12 Aug 2006

Suzanne Elston drops out of Clarington's Regional Race

August 9th, 2006

Suzanne Elston drops out of Clarington's Regional Race

Award-winning journalist Suzanne Elston has dropped out of the Clarington race for Regional Councillor, Wards 1 and 2. Elston, a well-known environmentalist and community activist, placed second in the 2000 and 2003 municipal elections, without the benefit of election signs.

Elston has cited family health reasons for her withdrawal and hopes that this year's candidates will follow her lead and not pollute the landscape with unnecessary lawn signs.

I've never met a ditch or a public boulevard that can vote, said Elston. Election signs should only be placed on private property to show electoral support.

Elston notes that since Clarington adopted the mail-in ballot system in 2003, lawn signs have become redundant. According to a local by-law, election signs cannot be put up until October 1st. Election ballots are mailed out to voters the following week.

By the time the signs go up, a lot of people have already made up their minds and may have already sent back their ballots, said Elston. This system favors the incumbents. Challengers have very little time to have an impact with their signs.

For further information, contact:
Suzanne Elston phone: 905-434-6865 email: selston@gmail.com

2 comments:

  1. So sorry that she's not running. She would have been an excellent regional councillor and may have helped to "green up" our Regional Council (who seem more interested in growth for the sake of growth and as much development as possible). Sprawling development. I'm quite sure Mayor Parrish would have appreciated another green councillor at the region to counter so many of the others.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You are absolutely right. Durham Region Planning Committee is stacked with developer-friendly/resident-unfriendly councilors. The worst offender is the head honcho himself, Anderson. He bullies the weak ones into his pro real-estate, pro developer, pro "growth at any cost" vision.

    Don't they realize that growth costs? Sure, they get some added tax revenue and (low) development charges, but the ongoing costs for infrastructure, renewal, and associated costs are not covered and must be made up for by taxpayers.

    Plenty of glory but no guts. We need a change in this committee as well as the chance to vote for Regional Chair for a change. Isn't that our right?

    ReplyDelete