elected truly represents voters' wish; No more 'Strategic Voting' confusion
* Term Limits: No City Councillor may sit for more than two terms consecutively; Person can take off one council term and then run again for the position; Encourages accountable political representation and respects the size and diversity of the city by giving fresh ideas a chance; No term limits for Mayor as this is the city's key recoignizable spokesperson and requires experience.
* Ban Polls: No public release of polling in the last two months of a campaign; Individual parties may poll but may not release results during election blackout period; This respects the democratic process and right of voters, not the media or partisan parties to choose *Update: As @enzodimatteo tweeted: "Poll after insufferable poll. They diminish our democracy and add nothing meaningful to the political discourse. They should be banned."
* NO - To Lowering the Voting Age: This may be appropriate at a later date, once civic education and the youth vote actually improves in terms of turnout.
* VOTING EQUITY: Right now if you own a property in a ward and live anywhere else, you get TWO votes - owner and spouse. Remove the 'spouse' vote, so that a resident or property owner each have but one vote.
* NO - To Extending the Vote to Permanent Residents: Citizenship should NOT be devalued; The issue is the 3-5 years it takes to gain Canadian Citizenship - we should push to reduce this time to 2-3 years.
* NO - to Online Voting: Technology is still too prone to viruses, hacking and manipulation; The time-proven method of many eyes ensuring a legal vote is working
* Mandatory Voting: With financial penalties for not performing a civic duty for anyone without a medical waiver; This MUST however include the option of 'None of the Above' to allow accurate voter intentions
* Publish Donor Lists: Of all campaigns at least one week before the first Advance Voting date; Would not require disclosure of finances, just names and locations.
* Ban Election Signs: For reasons that they are uninformative and hostile to the environment; Replace with temporary 'Election Kiosks' that would be erected at key points such as parks, community centres, outside subway stations, etc.; Permit candidates to only list their platforms on 8x10 pages with contacts
* Election Support: Permit candidates to link websites on accessible city website designed for ease of use with ELECTION button - would seamlessly direct inquiries to candidate sites; Allow 311 to route inquiries in a similar fashion; Require all candidates to list at a minimum their contact address and telephone number.
* Monthly Town Halls: To be held just after the monthly city council meetings to allow incumbent to report on activities and seek direction for the next monthly council meeting; Must be held in central, easily accessible location and be well publicized.
* Multi-Lingual Communication: In order to rise up, meet and cherish diversity in our city, I would allocate $20,000 of my first year's City Councillor salary to an initiative to reach constituents in their own most fluent home language. This is essential to increase civic engagement and is the price of democracy in our new society.
* Community Grants Program: Forbid City Councillors from using their office budgets to arbitrarily support lobby voting blocks; transfer a portion to a community grants program that is administered by a neutral, independent community council on a points system that ensure fairness, equity and that the community gets the best 'bang for the buck'.
* Constituency Office Designation: Every ward should have a central, easily accessible office that is owned and maintained by the city; would reduce the likelihood of politicians cherry picking locations to cater to only a segment of their ward.
* Protect Public Assets: No sell-off of city assets like Toronto Hydro, but also find a way to reclaim Schools that have been designated toi close (example: West Toronto). These lands and structures belong to the taxpayers - it doesn't matter if they are administered by school boards, the province or the city. They belong to the citizens. Find solutions, whether that be long term leases, rebranding as community centres/disaster relief centres/out of the cold/cooling centres.
* Smart Development: Change and gentrification is inevitable. We need to manage that change, which requires local neighbourhood resident input at early stages so that the change is balanced and positive for all the community. Ensure constituents are kept in the loop for all changes at every stage in their communities. Explore the possibility of local planning councils.
* Mixed-Use Buildings: No more single use buildings - ensure ground floors allow for commercial applications; Ensure housing is available for mixed--use as well: singles, families, low-income, seniors, etc.
* Smart Zoning: Ensure city zoning allows for better designed communities; Do not allow situations that would create deserts like what happens in Flemingdon Park where residents do not have easy access to food stores, banks, etc. More involvement of the community to build villages within neighbourhoods within cities.
* Expropriation Template: There are too many abandoned and wasted properties in our ward. We need an easily accessible process whereby a single citizen can identify such properties and start a process of review that eventually cause better use of such buildings and lands. Again, keeping constutuents informed and engaged is important.
* POVERTY: We need a comprehensive anti-poverty strategy that includes reducing poverty through intelligent social programs and spending money where it has real, proven positive effect. The City needs to work more closely with non-profits in this sector to make better use of their skills, research and networks.
* HUNGER: The City's Food Strategy needs a restart. Community Gardens are a help but not a solution. Food banks are struggling to keep up with demand and need city help with rent and space. Why not have food banks located in schools after hours?
