Imagine if the municipal election campaign was decided based on who voters believed had the best platform of ideas and who worked hardest to sell their platform to the public. That might be how democracy works in some places, but it certainly isn't the case here in Newmarket. In Newmarket it seems selling fear is what wins. The fear that certain candidates are peddling is, "my opponent isn't one of 'us' and we can't work with him or her."
All around Newmarket, we have Ward races with the front runners refusing to engage on issues such as high taxes, secondary growth plan, traffic congestion, local jobs, or public debt. Unfortunately, these important issues take a back seat to nonsense like how much charity work is done by a candidate, who is cheating with lawn signs, who loves Newmarket more, or who would win Miss Congeniality.
I think we are headed towards a four year disastrous term if Newmarket voters don't wise up to these antics before October 27th.
Let me use Ward 7 to illustrate. Earlier I tweeted that we finally had a Ward race based on issues. Maddie Di Muccio's husband, John Blommesteyn, has the strongest platform and has written a few dozen blogs about the issues. Apparently he is hitting the doors as evidenced in social media and is causing a stir with his ideas. He has also received the most coverage in the media of all the candidates, with articles in the local paper and on the radio with an impressive Newstalk 1010 interview about Glenway. And he has done a good job to show us that he is his own man, qualified on his own attributes, not riding on his wife's coat tails. If the outcome of the vote was based on the campaign, John B. would be the clear choice in Ward 7.
But when "fear" is added to the campaign, it muddies the outlook. John's ties to Maddie scares the daylights out of the Gruesome Twosome bloc on Council. They are not afraid that Maddie will gain control over the votes on Council (from where I stand, the votes will be 7-2 if John is elected next term instead of 8-1 this term). The Gruesome Twosome are afraid of finding themselves in a position of being required to openly debate their agenda if Maddie has an ally to back her up.
Take the contentious broadband issue as an example. In August, a report on Council said the broadband fibre optic cables could be installed along Main St, Davis Drive East, and Leslie Street for a sum of approximately $250,000 to $1,000,000. Darryl Wolk suggested $330,000,000 was a more accurate figure during the Rogers Debate. Recently, the Mayor and Regional Councillor have been promoting a blog that pegs the cost of installation at $30,000,000. The obvious truth is that nobody knows what the cost will be or whether broadband will create any jobs.
If you watched the Council meeting when broadband was tabled, the debate was about how to proceed with the project. Maddie insisted on a request for information (RFI) while the other councillors wanted a non-binding request for purchase (RFP). As Dorian Baxter attested, the Mayor's aggressiveness towards Maddie during this debate was deplorable, and frankly a tactic he uses far too often to silence her whenever her questioning makes his agenda appear weak. The issue was ultimately settled with, you guessed it, a 8-1 vote.
The distinction between an RFI and a RFP may seem subtle but it is important.
With an RFP, the Mayor and Council can legally take the matter behind closed doors and the public will never know what the final cost of broadband will be. (With an RFI, there would be no justification to hold the meeting in camera because there is no purchase being considered). Potentially, the Gruesome Twosome could decide behind closed doors to add a hundred million or more worth of public debt without any public or media scrutiny. I am certain that even the most ardent supporter of broadband would agree that secrecy on this expensive project is just plain wrong.
This one scenario paints the picture why the Gruesome Twosome are pulling out all stops to ensure that John B. is not elected. The Mayor can shout down Maddie when she isolated on Council but it would be impossible for him to avoid the tough questions if she has an ally.
I think all of Newmarket would sleep better knowing that at least two members of Council are committed to openness and transparency. John B's leak of the Glenway document demonstrates that he is willing to stick his neck on the chopping block to protect the concept of accountability.
Wednesday, 15 October 2014
Saturday, 4 October 2014
Are the Town's CAO and Legal Dept Prevaricating on Glenway's Western Development?
I am not sure how many readers were waiting with bated breath for the town to release it's version of the "Confidential Glenway Memo".
I have written before that my own blog's readership numbers drop like a stone whenever I bring up Glenway. That is why I am hesitant to raise the issue again.
