2022 Ottawa Municipal Election

[rocketphish]

Mayor Watson urges Ford government to drop 'strong mayor' plan
Tuesday's throne speech confirmed the Ford government would plow ahead with a new governance model providing special powers to the mayors of Ottawa and Toronto.

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Aug 09, 2022 • 23 minutes ago • 2 minute read

Don’t do it.

That’s the message from Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson to the Ontario Progressive Conservative government as Premier Doug Ford muscles into local government armed with plans for a “strong mayor” system for Ottawa and Toronto — and potentially other cities in the future.

“I don’t see a need to give certain mayors more powers and veto power over duly elected councillors,” Watson said in a statement Tuesday after Lieutenant Governor Elizabeth Dowdeswell read the throne speech in the Ontario legislature.

“What we have in place now, while imperfect, does create a system of checks and balances between the mayor and council,” said Watson, who isn’t seeking re-election in the Oct. 24 municipal vote. “I have never asked for more powers and I would urge the government to not proceed with this aspect of the throne speech.”

Tuesday’s throne speech confirmed the Ford government would plow ahead with a new governance model providing special powers to the mayors of Ottawa and Toronto. The PCs are tying their proposal to the housing crisis.

“Strong-mayor systems will empower municipal leaders to work more effectively with the province to reduce timelines for development, standardize processes and address local barriers to increasing the supply of housing,” Dowdeswell said in reading the throne speech.

“For urban populations, these new powers will be especially relevant as the province works with its municipal partners to expand the footprint of transit-oriented communities so more people can live, work and play near the convenience of public transit.”

On Wednesday, Municipal Affairs and Housing Minister Steve Clark is introducing legislation characterized as “additional tools to build more homes faster.”

The PCs haven’t yet put down on paper exactly what the strong mayor rules would be, but Ford has suggested the governance model would provide veto power to the mayor, with two-thirds of council being able to block the veto.

Currently, the mayor’s vote on council holds the same weight as ward councillors’ votes. Each member gets a single vote on a motion. It means if the mayor, or any council member, wants to turn a proposal into policy, more than half of council needs to agree.

In Toronto, Mayor John Tory, who’s seeking re-election, has supported the idea of a strong mayor system.

However, the idea hasn’t been met with much fanfare in Ottawa.

Ottawa’s mayoral candidates weren’t lauding the province’s plans when word squeaked out last month about the strong mayor proposal.

Catherine McKenney criticized the strong mayor plan as an “anti-democratic” move, Mark Sutcliffe said he was “ready to work within the current system to build the consensus our city needs,” and Bob Chiarelli positioned himself as a consensus-builder while observing that the premier’s plan “looks like it is intended to enable the mayor to initiate and complete important projects or files more quickly at their discretion.”

Watson crunched the numbers and discovered what many would already know: He hasn’t required extra powers to move votes through council.

“I have found that weak mayors want more powers,” Watson said. “I am proud to have worked with members of council to pass approximately 98.2 per cent of council votes over our last three terms without any special powers.”

jwilling@postmedia.com
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...ong-mayor-plan

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

It is not realistic. It means that city infrastructure deteriorates even faster and we never catch up to keeping our streets in good repair.

I just learned this week that a developer is building a cul de sac next to an intersection on Bank Street which is supposed to be connected. Why? Because a plan to widen Bank Street at Findlay Creek has been deferred yet again. We have agreed to build hundreds of homes in Findlay Creek yet we cannot extend 4 lane Bank Street by 1 km to reach the entrance streets into Findlay Creek. The end result is a dangerous situation because of excessive traffic merging resulting in crazy driver behaviour to race to get ahead a few car lengths at the merge point. The current road design dates to the 1950s and does not reflect current traffic reality. I am there on a regular basis and I see the bad driving, the horn blowing and multiple accidents. On top of that, as become Ottawa's recent planning, transit service in the area is gawd awful and cycling is unsafe because Bank Street was originally designed as a provincial highway. So, we give few alternatives to driving.

The idea that it is impossible is nonsense. The Landsdowne alone must be a few years of the normal hikes. Now with a one of many mayor can they actual take an axe to the budget in an effective way probably not. Chiariell has a better chance than O'Brien though as he understands how the system works and could probably form a strong coalition as Watson has.

[Proof Sheet]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Still surprised by that poll considering Ken Gray's audience. Old man Chiarelli at 51% and McKenney coming in second at 27% with Sutcliffe trailing at 18%.