* HOMELESSNESS: Streets to Homes is a good start but it is not enough. We still have homeless everywhere. Increase Toronto Rent Bank supports to all who need it (they give no interest loans for people in dangers of losing housing, now limited eligibility). More rigourous research on the efficiency of the shelter system likely will lead to city subsidies in market rent housing.
* AFFORDABLE HOUSING: The city's Toronto Community Housing Corporation needs a major investigation! It is not doing the job expected - poor maintenance, poor support of marginalized tenants, bedbugs, etc. We need a restart on this portfolio as well. Improved safety for rooming houses and more frequent inspections.
* ANIMAL/PET BYLAWS: There is a feral cat crisis in Toronto (See Cat City ). We need mandatory spay-neuter bylaws and a low cost downtown accessible spay neuter clinic. I support Dean Maher's )e\ward 20) call to ban sales of dogs and cats from retail pet stores, as it supports backyard breeding and animals are not properly cared for. "Why Buy or Breed when Rescue Pets are Euthanized". The City has to patch up relations with Toronto Humane Society and reach out to all the shelters and rescues to provide a coordinated effort.
* PUBLIC PARKS: We need more green spaces in ward 20 and need to support community initiatives like Dufferin Grove Park. Bureaucracy should not get in the way of innovation and community activism.
* ENVIRONMENT: We need to increase the tree canopy of the city to battle global warming and to increase the health of out citizens. More green strategies in every sector of city building.
* PROTECT THE WATERFRONT AND ISLANDS: Stop the condomization of the waterfront and the cutting off of the lakeshore from the rest of the city. Reclaim space as public space. No fixed link to Toronto Islands.
* CANCEL VEHICLE REGISTRATION TAX: But institute Road Tolls for rush hours coming into city core. Those that use the roads should pay for them fairly.
* COMPLETE STREETS: Where the rights of all are respected: pedestrians, cyclists, cars, transit, disabled, seniors, families, children, etc. Smarter design with separate bike lanes in a network that is connected city wide. Support and extend the BIXI initiative to a larger area.
* PEOPLE ORIENTED DESIGN: Think ahead. Design streets for our aging population with rest stops, benches and proper safety lighting.
* SMART DELIVERY OF GOODS: Encourage rail delivery inter-city with satellite hubs where goods are offloaded to smaller trucks. Restrict truck size in inner city. Institute Just in Time delivery so that deliveries are not happening during rush hours.
* ELECTRIC! not Diesel Trains: For the Georgetown corridor. Let's not build the transportation of the past or some unknown future. Electric is proven safe for our health. Do not cut costs by risking citizens' health.
*Update: Some good press on THE major election issue in Ward 18:
http://www.insidetorontovotes.ca/2010/10/diesel-trains-topic-du-jour-in-ward-18/
* SMART PARKING: Create parking hubs in business communities such as Dundas West BIA, Green 'P' Parking, multi-level buildings or underground. Parking is not for the main streets but is still needed in key locations.
* TTC an ESSENTIAL SERVICE: Getting around the city is the lifeblood of our economy. We cannot allow service disruptions on such catastrophic levels.
* TRANSIT CITY: Not the 'perfect' solution, but there is no time nor sense in debating further. We need it now. Build it!
* SUBWAY BUILDING: We should have been doing a few kilometers a year every year since the 1980's. Too expensive to catch up too quickly, but we must commit to building subways on an annual basis.
* FREE TTC TRANSIT: We need a vision now to see free transit within 25 years, funded by all levels of government
* SEPARATE ELECTED TTC CHAIR: Given the enormous portfolio of this position, both in terms of budget and the vision expected, we should have a separate elected position for the TTC CHAIR, which requires skills and experience going into the job, similar to how the USA electes Sherriff or Judge positions. No more handing out plum appointments to rookies. We cannot afford this.
As you can see, "Full Platform Jackets" are complex and comprehensive. Laying out a platform like this is almost impossible in an election campaign where the media want 30 seconds sound bytes, but we live in a big, complex city and society.
Voters should expect no less information on a candidate, because...
BUDGET & TAXES:
* Fair Taxes: Reduce where possible, No more User Fee tax grabs for things like parks & rec; Hold the line on any property tax increase beyond inflation at a minimum
* Smart Budgets: a FIVE year budget plan cycle, which starts with a declaration of VALUES that would inform the rest of the budget cycle.
* Independent Audit of City Budget by January 31 of any year in which an election is to be held with results released publicly
* More transparency: Better involvement of citizens, with an interactive website that encourages budget saving ideas, city-wide; More town Halls explaining the budget process and situation
DEMOCRACY ENHANCEMENTS:
and Community/Councillor Relations
* Ranked Ballots: Where voters can select preferences by priority (1,2,3,...) to ensure the person elected truly represents voters' wish; No more 'Strategic Voting' confusion
* Term Limits: No City Councillor may sit for more than two terms consecutively; Person can take off one council term and then run again for the position; Encourages accountable political representation and respects the size and diversity of the city by giving fresh ideas a chance; No term limits for Mayor as this is the city's key recoignizable spokesperson and requires experience.