However, this new Town of Newmarket document, (which you can find here: http://www.newmarket.ca/en/townhall/resourcelibrary/54-OfficeoftheCAOInformationReport2014-09-MariannevilleWestLands.pdf) is in stark contrast to the memo released on Tuesday afternoon, (which you can find here: http://john4newmarket.tumblr.com/post/98822155804) is worthy of comment because they seem to contradict each other in a devious sort of way.
On October 3, Town of Newmarket CAO (that's similar to the Town's chief executive officer) and the Town's Legal Department released a memo that seems to suggest that the lands on the most westerly portion of the Marianneville property are protected "woodlot" and "Oak Ridges Moraine". If this land is protected, then this is certainly good news for everyone with homes west of the hydro corridor.
But why is memo dated September 5 seeming less certain. The September 5th memo says that the developer has intentions to develop this same portion of land upon the completion of "successful studies". Would the developer "study" this land if the case of protection under the Oak Ridges Moraine Act was black and white?
Could it be that the October 29th memo was written with the intention of public readership while the September 5th was always intended to remain confidential? If that is the case, Glenway residents (who will soon become Glenway voters) would be wise to keep this inconsistency top of mind for their own sakes.
I thought that (Ward 7 candidate) John Blommesteyn astutely called out his challenger Christina Bisanz on the pecuniary interest issue under the MCIA. Obviously, if the building goes ahead, the lot premiums that many Glenway residents paid when purchasing their homes to live within the GG&CC vanishes. Bisanz's own home I'm told, is within the area affected. I am watching closely to see if she will say one way or the other what the development of the westerly portion of the Glenway Golf Course will mean to her ability to represent her neighbours.
There are only three weeks left so the time for Christina to come clean is now.
I have written before that my own blog's readership numbers drop like a stone whenever I bring up Glenway. That is why I am hesitant to raise the issue again.
However, this new Town of Newmarket document, (which you can find here: http://www.newmarket.ca/en/townhall/resourcelibrary/54-OfficeoftheCAOInformationReport2014-09-MariannevilleWestLands.pdf) is in stark contrast to the memo released on Tuesday afternoon, (which you can find here: http://john4newmarket.tumblr.com/post/98822155804) is worthy of comment because they seem to contradict each other in a devious sort of way.
On October 3, Town of Newmarket CAO (that's similar to the Town's chief executive officer) and the Town's Legal Department released a memo that seems to suggest that the lands on the most westerly portion of the Marianneville property are protected "woodlot" and "Oak Ridges Moraine". If this land is protected, then this is certainly good news for everyone with homes west of the hydro corridor.
But why is memo dated September 5 seeming less certain. The September 5th memo says that the developer has intentions to develop this same portion of land upon the completion of "successful studies". Would the developer "study" this land if the case of protection under the Oak Ridges Moraine Act was black and white?
Could it be that the October 29th memo was written with the intention of public readership while the September 5th was always intended to remain confidential? If that is the case, Glenway residents (who will soon become Glenway voters) would be wise to keep this inconsistency top of mind for their own sakes.
I thought that (Ward 7 candidate) John Blommesteyn astutely called out his challenger Christina Bisanz on the pecuniary interest issue under the MCIA. Obviously, if the building goes ahead, the lot premiums that many Glenway residents paid when purchasing their homes to live within the GG&CC vanishes. Bisanz's own home I'm told, is within the area affected. I am watching closely to see if she will say one way or the other what the development of the westerly portion of the Glenway Golf Course will mean to her ability to represent her neighbours.
There are only three weeks left so the time for Christina to come clean is now.
Thursday, 2 October 2014
Town of Newmarket, cancel your advertising contract with the Era for Democacy's sake
Lots of news in the past 24-hours and all of it interesting.
First of all, there was the unexpected release of information by Ward 7 candidate John Blommesteyn on Tuesday afternoon.
That was followed with news of the Newmarket Soccer Club is paying off its debt owed to the public through the placement of a private mortgage by way of a commercial lender.
Both of these stories show us that this council, who tried so desperately to keep both of these matters "confidential" from the public, can be swayed to do the right thing when public pressure is applied.