Not sure why we are even having a mayoral race when it is surely a foregone conclusion.

https://bulldogottawa.com/chiarelli-...-bulldog-poll/

Based on the fact that municipal elections have such a low turnout and Chiarelli's promise to freeze big spending and no property tax increases could be a winning formula. Generally people don't want a complicated platform and the elderly vote in greater numbers than the 'yoof'.

[rocketphish]

A property-tax freeze in Ottawa is a half-good idea
Anyone can freeze taxes. The trick is to freeze spending. If you don’t do both, it just means bigger tax increases in the future.

Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen
Aug 09, 2022 • 17 hours ago • 3 minute read

Crafting a property tax promise that is both realistic and politically palatable is one of the toughest challenges facing Ottawa’s mayoral candidates. Pick a number that’s too high and you won’t get elected. Pick one that’s too low and you either won’t be able to keep the promise or you will be contributing to the decline in city services.

Former mayor Bob Chiarelli has opened the bidding by offering a one-year tax freeze, accompanied by a spending review conducted by outside experts. It’s a half-good idea. The city’s spending is long overdue for a rational, external examination. During Mayor Jim Watson’s 12-year reign, the magic formula was to raise taxes by something like the rate of inflation, then do a little bit more of what you did last year.

Maybe someone in the mayor’s office or the bureaucracy asked some tough questions about whether city spending was effective and matched public priorities, but it wasn’t city councillors. The annual budget exercise consisted of minor tweaking, at best.

So, by all means, let’s re-examine how our property-tax dollars are spent. Any new mayor should do that. Unfortunately, the promise of a tax freeze is just a gimmick. Anyone can freeze taxes. The trick is to freeze spending. If you don’t do both, it just means bigger tax increases in the remaining three years of the term.

Chiarelli says he will be looking for “efficiencies,” not cuts, but the relentless pressure of wage increases and high inflation will inevitably mean less service for the same money. To anyone who has noted the state of the city’s roads or its general shabbiness, that’s unattractive.

The two major candidates, Coun. Catherine McKenney and journalist and businessman Mark Sutcliffe, haven’t gotten down to property-tax numbers yet, but neither rushed to match Chiarelli’s tax freeze. McKenney is offering “smart” spending, however that is defined, and Sutcliffe wants a zero-based budget approach with a line-by-line spending review.

Sutcliffe’s approach is a rational one, but it will mean a complete revamping of the way the city explains its spending. The city budget offers taxpayers the bare minimum of information and little that is useful. Take road operations for example, page 241 of the budget. The city intends to spend $135 million on road services this year, so quite a lot of something is happening. For the curious, there is a list of all the types of road services the city provides, without spending figures for each. Instead, spending is aggregated at the highest level on a second page. Net result: you know nothing. Just as intended, one suspects.

A city budget should tell the public what the city is trying to accomplish in each service area, how it measures results and how any additional spending will help reach the goal. The city budget does none of those things.

The goal should not be just to communicate clearly, but to use the budget as a means to force staff and councillors to explain what they do, why they do it, and why it costs what it costs. The exercise of preparing such a document is the first step to rationalizing what the city does.

For years, the city tax increase has been a political number largely unrelated to priorities or service adequacy. It’s a lazy approach that avoids all the hard work required to create a plan that will actually improve city services.

We should expect candidates for mayor to clearly identify their priorities, what they would spend more on, what they would do less of, and how they think that will affect taxes.

A tax freeze, while superficially appealing, merely locks in place a diminished version of the status quo. That’s not what Ottawa needs.

Randall Denley is an Ottawa political commentator and author. He ran against Bob Chiarelli in the 2011 and 2014 Ontario provincial elections. Contact him at randalldenley1@gmail.com

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/de...half-good-idea

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Proof Sheet

Not sure why we are even having a mayoral race when it is surely a foregone conclusion.

https://bulldogottawa.com/chiarelli-...-bulldog-poll/

Based on the fact that municipal elections have such a low turnout and Chiarelli's promise to freeze big spending and no property tax increases could be a winning formula. Generally people don't want a complicated platform and the elderly vote in greater numbers than the 'yoof'.

At the moment, McKenney is leading in the polls, which is surprising. And by a decent margin at that. I unfortunately can't find the source, but about 10% separates each top candidate (Chiarelli in the 10s, Sutcliffe in the 20s and McKenney in the 30s).