* Ban Polls: No public release of polling in the last two months of a campaign; Individual parties may poll but may not release results during election blackout period; This respects the democratic process and right of voters, not the media or partisan parties to choose *Update: As @enzodimatteo tweeted: "Poll after insufferable poll. They diminish our democracy and add nothing meaningful to the political discourse. They should be banned."
* NO - To Lowering the Voting Age: This may be appropriate at a later date, once civic education and the youth vote actually improves in terms of turnout.
* VOTING EQUITY: Right now if you own a property in a ward and live anywhere else, you get TWO votes - owner and spouse. Remove the 'spouse' vote, so that a resident or property owner each have but one vote.
* NO - To Extending the Vote to Permanent Residents: Citizenship should NOT be devalued; The issue is the 3-5 years it takes to gain Canadian Citizenship - we should push to reduce this time to 2-3 years.
* NO - to Online Voting: Technology is still too prone to viruses, hacking and manipulation; The time-proven method of many eyes ensuring a legal vote is working
* Mandatory Voting: With financial penalties for not performing a civic duty for anyone without a medical waiver; This MUST however include the option of 'None of the Above' to allow accurate voter intentions
* Publish Donor Lists: Of all campaigns at least one week before the first Advance Voting date; Would not require disclosure of finances, just names and locations.
* Ban Election Signs: For reasons that they are uninformative and hostile to the environment; Replace with temporary 'Election Kiosks' that would be erected at key points such as parks, community centres, outside subway stations, etc.; Permit candidates to only list their platforms on 8x10 pages with contacts
* Election Support: Permit candidates to link websites on accessible city website designed for ease of use with ELECTION button - would seamlessly direct inquiries to candidate sites; Allow 311 to route inquiries in a similar fashion; Require all candidates to list at a minimum their contact address and telephone number.
* Monthly Town Halls: To be held just after the monthly city council meetings to allow incumbent to report on activities and seek direction for the next monthly council meeting; Must be held in central, easily accessible location and be well publicized.
* Multi-Lingual Communication: In order to rise up, meet and cherish diversity in our city, I would allocate $20,000 of my first year's City Councillor salary to an initiative to reach constituents in their own most fluent home language. This is essential to increase civic engagement and is the price of democracy in our new society.
* Community Grants Program: Forbid City Councillors from using their office budgets to arbitrarily support lobby voting blocks; transfer a portion to a community grants program that is administered by a neutral, independent community council on a points system that ensure fairness, equity and that the community gets the best 'bang for the buck'.
* Constituency Office Designation: Every ward should have a central, easily accessible office that is owned and maintained by the city; would reduce the likelihood of politicians cherry picking locations to cater to only a segment of their ward.
DEVELOPMENT/BUSINESS RENEWAL:
* Protect Public Assets: No sell-off of city assets like Toronto Hydro, but also find a way to reclaim Schools that have been designated toi close (example: West Toronto). These lands and structures belong to the taxpayers - it doesn't matter if they are administered by school boards, the province or the city. They belong to the citizens. Find solutions, whether that be long term leases, rebranding as community centres/disaster relief centres/out of the cold/cooling centres.
* Smart Development: Change and gentrification is inevitable. We need to manage that change, which requires local neighbourhood resident input at early stages so that the change is balanced and positive for all the community. Ensure constituents are kept in the loop for all changes at every stage in their communities. Explore the possibility of local planning councils.
* Mixed-Use Buildings: No more single use buildings - ensure ground floors allow for commercial applications; Ensure housing is available for mixed--use as well: singles, families, low-income, seniors, etc.
* Smart Zoning: Ensure city zoning allows for better designed communities; Do not allow situations that would create deserts like what happens in Flemingdon Park where residents do not have easy access to food stores, banks, etc. More involvement of the community to build villages within neighbourhoods within cities.
* Expropriation Template: There are too many abandoned and wasted properties in our ward. We need an easily accessible process whereby a single citizen can identify such properties and start a process of review that eventually cause better use of such buildings and lands. Again, keeping constutuents informed and engaged is important.
QUALITY OF LIFE: is the business of government
* POVERTY: We need a comprehensive anti-poverty strategy that includes reducing poverty through intelligent social programs and spending money where it has real, proven positive effect. The City needs to work more closely with non-profits in this sector to make better use of their skills, research and networks.
* HUNGER: The City's Food Strategy needs a restart. Community Gardens are a help but not a solution. Food banks are struggling to keep up with demand and need city help with rent and space. Why not have food banks located in schools after hours?
* HOMELESSNESS: Streets to Homes is a good start but it is not enough. We still have homeless everywhere. Increase Toronto Rent Bank supports to all who need it (they give no interest loans for people in dangers of losing housing, now limited eligibility). More rigourous research on the efficiency of the shelter system likely will lead to city subsidies in market rent housing.