No wonder the gruesome-twosome, Mayor Van Bynen and his henchman sidekick John Taylor, are bemoaning this new era of "Hyper Transparency" (words actually spoken by John Taylor at Monday's council meeting).
For anyone doubting the reasoning why Kathleen Wynne's Bill 8 is desperately needed, only needs to refer to this week's events to know that public pressure has benefits to ensure that elected officials do the right thing.
We used to rely on the media to keep politicians honest.
Clearly in Newmarket, the Era is not to be trusted to report the news.
If you read the Era's reporting of the Glenway memo release, one critical fact is glaringly missing. There is no mention of the petition that sparked this debate.
Here are the actual series of events.
1) Councillor Di Muccio asked at the September 22 council meeting for the memo to made public. The Gruesome-Twosome argued against. There was discussion about how this matter would be discussed in camera. We are left assuming that it was discussed and the majority voted against making the document public.
2) Ward 7 candidate John Blommesteyn gathered a petition and presented it to council on September 29th. Council decided to meet in private again to reconsider their decision from the week previous.
3) Upon coming out of the in camera meeting on the 29th, every speaker made mention of John Blommesteyn's ;petition as being the catalyst for their decision to make the memo public. In other words, they succumbed to the public pressure.
But in the Era's story, despite the critical role this petition played (as confirmed by all the speakers on Council), this petition goes un-mentioned. Instead of playing up the role the public played in getting council to act responsibly (weeks out from an election), the Era is focusing on how the memo got released.
To give you an analogy of how bad Chris Simon's article is: imagine if Chris Simon was reporting on Abraham Lincoln's assassination and he didn't mention a single word about the President being killed. His story would focus on how a gun got smuggled into the theatre instead. There is no other way to describe it other than bad reporting.
My blog was created years ago in response to bias reporting in the Era. Since then I have written 146 posts that generally share one common thread - that is how the Era fails us when reporting Newmarket Council news.
And I assume, based on my readership numbers, that most of you agree with me. At least, nobody has ever taken me to task on my Twitter feed or my comments page defending how the Era reports on Newmarket politics.
I don't know if the Town of Newmarket's advertising budget has "bought" good coverage for the Mayor and his allies. Experience shows us that this is likely true. I defy anyone to find any story in the Era that is actually critical of Tony Van Bynen (by mentioning him specifically). I looked and couldn't find anything remotely close to criticizing the Mayor.
For the sake of our democracy, I am calling on the Town of Newmarket to stop advertising in the Era because it influences the way news gets told. It is the only way to restore integrity to the Era in its reporting.
I know this to be true because the Town of Aurora doesn't publish in the paper and the local reporters are actually doing a good job of keeping the Aurora mayor and council honest.
If we want the type of honest reporting that Aurora residents enjoy then we need to cancel the Town of Newmarket advertising too.
First of all, there was the unexpected release of information by Ward 7 candidate John Blommesteyn on Tuesday afternoon.
That was followed with news of the Newmarket Soccer Club is paying off its debt owed to the public through the placement of a private mortgage by way of a commercial lender.
Both of these stories show us that this council, who tried so desperately to keep both of these matters "confidential" from the public, can be swayed to do the right thing when public pressure is applied.
No wonder the gruesome-twosome, Mayor Van Bynen and his henchman sidekick John Taylor, are bemoaning this new era of "Hyper Transparency" (words actually spoken by John Taylor at Monday's council meeting).
For anyone doubting the reasoning why Kathleen Wynne's Bill 8 is desperately needed, only needs to refer to this week's events to know that public pressure has benefits to ensure that elected officials do the right thing.
We used to rely on the media to keep politicians honest.
Clearly in Newmarket, the Era is not to be trusted to report the news.
If you read the Era's reporting of the Glenway memo release, one critical fact is glaringly missing. There is no mention of the petition that sparked this debate.
Here are the actual series of events.
1) Councillor Di Muccio asked at the September 22 council meeting for the memo to made public. The Gruesome-Twosome argued against. There was discussion about how this matter would be discussed in camera. We are left assuming that it was discussed and the majority voted against making the document public.
