15 Sept 2006

Why so many candidates? Are we dissatisfied?

Why are there so many candidates in this election for Clarington Mayor and Council seats? Could it be because of higher than normal voter dissatisfaction with our present Council? Even ex-mayor Hamre has declared she is running in this election because she wants to get Council "back on track to the station called democracy" (source Orono Weekly Times Sept. 13 article). She retired in 2000 and has not been happy with the direction our municipal council has taken. And she's not alone.

There has been much discussion (and complaining) by voters over the last couple of years about all the "in camera" sessions by this council. Then they come out and vote but you don't know what they are voting on. There seems to be far too much of this when it should be an open and transparent council. Then again we don't know what goes on behind closed doors so we don't know what is being voted on. Sure there are things that must be discussed "in camera" such as some personnel matters, but there seem to be SO many private sessions these days and people wonder why.

Then there are the complaints about the fact that there is little debate on issues - it seems most things are just rubber-stamped by council. The greatest debate comes from residents who come as delegations before council to speak on issues. But too often they are interrupted and intimidated if they disagree with a council position or if they dare to criticize any of council's actions. Or they are acknowledged and thanked for their input, the Mayor asks quickly "Are there any questions" for this speaker and rapidly "There are none so thank you". And then on to the next delegation. Even when questions are asked, it seems the resident's concerns too frequently fall on deaf ears. When lawyers or agents for the development industry get up to speak, however, they seem to be given greater attention as well as respect. Correct or not, that is the perception.

Then we have the unprecedented salary increases. The average pay for local councillors prior to 2000 was $17,000. Last year Clarington's four local councillors were paid $35,000, with the two regional councillors taking home $85,000 depending on what committees they sit on. Regional Councillors prior to 2000 were paid $46,000. (This includes Regional pay).

Add to that the incredible mileage rate increase. This council more than doubled their mileage allowances. The new flat rate increased the mayor's mileage allowance from $570 a month to $1,293. Councillors' mileage rates jump from $228 to $564 per month.
Collecting on a per-kilometre basis would be a complicated procedure for councillors who make numerous trips a day, said Regional Councillor Jim Schell (who is running for Mayor in this election)
Now, if it's too difficult for our politicians to keep track of mileage (and these are the people who are running our municipality???), then why not simply use a trip odometer?

There is also the perception of council being "developer friendly" in their decisions, which ties in with the fact that every single one of our present council and mayor had developers as donors to their last campaign. There are already a couple of new candidates who have declared that they will NOT accept donations from the development industry or companies who do business with the municipality. And there is much support for this action from groups such as the Sierra Club of Canada, Rouge Duffins Greenspace Coalition, Ontario Greenbelt Alliance, Ontario Smart Growth Network and many individual Clarington voters. Taking this step makes it more difficult for these candidates without the deep pockets in that sector, but makes for a candidacy that is not beholden to any of the developers and candidates who won't feel pressure to do any reciprocal favours for anyone if elected.

Incumbents already have an advantage over new candidates with name recognition, previous literature to hand out and signs from previous campaigns. They also have the restrictive Clarington sign by-law that gives them another advantage over those who would run against them, and while it could easily have been changed at any time over the last few years or even in the lead-up to this election, it has not been done. They already have abundant vehicles for "campaigning" including speeches made at council meetings leading up to an election, their pictures being featured in the local newspapers without having to put in "ads", their seats on various boards and councils within the region and public appearances in the official position of mayor or councillor at local events.

Some Clarington residents have commented that they have observed how council's attention to the wants or needs of the voter changes when an election is imminent. Suddenly the mayor is more cordial to delegations. Suddenly there are more "speeches" by councillors at council meetings. Suddenly there is more of an attempt, whether superficial or sincere, to accommodate the wishes of voters. Still there is little debate among this group of municipal officials and still they seem to rubber-stamp most motions.

Clarington voters are increasingly speaking up about their dissatisfaction with the current council on a number of issues, which might be the reason there are more candidates for all seats in this election than usual. Except for Local Ward 1, where there is still only one candidate (the incumbent) but there are rumours that there will be additional candidates before nominations close on September 29th.

Is it a good thing to have so many candidates? Perhaps not, as it dilutes the votes and may allow for someone who is not really the best candidate for the position to slip through and win. Or those wanting change may dilute the vote to the extent that the one incumbent for a position will win over challengers simply because there are more choices for "change" and only one incumbent. It is always good to have more than one candidate for each seat as it affords the voter a choice. But having too many may not be a good thing either. We'll have to wait and see how this election turns out.

We will also have to wait and see whether there are any withdrawals of nominations by October 2nd which is the last date for withdrawals for this election. And we will all have to take a good, long, hard look at the candidates in our wards and the mayoral candidates. We'll have to try to learn all we can about each one and then make an informed decision when we vote.

Candidates are welcome to comment here if they wish, and may let us know whether they have put any restrictions on their own campaigns regarding who they will accept donations from. They can also comment on any other issues they would like to speak up on.

There is much interest in Clarington leading up to this election, and with good reason. We do deserve better.

2 comments:

  1. These are all good reasons to look beyond the incumbents to the challengers. Incumbents always have a head start and advantages over new candidates, including the big one of name recognition. But in this election that may be more of a hindrance than a help.

    You are right that there is much dissatisfaction with the present mayor and council. I am especially upset over the whopping salary AND mileage rate increases they gave themselves. There are other important issues but this one points up how helpless we are when this council makes a decision, good or bad. A zero percent tax increase might be reason for a raise, but doubling their own salaries on top of the tax increases every year is unconscionable.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well we have one less now as Diane Hamre has pulled out and would not comment on why.

    ReplyDelete