* AFFORDABLE HOUSING: The city's Toronto Community Housing Corporation needs a major investigation! It is not doing the job expected - poor maintenance, poor support of marginalized tenants, bedbugs, etc. We need a restart on this portfolio as well. Improved safety for rooming houses and more frequent inspections.
* ANIMAL/PET BYLAWS: There is a feral cat crisis in Toronto (See Cat City ). We need mandatory spay-neuter bylaws and a low cost downtown accessible spay neuter clinic. I support Dean Maher's )e\ward 20) call to ban sales of dogs and cats from retail pet stores, as it supports backyard breeding and animals are not properly cared for. "Why Buy or Breed when Rescue Pets are Euthanized". The City has to patch up relations with Toronto Humane Society and reach out to all the shelters and rescues to provide a coordinated effort.
* PUBLIC PARKS: We need more green spaces in ward 20 and need to support community initiatives like Dufferin Grove Park. Bureaucracy should not get in the way of innovation and community activism.
* ENVIRONMENT: We need to increase the tree canopy of the city to battle global warming and to increase the health of out citizens. More green strategies in every sector of city building.
* PROTECT THE WATERFRONT AND ISLANDS: Stop the condomization of the waterfront and the cutting off of the lakeshore from the rest of the city. Reclaim space as public space. No fixed link to Toronto Islands.
TRAFFIC: including 'Complete Streets'
* CANCEL VEHICLE REGISTRATION TAX: But institute Road Tolls for rush hours coming into city core. Those that use the roads should pay for them fairly.
* COMPLETE STREETS: Where the rights of all are respected: pedestrians, cyclists, cars, transit, disabled, seniors, families, children, etc. Smarter design with separate bike lanes in a network that is connected city wide. Support and extend the BIXI initiative to a larger area.
* PEOPLE ORIENTED DESIGN: Think ahead. Design streets for our aging population with rest stops, benches and proper safety lighting.
* SMART DELIVERY OF GOODS: Encourage rail delivery inter-city with satellite hubs where goods are offloaded to smaller trucks. Restrict truck size in inner city. Institute Just in Time delivery so that deliveries are not happening during rush hours.
* ELECTRIC! not Diesel Trains: For the Georgetown corridor. Let's not build the transportation of the past or some unknown future. Electric is proven safe for our health. Do not cut costs by risking citizens' health.
*Update: Some good press on THE major election issue in Ward 18:
http://www.insidetorontovotes.ca/2010/10/diesel-trains-topic-du-jour-in-ward-18/
* SMART PARKING: Create parking hubs in business communities such as Dundas West BIA, Green 'P' Parking, multi-level buildings or underground. Parking is not for the main streets but is still needed in key locations.
TTC: TRANSIT - The BIG Issue!
* TTC an ESSENTIAL SERVICE: Getting around the city is the lifeblood of our economy. We cannot allow service disruptions on such catastrophic levels.
* TRANSIT CITY: Not the 'perfect' solution, but there is no time nor sense in debating further. We need it now. Build it!
* SUBWAY BUILDING: We should have been doing a few kilometers a year every year since the 1980's. Too expensive to catch up too quickly, but we must commit to building subways on an annual basis.
* FREE TTC TRANSIT: We need a vision now to see free transit within 25 years, funded by all levels of government
* SEPARATE ELECTED TTC CHAIR: Given the enormous portfolio of this position, both in terms of budget and the vision expected, we should have a separate elected position for the TTC CHAIR, which requires skills and experience going into the job, similar to how the USA electes Sherriff or Judge positions. No more handing out plum appointments to rookies. We cannot afford this.
As you can see, "Full Platform Jackets" are complex and comprehensive. Laying out a platform like this is almost impossible in an election campaign where the media want 30 seconds sound bytes, but we live in a big, complex city and society.
Voters should expect no less information on a candidate, because...
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
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
Sunday, September 26, 2010
PUBLIC ASSETS? PUBLIC SAY !
TOO MUCH GOVERNMENT? School Boards, City, Province Not On the Same Page
We keep hearing this election that our city is in financial trouble... or not.
We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem... or not.
We have assets that the city should sell to get revenue... or not.
It's a confusing situation with extreme ideas being thrown out by desperate candidates wanting to make the news with the latest outrageous statements, at least in the race for mayor.
What it does show is how truth gets distorted by personal persepective and the immediate and short term needs of those who might govern us. No one it seems is taking the longer view and realizing that the status quo in how we are governed needs to change to meet our far future needs.
Take the example of closing schools - like West Toronto, right across from where I live.