2) Ward 7 candidate John Blommesteyn gathered a petition and presented it to council on September 29th. Council decided to meet in private again to reconsider their decision from the week previous.
3) Upon coming out of the in camera meeting on the 29th, every speaker made mention of John Blommesteyn's ;petition as being the catalyst for their decision to make the memo public. In other words, they succumbed to the public pressure.
But in the Era's story, despite the critical role this petition played (as confirmed by all the speakers on Council), this petition goes un-mentioned. Instead of playing up the role the public played in getting council to act responsibly (weeks out from an election), the Era is focusing on how the memo got released.
To give you an analogy of how bad Chris Simon's article is: imagine if Chris Simon was reporting on Abraham Lincoln's assassination and he didn't mention a single word about the President being killed. His story would focus on how a gun got smuggled into the theatre instead. There is no other way to describe it other than bad reporting.
My blog was created years ago in response to bias reporting in the Era. Since then I have written 146 posts that generally share one common thread - that is how the Era fails us when reporting Newmarket Council news.
And I assume, based on my readership numbers, that most of you agree with me. At least, nobody has ever taken me to task on my Twitter feed or my comments page defending how the Era reports on Newmarket politics.
I don't know if the Town of Newmarket's advertising budget has "bought" good coverage for the Mayor and his allies. Experience shows us that this is likely true. I defy anyone to find any story in the Era that is actually critical of Tony Van Bynen (by mentioning him specifically). I looked and couldn't find anything remotely close to criticizing the Mayor.
For the sake of our democracy, I am calling on the Town of Newmarket to stop advertising in the Era because it influences the way news gets told. It is the only way to restore integrity to the Era in its reporting.
I know this to be true because the Town of Aurora doesn't publish in the paper and the local reporters are actually doing a good job of keeping the Aurora mayor and council honest.
If we want the type of honest reporting that Aurora residents enjoy then we need to cancel the Town of Newmarket advertising too.
Friday, 26 September 2014
My response to @Ham6Karin
I can appreciate your feelings on my posts about Ward One candidate Wasim Jarrah. You called them shameless and discrediting and said that I was doing so only to prop up another candidate.
I am sorry to say that you are wrong on all three accounts.
Election campaigns are long and arduous. During this time, candidates are weighed and measured against their platforms and qualifications. All except one candidate in each race will come up short.
Running in a election is not for the feint of heart.
I don't know how closely you follow Newmarket Town Hall but we have a Mayor and Council that like to keep secrets. (If you want an example of their secretiveness, read the www.shrinkslessorsquare.ca blog post from today).
This Mayor and Council will readily convene to a closed door meeting when things get too hot politically and prefer to decide contentious issues with back room deals. That's how we ended up with losing Glenway at the OMB, how the soccer loan got done, and a myriad of other bad deals (most of those, I suspect, we'll never know about but we're surely paying them with our tax dollars).
Months ago, when I first reported on Wasim Jarrah's ill-advised drive to the airport, he didn't address the issue saying, "Yes it was me" or "No it isn't". Instead, he went to Google and had my blog deleted. In time it was proven that everything I wrote about him was correct, as he admitted to the facts earlier this week on Toronto radio. (I'll never know what he said to Google to have my blog taken down but I have a hard time listening to him defend free speech after the censorship he imposed on my blog).
Because of this, voters can predict what Wasim Jarrah's behaviour will be if he's elected to represent Ward 1 and the next Soccer Club bail out lands on the table. Can you tell me honestly that he can be trusted to keep similarly shady deals in the public domain?
But I am a person who believes in second chances so I decided to test Wasim Jarrah again, this time with the controversial tweets he made about Iraq.
I noticed those tweets as soon as he made them and thought "Oh boy, he's in trouble", but nobody questioned him at that time.
So when the opportunity arose, I decided to challenge him on them.
You are right when you say that everyone has the right to an opinion and frankly I respect those willing to stand by their convictions even when the public sentiment goes against them, (which is why I respect the Ward 6 councillor so much).
