On the home front (Part II)

So, Kitchener and Waterloo. Not where I've spent the majority of my time the last few years, but two cities I still know well enough to give an overview of their political situation.

We'll start in my hometown of Kitchener, where mayor-for-life Carl Zehr (right) is running for yet another term - first elected in 1994, this would be his sixth term as mayor. In that time, Zehr has benefitted greatly from a lack of strong challengers - a recent poll conducted on The Record's website saw over 70% of respondents unhappy with Zehr's performance, yet so far nobody credible has declared their intention to try and take Zehr's job.

Recent speculation has been that 'several' current Kitchener councillors are poised to take a run at the top job - but I haven't seen any names suggested. There are very few current councillors who have amassed enough of a reputation to be able to effectively challenge Zehr, but Berry Vrbanovic and John Smola (and again, I'm completely speculating here) are two of a very select group who might be able to pull it off.

Kitchener's council will have a vastly different look after the election, though - not only because of current councillors running for mayor or opting to leave politics altogether (and again, Kitchener politicians seem slower than their Brantford counterparts in declaring their intentions), but also because the city is being restructured into ten wards (up from the current number of six), meaning new faces will be on council no matter what, allowing for new voices and perspectives to be heard.

In Waterloo, incumbent mayor Brenda Halloran (left) (who was herself a surprise election in 2006 over incumbent mayor Herb Epp) will definitely find herself in a race - councillor Jan D'Ailly has already announced his intention to run for mayor.

D'Ailly (right) was clearly planning this move for a long time - it seems as though everytime CTV reports on Waterloo politics, he's in front of the camera explaining how something is either great for Waterloo or bad for Waterloo but went through despite his objections. That public profile will serve him well in a battle that will ilkely see more top-flight candidates in the running before long.

Downtown revitalization has yet to reach the critical mass in Kitchener that it did in Brantford a decade ago (and in Waterloo it doesn't even need to be on the table), but that doesn't mean that there's no interesting issues in Waterloo Region this year.

I suspect the biggest election issue in either city will be light rail transit - yes, Zehr and others have said that anti-transit groups had and missed their chance to speak up, but once enough people realize what went through while they weren't paying attention, reopening the debate will be the only face-saving move the politicians can make.

Rapid transit is definitely something that could be improved in Waterloo Region - having rode the iXpress a few times, I feel qualified enough to make that statement - but light rail is not the right way to do it. I've written about this before, and so have others who are far more passionate and informed, but the biggest drawback is that regular traffic along the route will be utterly frustrated.

A good rapid transit system should make people realize its obvious advantages over using cars, not - as the current proposal would - piss off drivers to the point where they'd rather ignore downtown altogether than get there via light rail.

I don't know what the right solution is, but Kitchener and Waterloo (and Cambridge, ideally a partner in any scenario) are full of smart people who could figure it out.

Also on the table - yet again - is the issue of amalgamation. This time, Taxpayers For Sensible Transit are trying to get a referendum question tacked on to the October ballot, asking whether the Kitchener and Waterloo city councils should explore the idea of combining into one city.

Much like the Quebec referendum in 1995, Kitchener and Waterloo residents aren't actually being asked to vote on whether the cities should amalgamate (at least not yet), just on if they think it's worth exploring. But also like 1995, it's going to be portrayed as a referendum on amalgamation, rather than on councillors being allowed to explore whether an idea makes sense.

Amalgamation is a tricky issue - Kitchenerites look at Waterloo with its bustling economy, worldly reputation, and quickly-plowed streets, with envy, but Waterloo residents also pay significantly higher property taxes. It's not easy to figure out what an amalgamated city would look like or how residents would be impacted, and I would rather see these issues researched by informed elected officials after October than a barely-informed electorate befroe it.

I'll likely continue blogging about all three cities as October 25 draws closer.

-----------------------

One quick question on Stephen Harper's cabinet shuffle before I leave politics alone for a while.

Considering all Conservative policy comes from the top down, and cabinet ministers will never leave the cabinet while the Conservatives are in power (as that would be an admission of weakness), why would anyone want to be a Conservative backbencher anymore? Is there a more thankless job in politics?

--Ryan