We have one taxpayer whose money goes to providing them - buildings, land, maintenance, staffing, etc. Yet who is in control? The Province ultimately, because education is a provincial responsibility. The Province allows for a democratically elected local ward government in the form of School Trustees who make up a board of control. That board is required by law to balance budgets and if it gets out of line, the Province can step in (and has) and does what it wants. Then we have the City, also under the control of the Province with seperate elected Councillors and Mayor. The Province has a lighter touch with city government, but still has the control and can punish or reward cities for meeting their agendas (just look at Transit funding issues).
In the real, physical world we still have the one taxpayer who finances the acquisition of land and infrastructure - like West Toronto. Yet, we have THREE governing bodies with an interest in the decisions that affect that single physical thing.
The Province wants to balance its budget and to get a good return on that thing.
The Scool Board wants to maximize use of schools, balance budgets and that means selling that thing.
The City wants to ensure that there is sufficient community space for increasing population densities and that means trying ti gain control of that thing.
THREE governments with different agendas competing for control of one thing.
... kind of like three hands in the one taxpayer's pocket in a way, isn't it?
Schools are unique. They are geographically and strategically placed in our communities so they are at the core of local neighbourhoods. They are built in such a way that they usually have significant green space surrounding a large, accessible structure that can accomodate large numbers of people. Often they are easily areached by public transit or are in walking distance to large residential areas. They are natural 'Community Hubs' as was the topic of a Social Planning conference that I attended just this past Friday.
Schools are extremely valuable assets that we must not misuse or dispose of without a tremendous amount of forethought - the kind that looks DECADES into the future and not just the next budget.
Despite the complexities of competing government powers and short term demands of budgets, we MUST save our schools for the children and communities of the future. All that is required is political will to change what we need to to make this happen. We owe it to our collective future.... because ...
We keep hearing this election that our city is in financial trouble... or not.
We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem... or not.
We have assets that the city should sell to get revenue... or not.
It's a confusing situation with extreme ideas being thrown out by desperate candidates wanting to make the news with the latest outrageous statements, at least in the race for mayor.
"Here's my great idea... yes it costs... but we'll just sell..(fill in the blank..Toronto Hydro, etc)."
What it does show is how truth gets distorted by personal persepective and the immediate and short term needs of those who might govern us. No one it seems is taking the longer view and realizing that the status quo in how we are governed needs to change to meet our far future needs.
Take the example of closing schools - like West Toronto, right across from where I live.
We have one taxpayer whose money goes to providing them - buildings, land, maintenance, staffing, etc. Yet who is in control? The Province ultimately, because education is a provincial responsibility. The Province allows for a democratically elected local ward government in the form of School Trustees who make up a board of control. That board is required by law to balance budgets and if it gets out of line, the Province can step in (and has) and does what it wants. Then we have the City, also under the control of the Province with seperate elected Councillors and Mayor. The Province has a lighter touch with city government, but still has the control and can punish or reward cities for meeting their agendas (just look at Transit funding issues).
In the real, physical world we still have the one taxpayer who finances the acquisition of land and infrastructure - like West Toronto. Yet, we have THREE governing bodies with an interest in the decisions that affect that single physical thing.
The Province wants to balance its budget and to get a good return on that thing.
The Scool Board wants to maximize use of schools, balance budgets and that means selling that thing.
The City wants to ensure that there is sufficient community space for increasing population densities and that means trying ti gain control of that thing.
THREE governments with different agendas competing for control of one thing.
... kind of like three hands in the one taxpayer's pocket in a way, isn't it?
Schools are unique. They are geographically and strategically placed in our communities so they are at the core of local neighbourhoods. They are built in such a way that they usually have significant green space surrounding a large, accessible structure that can accomodate large numbers of people. Often they are easily areached by public transit or are in walking distance to large residential areas. They are natural 'Community Hubs' as was the topic of a Social Planning conference that I attended just this past Friday.
Schools are extremely valuable assets that we must not misuse or dispose of without a tremendous amount of forethought - the kind that looks DECADES into the future and not just the next budget.
Despite the complexities of competing government powers and short term demands of budgets, we MUST save our schools for the children and communities of the future. All that is required is political will to change what we need to to make this happen. We owe it to our collective future.... because ...
DAVENPORT DESERVES BETTER !
Thursday, September 23, 2010
It's the ARTS stupid!
When Artists Attack ...
I knew this was coming. A year and a half ago I was at City Hall making a deputation about animal/pet bylaws with about 100+ other people making deputations. At least 90 per cent of the deputants were a well-organized city-wide lobby group demanding that the city fund the arts with substantial grants.