Considering Ottawa Centre traditionally has the highest turnout anywhere in Canada both Federally and Provincially, McKenney may have a chance. Furthermore, though I personally prefer Sutcliffe over Chiarelli, I believe he and Chiarelli are targeting the same voter block while McKenney stands alone on the left.

[waterloowarrior]

Originally Posted by Proof Sheet

Not sure why we are even having a mayoral race when it is surely a foregone conclusion.

https://bulldogottawa.com/chiarelli-...-bulldog-poll/

Based on the fact that municipal elections have such a low turnout and Chiarelli's promise to freeze big spending and no property tax increases could be a winning formula. Generally people don't want a complicated platform and the elderly vote in greater numbers than the 'yoof'.

Anyone remember the ZeroMeansZero blog? Hopefully we don't get that type of drama again

[J.OT13]

Watson against the strong mayor concept. That's rich, considering he wielded his entire catalogue of power (and then some) to rule City Council, and quite effectively. I just think he's afraid McKenney wins the election.

[passwordisnt123]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Watson against the strong mayor concept. That's rich, considering he wielded his entire catalogue of power (and then some) to rule City Council, and quite effectively. I just think he's afraid McKenney wins the election.

I think that's pretty much it. Now that it's likely not going to be him with the power, he sure as hell doesn't want his nemesis getting that power.

[J.OT13]

The Governments argument that the strong mayor system will speed up housing development is kind of ridiculous. What if a City elects a NIMBY mayor? Imagine Clive Doucet as Mayor of Ottawa. Or even Diane Deans. Allan Hubley, who has voted against very reasonable infills in Kanata.

[Proof Sheet]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

Anyone remember the ZeroMeansZero blog? Hopefully we don't get that type of drama again

I still have this website bookmarked. I found it very funny at the time

http://the-o-dot.blogspot.com/

I remember the zeromeanszero blog and the big dick swinging mayor we had.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

The Governments argument that the strong mayor system will speed up housing development is kind of ridiculous. What if a City elects a NIMBY mayor? Imagine Clive Doucet as Mayor of Ottawa. Or even Diane Deans. Allan Hubley, who has voted against very reasonable infills in Kanata.

Or McKenney or Chiarelli or possibly Sutcliffe....

Yeah, strong mayor powers directed towards housing won't mean much if someone like McKenney who thinks Ottawa has built enough housing is voted in.

Currently none of the front runners are exactly that pro-housing (though the horizon/McKenney club is sure trying to paint Sutcliffe as a developer plant). Instead it looks like it's going to be 4 years of groundwork for massive increase in exurban population.

[rocketphish]

McKenney fought for progressive budgets as councillor, but wouldn't use new mayoral powers to make them happen

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Aug 12, 2022 • 22 hours ago • 3 minute read

Catherine McKenney has fought for years at Ottawa city council for a more progressive agenda, but, even if they have the power to singlehandedly create the city’s most important financial policy, they would still want an endorsement from most of their colleagues.

The Ontario Progressive Conservative government is proposing to give “strong mayor” powers to the heads of Ottawa and Toronto councils, with the ability for mayors to create and table annual city budgets and veto any changes passed by council.

The legislation would also allow two-thirds of council to override a mayor’s veto.

“As soon as I heard about the strong mayor bill, I assumed it would include powers around the budget, so I wasn’t surprised to see that detail,” McKenney said in an interview on Friday.

“The powers really don’t contribute to a very democratic process. I have pushed for progressive priorities. If I’m successful on Oct. 24, what I will bring to my role as mayor and out of my campaign will be a progressive platform, but I still believe strongly that it is the role of the mayor to work with all of council and to form that type of consensus.”

McKenney’s main challengers so far are Mark Sutcliffe and Bob Chiarelli. Nominations for all council seats close on Aug. 19.

Sutcliffe has said special mayoral powers aren’t what’s needed to increase homebuilding, which is the rationale the PCs are using to overhaul municipal governance in the province’s two largest cities.

Chiarelli has observed that the strong mayor power aims to enable the mayor to start and complete important projects more quickly at their discretion, while noting that his first priority has always been to find or build consensus on major issues.

