I'd like to know why any of them feel like they deserve another chance. I truly don't mean that to be snarky. What are the records that they're standing on?
I would also like to know how they feel they've grown the business climate here in PG, specifically re: downtown. Most of those businesses that left the downtown core didn't relocate. What have they done about derelict and vacant buildings downtown? Have they worked with the owners of those buildings in any capacity to encourage clean-up and / or occupation? I'd also like to know how any of them might be able to look at voters with a straight face and tell us they "have a plan." If they do, where has that plan been for the past 4 years? Why now and not 4 years ago?
I get that there is a lot to the machinations of council and running a city that I don't understand. But we elect them so that they do understand, and to tell us they have a plan when they know full well that said machinations will prevent them from implementing it, just fuels cynicism and apathy. Tell me about a plan they can implement. For real.
Yu couldn't do it (throwback to his last campaign) and I hope he doesn't run again because the apathy of voters could give him a real chance of being re-elected. Sigh.
It took 10 years of begging and pleading to get a sidewalk along Austin Road. I don't have a lot of hope anymore, unfortunately.
The core problem is that in absence of compelling NEW candidates with actual specific change-vision, and a resume that fits the moment, most voters run to their safety candidates (hence last election being a very similar climate, and us electioning a nearly identical council).
We can be as scrupulous and scathing as we want to the current Council but it means nothing if the crop vying to take their seats are similarly dogmatic but unproven or providing a weak resume.
This is why I was hugely in favour in giving Council a raise a couple months ago - it's quite literally the only recruitment tool we have right now. The job absolutely sucks, the pay is awful, and you're just hoping some charitable smart/progressive/qualified person signs up for it.
100%. I don't want to be scathing, though. These are real questions. I would love for them to say, "This is what we've done, and this is how it compares to what we said we were going to do, and this is why I think we should get another chance." Instead, they will undoubtedly give us, "These are my ideas for the future, nevermind what I've been doing the past 4 years."
Simon Yu was untested, and hasn't proven himself, but the options were also limited.
Great post, very similar things could be said if where I live in Powell River. I think much of deindustrializing rural bc is experiencing the same issues of decaying infrastructure as the resource base dries up and big capital pulls out
One thing that I haven't heard (and perhaps Darrin has?) is what hit the city will take with the Canfor Pulp closure in November, in terms of taxes. Because once it is no longer an active industrial site, BC Assessment puts it in a different category and the property value drops significantly. And thus property taxes decline significantly.
I didn't realize this was a thing until Crofton and Vanderhoof (with the closure of Canfor Plateau) lost a lot of tax dollars. Vanderhoof lost about a million dollars in revenue, about 10% of their budget, and Croft lost close to that. It's a huge hit for these small communities on top of all the job losses/income taxes/local spending, but I think it will definitely be a kick to PG's revenues.
Living in the regional district for nine years, and having an area director that has won by acclimation twice in that time (and possibly again? I need to look into the RD electoral news), I find the PG political scene pretty disheartening. Mostly because the lack of understanding, or the unwillingness to understand, how municipal governments are structured and operate. Heck, I can't wait for people living outside of city limits to put mayoral signs on their lawns (again) and go to the city to vote (again), only to find that they aren't eligible (and again get really angry that they can't).
It also makes me uncomfortable that some current and aspiring councillors really do not understand that they are one vote only on a democratic council, and do not have any special powers or influence over legislation and policy and bylaws that provide necessary checks and balances. My sense from the chatter on at least one FB group, that some people who aspire to political life do not want to follow the rules and they want to be able to lean over city staff doing their jobs, and micromanage their every move, and/or fire them if they don't like what they see.
As a public servant myself, it is very disheartening, especially when the overwhelming majority of us are doing our jobs as best as we can when as asked of us by our superiors. We can and do challenge some decisions when we feel that they may not be fully informed of the impacts or risks (and document it), and ultimately are overseen by ncluding those who report directly to elected officials. I'm sure it is similar in the city.
Is it a perfect system? Absolutely not. Bureaucracy never is (don't get me started on Deputy Minister approvals to buy office supplies right now!). But holy hannah, it is a far better system here than having a supreme ruler send in a DOGE team for "cost cutting", only to save so little, and lose so much.