My plea was for the city to reconsider its tax grab of demanding licences for cats, since my analysis based on city information showed that the taxes raised would just about cover the cost of bylaw officers enforcing the licencing bylaw, with no money actually going to help the terrible ongoing stray/abandoned pet overpopulation crisis. Essentially, the city was raising money to build a bigger bureaucracy. I can recall being frustrated with city resistance to dropping a tax grab and suggested the city not hire more pet cops and 'give the money to the starving artists instead' since at least it would do some real good. (applause and laughter)
http://artsvotetoronto.ca/report-card/ surveyed all candidates for election with a heavily biased survey that seemed somewhat extortionary to me. "I am an Artist. I Vote" is the slogan. It was clear that the arts community would brook no disagreement that the arts demand more funding and fashioned individual questions in such a way that anyone who wanted to be in power better say the right things - or else.
And so the tweets and announcements begin with acquiescing candidates toeing the line...
"Thrilled to receive 4/4 stars from ArtsVote #ward18 benefits from large community of working artists" - Kevin Beaulieu (NDP Executive Assistant to incumbent Adam Giambrone - endorsed by community activist/artist Dyan Marie, incumbent councillors Adam Giambrone, Gord Perks, Adam Vaughan)
Also getting 4 stars were:
My score? Not surprisingly: ONE star - which I hasten to point out is because the individual questions were pretty much all or nothing answers.
I am still not convinced (but willing to be) that taxpayer money en masse to artists helps anyone except the artists themseves. I admit to being not as informed as I'd like on this issue, as I am in favour of meaningful community grants to local groups that demonstrably improve the quality of life in our ward. A previous idea I posted about the use of councillor office budgets (current status: councillors can give taxpayer money to vote-friendly groups as they choose):
* Lets transfer money from Councillor office budgets to a city run local grants budget that everyone can apply to. It could be a simple lottery or a well thought out procedure where points are used to award grants where neighbourhoods would see the most 'bang for the buck' and would be fair to everyone.
Another site where the Arts debate is being held: http://www.junctiontriangle.ca/node/441#comment-2362
MAYORAL ARTS DEBATE will be held Wednesday, September 29 from 6-9pm at the Art Gallery of Ontario Baillie Court 317 Dundas Street West. Moderator: John Tory with the "Major Mayoral Candidates"... congratulations to the organizers for trying to include one of the other 36 candidates! Over 4,000 people voted and (so far *) chose Keith Cole over James di Fiore and HiMY SYeD.
* Note: Highlighting the questionable veracity of online polling, the ArtsVote site says there was some funny business going on with the survey responses so a second round of voting will happen on Friday September 24 from 4-8pm.
Sadly, I regret not being able to attend this as Rogers Cable 10 has scheduled their live ward candidates debate for us that same time. One question I hope gets asked is this:
I knew this was coming. A year and a half ago I was at City Hall making a deputation about animal/pet bylaws with about 100+ other people making deputations. At least 90 per cent of the deputants were a well-organized city-wide lobby group demanding that the city fund the arts with substantial grants.
My plea was for the city to reconsider its tax grab of demanding licences for cats, since my analysis based on city information showed that the taxes raised would just about cover the cost of bylaw officers enforcing the licencing bylaw, with no money actually going to help the terrible ongoing stray/abandoned pet overpopulation crisis. Essentially, the city was raising money to build a bigger bureaucracy. I can recall being frustrated with city resistance to dropping a tax grab and suggested the city not hire more pet cops and 'give the money to the starving artists instead' since at least it would do some real good. (applause and laughter)
http://artsvotetoronto.ca/report-card/ surveyed all candidates for election with a heavily biased survey that seemed somewhat extortionary to me. "I am an Artist. I Vote" is the slogan. It was clear that the arts community would brook no disagreement that the arts demand more funding and fashioned individual questions in such a way that anyone who wanted to be in power better say the right things - or else.
And so the tweets and announcements begin with acquiescing candidates toeing the line...
"Thrilled to receive 4/4 stars from ArtsVote #ward18 benefits from large community of working artists" - Kevin Beaulieu (NDP Executive Assistant to incumbent Adam Giambrone - endorsed by community activist/artist Dyan Marie, incumbent councillors Adam Giambrone, Gord Perks, Adam Vaughan)
Also getting 4 stars were:
- Ana Bailao (Liberal/Mario Silva's former Executive Assistant)
- Hema Vyas (self-proclaimed independent and Culturelink guru)
- Frank de Jong (Green Party environmentalist)
Not completing the survey for ward 18 were: Doug Carroll, Abdirazak Elmi, Nha Le, Joe MacDonald, Mohammed Muhit, Kirk Russell, Joanna Telitniak.
Perhaps I should have done the 'smart political game thing' and said what voters wanted to hear or just not even responded to the survey (as it seems most candidates chose). But I have a different standard: I believe in answering all surveys and questions, taking the risk that honesty is what voters really want to hear. I've long been tired of hearing spin-doctored politically correct vagueness from politicians, and vow that I won't do that.My score? Not surprisingly: ONE star - which I hasten to point out is because the individual questions were pretty much all or nothing answers.
