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

On the home front (Part I)

(I was originally going to do this as one post, but I thought if I split it into two it'd give the illusion that I'm actually getting something up here from time to time.)

It's that time again, Ontario.

Municipal elections are coming up. It doesn't feel like three-and-a-half years since I, bushy-tailed young journalism student that I was, reported on Brantford's 2006 elections for class, yet that's exactly how long it has been.

This October, Brantfordites (and Kitchenerites and Waterloosers and everybody else in the province) return to the polls to cast their ballots for mayor, city council, and positions of lesser renown.

I'll be dealing with Brantford in this post, and then I'll be back in a few days to talk about the situations in Kitchener and Waterloo.

Brantford has had a history of competitive mayoral elections (as well as John Turmel and Winston Ferguson-types high on colour and short on the 'taken seriously' factor), and 2010 promises to be no exception.

Incumbent mayor Mike Hancock has yet to officially announce his candidacy either way, but all signs seem to point to Hancock not seeking a third turn. Several candidates have already begun campaigns, and if Hancock were running, he would likely want his name in on the ground for.

The same goes for former mayor Chris Friel, who finished a very near second to Hancock in both 2003 and 2006. Friel is a bit less of a long shot to run, but again the lack of any announcement thus far makes his candidacy unlikely.

Of those who have declared, the favourite appears to be current Ward 1 councillor Mark Littell (left). First elected to council in 2006, with a public perception that he was only running for council so he could run for mayor in 2010, Littell has proven those predictions correct.

If nothing else, Littell certainly is able to look and act the part of Mayor of Brantford, and that is why I see him being successful - he's a good politician. Being responsible for downtown has allowed Littell to take the lead on the Colborne expropriation and other major issues, which has in turn given him more visibility with the public which can be leveraged into a strong mayoral campaign.

To the extent that municipal politicians can be classified by ideology, Littell is a bit of a conservative - nice to business, and happy to see his record tied to major business-friendly projects. Students generally don't care about Brantford politics enough to have opinions on the subject, but Littell (likely because of his obvious ambition and conservative leanings) is generally disliked by students who have met him.


>Another strong candidate is current councillor John Sless (right). Sless has been on council for much longer than Littell, and has cultivated a reputation as a true fiscal conservative - somebody who will question even the smallest bits of city spending, ensuring that the Brantford taxpayers get the best value for their money.

Sless' biggest challenge is his appearance - he looks like the councillor who goes over every line of the budget with a fine-tooth comb, but he doesn't look like a mayor. It might seem trivial, but when so much of the public's voting power will be spent based on who looks most impressive on TV, Sless has an uphill battle.

The third - and likely final - current councillor seeking the mayor's chair is James Calnan (left), also new to council in 2006. Calnan hasn't developed a reputation to the extent of Littell or Sless, which could hit him harder than any policy or qualification issues - he's more of an unknown.

Calnan has become a go-to councillor for CTV when they head to Brantford to cover local issues, so that is a source of visibility that the other two don't have - but I don't think it's important enough to make a big difference.

Also running is former councillor Mike Quattrociocchi, but his candidacy will likely be hampered by the same factors that sunk his 2006 bid to remain on council (namely, a disregard for building permits and by extension all municipal by-laws, such are the wonders of perception).

It seems as though the biggest issue in Brantford this electoral session will be the aforementioned state of Colborne's south side between Grand River Hall and Icomm Dr. Properties are scheduled to be demolished soon, even though there is no plan as far as what will go into that space or how any of it will be paid for. Littell has been one of the main proponents of pushing through with all of this no matter what - which leads my cynical side to wonder if he wants it out of the public's mind before the election because he knows it would hurt his chances otherwise.

Predicting what other issues will emerge over the course of a campaign is never easy, but I wouldn't be surprised if Brantford's election issues included a renovated, expanded, and possibly relocated bus terminal, ways to attract commercial and retail (read: non-Laurier) partners to the downtown, redevelopment of remaining brownfield (and, less likely, greyfield) sites, and attracting new investors to the city.

In any event, it's sure to be an interesting campaign. Kitchener and Waterloo, probably in less detail, to come next week.

--Ryan