*rant over*
(edits to fix a lot of spelling and punctuation, sort of)
I'd like to know why any of them feel like they deserve another chance. I truly don't mean that to be snarky. What are the records that they're standing on?
I would also like to know how they feel they've grown the business climate here in PG, specifically re: downtown. Most of those businesses that left the downtown core didn't relocate. What have they done about derelict and vacant buildings downtown? Have they worked with the owners of those buildings in any capacity to encourage clean-up and / or occupation? I'd also like to know how any of them might be able to look at voters with a straight face and tell us they "have a plan." If they do, where has that plan been for the past 4 years? Why now and not 4 years ago?
I get that there is a lot to the machinations of council and running a city that I don't understand. But we elect them so that they do understand, and to tell us they have a plan when they know full well that said machinations will prevent them from implementing it, just fuels cynicism and apathy. Tell me about a plan they can implement. For real.
Yu couldn't do it (throwback to his last campaign) and I hope he doesn't run again because the apathy of voters could give him a real chance of being re-elected. Sigh.
It took 10 years of begging and pleading to get a sidewalk along Austin Road. I don't have a lot of hope anymore, unfortunately.
Yeah, I more or less agree across the board.
The core problem is that in absence of compelling NEW candidates with actual specific change-vision, and a resume that fits the moment, most voters run to their safety candidates (hence last election being a very similar climate, and us electioning a nearly identical council).
We can be as scrupulous and scathing as we want to the current Council but it means nothing if the crop vying to take their seats are similarly dogmatic but unproven or providing a weak resume.
This is why I was hugely in favour in giving Council a raise a couple months ago - it's quite literally the only recruitment tool we have right now. The job absolutely sucks, the pay is awful, and you're just hoping some charitable smart/progressive/qualified person signs up for it.
100%. I don't want to be scathing, though. These are real questions. I would love for them to say, "This is what we've done, and this is how it compares to what we said we were going to do, and this is why I think we should get another chance." Instead, they will undoubtedly give us, "These are my ideas for the future, nevermind what I've been doing the past 4 years."
Simon Yu was untested, and hasn't proven himself, but the options were also limited.
Great post, very similar things could be said if where I live in Powell River. I think much of deindustrializing rural bc is experiencing the same issues of decaying infrastructure as the resource base dries up and big capital pulls out
One thing that I haven't heard (and perhaps Darrin has?) is what hit the city will take with the Canfor Pulp closure in November, in terms of taxes. Because once it is no longer an active industrial site, BC Assessment puts it in a different category and the property value drops significantly. And thus property taxes decline significantly.
I didn't realize this was a thing until Crofton and Vanderhoof (with the closure of Canfor Plateau) lost a lot of tax dollars. Vanderhoof lost about a million dollars in revenue, about 10% of their budget, and Croft lost close to that. It's a huge hit for these small communities on top of all the job losses/income taxes/local spending, but I think it will definitely be a kick to PG's revenues.
Living in the regional district for nine years, and having an area director that has won by acclimation twice in that time (and possibly again? I need to look into the RD electoral news), I find the PG political scene pretty disheartening. Mostly because the lack of understanding, or the unwillingness to understand, how municipal governments are structured and operate. Heck, I can't wait for people living outside of city limits to put mayoral signs on their lawns (again) and go to the city to vote (again), only to find that they aren't eligible (and again get really angry that they can't).
It also makes me uncomfortable that some current and aspiring councillors really do not understand that they are one vote only on a democratic council, and do not have any special powers or influence over legislation and policy and bylaws that provide necessary checks and balances. My sense from the chatter on at least one FB group, that some people who aspire to political life do not want to follow the rules and they want to be able to lean over city staff doing their jobs, and micromanage their every move, and/or fire them if they don't like what they see.
As a public servant myself, it is very disheartening, especially when the overwhelming majority of us are doing our jobs as best as we can when as asked of us by our superiors. We can and do challenge some decisions when we feel that they may not be fully informed of the impacts or risks (and document it), and ultimately are overseen by ncluding those who report directly to elected officials. I'm sure it is similar in the city.
Is it a perfect system? Absolutely not. Bureaucracy never is (don't get me started on Deputy Minister approvals to buy office supplies right now!). But holy hannah, it is a far better system here than having a supreme ruler send in a DOGE team for "cost cutting", only to save so little, and lose so much.
*rant over*
(edits to fix a lot of spelling and punctuation, sort of)