I am still not convinced (but willing to be) that taxpayer money en masse to artists helps anyone except the artists themseves. I admit to being not as informed as I'd like on this issue, as I am in favour of meaningful community grants to local groups that demonstrably improve the quality of life in our ward. A previous idea I posted about the use of councillor office budgets (current status: councillors can give taxpayer money to vote-friendly groups as they choose):
* Lets transfer money from Councillor office budgets to a city run local grants budget that everyone can apply to. It could be a simple lottery or a well thought out procedure where points are used to award grants where neighbourhoods would see the most 'bang for the buck' and would be fair to everyone.
Another site where the Arts debate is being held: http://www.junctiontriangle.ca/node/441#comment-2362
MAYORAL ARTS DEBATE will be held Wednesday, September 29 from 6-9pm at the Art Gallery of Ontario Baillie Court 317 Dundas Street West. Moderator: John Tory with the "Major Mayoral Candidates"... congratulations to the organizers for trying to include one of the other 36 candidates! Over 4,000 people voted and (so far *) chose Keith Cole over James di Fiore and HiMY SYeD.
* Note: Highlighting the questionable veracity of online polling, the ArtsVote site says there was some funny business going on with the survey responses so a second round of voting will happen on Friday September 24 from 4-8pm.
Sadly, I regret not being able to attend this as Rogers Cable 10 has scheduled their live ward candidates debate for us that same time. One question I hope gets asked is this:
How do you see the arts contributing to real solutions for poverty-hunger-homelessness in our city, and please refrain from telling us how this helps the 'starving artists' ?
* Update: Ontario provincial government coughs up additional $27 million over next 3 years to non-profit groups as operating funds... http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2010/09/24/ontario-arts-funding.html
Interesting reader comments on this.... with hydro going up why spend $ on arts...why should govts be allowed to spend $ on charities - if art is not good enough to support itself why is my money being taken to do so...why are arts more important than helping low income people or seniors...this is the type of investment you don't get a return on..."sugar coated welfare for artists" - you can see the anger out there. Arts lobby need to answer these questions.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Preliminary List of Issues
Setting the Agenda 2010 http://settingtheagenda2010.com/about/
In November, 2009 a forward looking city councillor, Joe Mihevc (ward 21 St Paul's: http://www.toronto.ca/councillors/mihevc1.htm ) created a website inviting people to determine the policy issues Torontonians care about - moving from the 'who' to the 'what' as he put it.
A lot of interesting debate, suggestion and ideas germinated there. I encourage people to look at the individual inputs, some of which are my own and helped me think about what might be done better in our city.
The list started with broad categories, some then broken down into sub-topics:
* Accessibility
* Anti-Poverty Strategy
* Arts and Culture
* Community Services and Engagement (including day care, libraries, seniors services, parks, forestry,recreation, etc)
* Cycling Infrastructure
* Democratic Reform and Civic Engagement
* Economics and Finances
* Green Infrastructure
* Hard Infrastructure (including streets, water and waste water, sidewalks, green infrastructure)
* Jobs
* Parking (including paid on street, permit and residential off street)
* Party Systems at City Hall
* Planning and Development
* Public Health
* Public Spaces, Clean and Beautiful Cities and Urban Design
* Seniors' Issues
* Taxes
* Transit Future
* Youth Issues
It seemed that political personality was taken out of the discussion and pure ideas and concerns were explored.
In November, 2009 a forward looking city councillor, Joe Mihevc (ward 21 St Paul's: http://www.toronto.ca/councillors/mihevc1.htm ) created a website inviting people to determine the policy issues Torontonians care about - moving from the 'who' to the 'what' as he put it.
A lot of interesting debate, suggestion and ideas germinated there. I encourage people to look at the individual inputs, some of which are my own and helped me think about what might be done better in our city.