McKenney (whose pronouns are they/them) is a mayoral candidate who for years as councillor for Somerset ward has been trying to shift priorities to better align with a progressive approach. They have had an uphill battle to provide more money in areas of affordable housing and social services and have tried to convince colleagues to increase taxes to help fund those critical areas.

If they win, McKenney could use the new budget powers to write the budget they have always wanted and swat away attempts by colleagues to dismantle it. A supermajority vote is the only thing that would stand in the way.

“You’re not going to win every vote, and I believe firmly that that’s OK, that it’s the role of the mayor and the mayor’s office to work with all of council and allow for that type of debate, discussion and dissension, if necessary,” McKenney said.

McKenney says they don’t believe one person knows what’s best for an entire city, which is why there are councillors around the table representing their communities, “hopefully also bringing that city perspective to their decision-making.”

The membership of Ottawa council will be very different when the new four-year term begins Nov. 15, about three weeks after the Oct. 24 municipal election. At least nine councillors, including McKenney, aren’t seeking re-election in their wards. There will be a new mayor since Jim Watson isn’t seeking another mandate.

McKenney has been dismissive of the veto power in shaping policy.

“If it doesn’t have the support of the majority of council, I am going against the will of representatives across the city, and I do not see how that will benefit the city on a budget issue, on a planning and development issue, on a housing affordability issue. It’s just not what we need,” McKenney said.

Ottawa needs more “city powers” that are independent of provincial oversight, McKenney said.

The headline item from a city budget is usually the impact to property taxes and often it’s the area drawing most of the debate at council. Taxes are the main revenue source for the budget.

McKenney said they will openly talk about what they believe a future tax rate will look like to cover the promises in their campaign platform.

“I will be upfront and transparent about that well ahead of Oct. 24,” McKenney said. “It will be the will of a majority of council when we go into any discussion and any debate, including the budget. It will be up to the majority of council to have that final vote.”

jwilling@postmedia.com
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...ke-them-happen

[passwordisnt123]

So just to sum up then, Watson doesn't want strong mayor powers. McKenney doesn't want them either and neither does Sutcliffe. Why the hell is Doug Ford foisting this US-style mayor power dynamics upon our city?

[vtecyo]

Originally Posted by passwordisnt123

So just to sum up then, Watson doesn't want strong mayor powers. McKenney doesn't want them either and neither does Sutcliffe. Why the hell is Doug Ford foisting this US-style mayor power dynamics upon our city?

Presumably that means the front runners would choose not to exercise those powers.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by vtecyo

Presumably that means the front runners would choose not to exercise those powers.

I think it is like Trudeau and electoral reform. Whoever wins will decide they like power.

[LeadingEdgeBoomer]

Originally Posted by passwordisnt123

So just to sum up then, Watson doesn't want strong mayor powers. McKenney doesn't want them either and neither does Sutcliffe. Why the hell is Doug Ford foisting this US-style mayor power dynamics upon our city?

Because Doug Ford wants to be a Strong Premier.

[JCL]

Originally Posted by passwordisnt123

So just to sum up then, Watson doesn't want strong mayor powers. McKenney doesn't want them either and neither does Sutcliffe. Why the hell is Doug Ford foisting this US-style mayor power dynamics upon our city?

There is one mayoral candidate that DOES support the strong mayor system: Mike Macguire.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

The Governments argument that the strong mayor system will speed up housing development is kind of ridiculous. What if a City elects a NIMBY mayor? Imagine Clive Doucet as Mayor of Ottawa. Or even Diane Deans. Allan Hubley, who has voted against very reasonable infills in Kanata.

Maybe. But mayors are far more likely to face consequences for higher home prices than NIMBY councillors.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

Yeah, strong mayor powers directed towards housing won't mean much if someone like McKenney who thinks Ottawa has built enough housing is voted in.

She said that? Well that's disappointing.

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

Currently none of the front runners are exactly that pro-housing (though the horizon/McKenney club is sure trying to paint Sutcliffe as a developer plant). Instead it looks like it's going to be 4 years of groundwork for massive increase in exurban population.

Who is the least opposed to building more housing though? Or more broadly making housing more affordable.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

She said that? Well that's disappointing.



Who is the least opposed to building more housing though? Or more broadly making housing more affordable.

It was part of a meeting on the HATF report in response to dean tester of Affordable Ottawa.

Currently, Brandon Bay, but they readily admit their running just to get airtime to the issue of housing in Ottawa. The rest haven't really put out a policy on what they will do about the subject.