The list started with broad categories, some then broken down into sub-topics:
* Accessibility
* Anti-Poverty Strategy
* Arts and Culture
* Community Services and Engagement (including day care, libraries, seniors services, parks, forestry,recreation, etc)
* Cycling Infrastructure
* Democratic Reform and Civic Engagement
* Economics and Finances
* Green Infrastructure
* Hard Infrastructure (including streets, water and waste water, sidewalks, green infrastructure)
* Jobs
* Parking (including paid on street, permit and residential off street)
* Party Systems at City Hall
* Planning and Development
* Public Health
* Public Spaces, Clean and Beautiful Cities and Urban Design
* Seniors' Issues
* Taxes
* Transit Future
* Youth Issues
It seemed that political personality was taken out of the discussion and pure ideas and concerns were explored.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Bike Lanes, Complete Streets, War on the Car and Transit City
BICYCLE LANES : City council is to vote on bicycle lanes for the very busy car speedway of University Avenue (and this after all the arguements over bicycle lanes on Jarvis Street)... http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/toronto/story.html?id=2926872 and it appears to be a hot issue in the mayoral race, with some lining up against bike lanes (Rossi), some dithering about it (Smitherman) and some in favour (Pantalone, Ford). All the media spin seems to repeatedly flog the phrase "War on the Car", as if this is an us versus them situation. Many of us have seen the nearly useless 'bike sharrows' on Lansdowne Avenue which are just painted reminders for drivers to watch for cyclists, while doing little to ensure traffic safety. *** Update: Council passed the proposal, calling it a "tipping point" because there was little public opposition: http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/toronto/archive/2010/04/20/proposal-for-bike-lanes-on-university-avenue-passes-first-hurdle.aspx
COMPLETE STREETS : This is yet another friendly buzz word being bandied about lately (like "Transit City"). What it means is that city planning should design our roadways in such a way that they are safe, attractive, comfortable and provide access to all types of users: bicycles, motorists, pedestrians and public transit users. The idea is that all people can move around the city, no matter what their age, ability or disability. (For more background on this, see: http://www.completestreets.org/ or http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/programs/environment-utsp-casestudy-cs72e-completestreets-812.htm )
War on the Car? No - I don't believe that it is that simple. Those claims, usually aimed at the very busy bicyclist (often equates 'leftist') lobby at city hall by people and politicians from the outskirts of the city (ie. not downtown, core Toronto) are made by people who want to preserve their status quo. That is, they want to keep driving single occupant vehicles through traffic gridlock into and out of the city and not be hindered by obstacles like cyclists. It is a very selfish view and completely ignores the fact that we are on a track to kill ourselves and the planet with pollution. However, I do concede that many are diverted to using their cars because of poor public transit and poor design of out city access roadways. Yet fuel is added to the fire by some cyclists who overtly antagonize drivers by their behaviours on the road. This is an unecessary conflict situation that is not helped by people polarizing the debate and hurling insults at each other.
TRANSIT CITY : This is a proposal by the outgoing Mayor Miller administration to build 8 new LRT (Light Rail Transit) lines to areas not now being served by high volume transit (ie subways). The plan is to extend capacity and more frequent service to outlying areas to the east (Scarborough), north (Finch west), south (waterfront) and west (airport). Since subways are terrifically expensive, using electricly powered vehicles is the next best step to attaining service goals. The 8 lines are: Eglinton crosstown, Jane north, Finch west, Waterfront west, Don Mills north, Sheppard east, Scarborough Rapid Transit (a kind of north-east line), and Scarborough-Malvern. Full details can be found here: http://www3.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Projects_and_initiatives/Transit_city/index.jsp
MY PROPOSAL: CITY OF THE FUTURE
Given the perfect storm of traffic gridlock, under-funded public transit, growing population, increasing density and diversity, climate change and a competitive global economy, Toronto needs to dream bigger. We need to collectively collaborate on planning for a unique city of the future where all the complex needs of a densely packed urban environment are met. This would include:
- PUBLIC TRANSIT : Robust, fully accessible and 'first choice'. Customer service driven, reliable, frequent and comfortable. This requires very low fares to start with an eventual intent on making public transit completely free to use for the rider. Interconnectivity with all modes of transport is a must: rail, subway, streetcar, bus, cycling, airport, etc. Public transit must reach out to the entire GTA and beyond. Since it is a massive undertaking, it should be administered by an independent regional authority and (eventually) 100% funded from property, business, sales, gas taxes and road tolls. This is ESSENTIAL! ***Update: Someone else thinking about this http://thestar.blogs.com/yourcitymycity/transit/
- Road Tolls. A sensibly defined defined inner city core needs to charge road tolls to discourage automobile use and reduce traffic gridlock and pollution.
- Downsize Transport. Prohibit large transport trailer trucks from entering a defined inner city core. Instead, they would have to use smaller sized trucks for goods transport within the core. This requires a radical rethink of how we move goods across country and into the city. I propose advocating significant rail and ship transport to move goods into satellite stations around the city. From there, the smaller truck vehicles would move goods within the city. Such vehicles would be exempt from road tolls.
- Parking : We must stop the practice of parking being allowed on every street. Streets are meant to be used in motion. People will still need a place to store their vehicles, so underground parking or, second choice of above ground parking structures needs to be favoured. There will be those with physical disabilities who need transport, but this should be the duty of a robust public transit system.
- Multiple Use Roads : As in the opening photo of this blog, we need a "Street of the Future" where there is separated access for pedestrians, cyclists, cars/trucks, public transit. Planting trees, bushes, hedges would contribute to beauty. reducing pollution and safety. More benches, rest stops and water fountains for the traveller and those with disabilities or the elderly would help make roadways truly livable.
Emphasis on COLLABORATIVE EFFORT. We cannot trust any one group to design our living space of the future. Lobby groups, politicians, urban planners, engineers, city bureaucracies, special interest groups all have their own agendas. We need to come together to plan a better city now, because...
DAVENPORT DESERVES BETTER !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