Clearly Wasim Jarrah buckled under my challenge. He deleted his tweets within seconds of me raising them as an issue. He did not respond as to why he felt Stephen Harper was blood thirsty, or why John Baird is a vampire. He simply tried to make the problem go away by pretending these tweets never existed.
That's a big red flag for me. I've seen our Mayor and Council employ the same "disappearing act" with contentious issues. When faced with their own record, they did everything they could to clam up and hide.
You know what I am speaking of Karin, It doesn't go unnoticed that you very eloquently explained what was wrong with the US foreign policy within a the context of a 140 character tweet. Why couldn't Wasim Jarrah do the same? Why did he simply delete the tweets as opposed to explaining his point of view. And what can voters expect he'll do if elected to Council and he gets called upon to make a principled decision?
I never met the man but perhaps Wasim Jarrah is a very nice man. He is likely a very good volunteer and I am sure he loves his family and they love him too.
But is he any different from the today's crop of Gruesome-Twosome bloq councillors that we currently have "representing" us? No, because his actions over these past few months show us that he behaves in exactly the same manner as they do.
So you are entitled to believe that I am harsh, shameless and nasty. I prefer to think that by exposing his behaviour, I have given Newmarket Ward 1 voters a clear insight to the man who wants to represent them.
And the process of vetting candidates is exactly the reason why we have election campaigns.
I am sorry to say that you are wrong on all three accounts.
Election campaigns are long and arduous. During this time, candidates are weighed and measured against their platforms and qualifications. All except one candidate in each race will come up short.
Running in a election is not for the feint of heart.
I don't know how closely you follow Newmarket Town Hall but we have a Mayor and Council that like to keep secrets. (If you want an example of their secretiveness, read the www.shrinkslessorsquare.ca blog post from today).
This Mayor and Council will readily convene to a closed door meeting when things get too hot politically and prefer to decide contentious issues with back room deals. That's how we ended up with losing Glenway at the OMB, how the soccer loan got done, and a myriad of other bad deals (most of those, I suspect, we'll never know about but we're surely paying them with our tax dollars).
Months ago, when I first reported on Wasim Jarrah's ill-advised drive to the airport, he didn't address the issue saying, "Yes it was me" or "No it isn't". Instead, he went to Google and had my blog deleted. In time it was proven that everything I wrote about him was correct, as he admitted to the facts earlier this week on Toronto radio. (I'll never know what he said to Google to have my blog taken down but I have a hard time listening to him defend free speech after the censorship he imposed on my blog).
Because of this, voters can predict what Wasim Jarrah's behaviour will be if he's elected to represent Ward 1 and the next Soccer Club bail out lands on the table. Can you tell me honestly that he can be trusted to keep similarly shady deals in the public domain?
But I am a person who believes in second chances so I decided to test Wasim Jarrah again, this time with the controversial tweets he made about Iraq.
I noticed those tweets as soon as he made them and thought "Oh boy, he's in trouble", but nobody questioned him at that time.
So when the opportunity arose, I decided to challenge him on them.
You are right when you say that everyone has the right to an opinion and frankly I respect those willing to stand by their convictions even when the public sentiment goes against them, (which is why I respect the Ward 6 councillor so much).
Clearly Wasim Jarrah buckled under my challenge. He deleted his tweets within seconds of me raising them as an issue. He did not respond as to why he felt Stephen Harper was blood thirsty, or why John Baird is a vampire. He simply tried to make the problem go away by pretending these tweets never existed.
That's a big red flag for me. I've seen our Mayor and Council employ the same "disappearing act" with contentious issues. When faced with their own record, they did everything they could to clam up and hide.
You know what I am speaking of Karin, It doesn't go unnoticed that you very eloquently explained what was wrong with the US foreign policy within a the context of a 140 character tweet. Why couldn't Wasim Jarrah do the same? Why did he simply delete the tweets as opposed to explaining his point of view. And what can voters expect he'll do if elected to Council and he gets called upon to make a principled decision?
I never met the man but perhaps Wasim Jarrah is a very nice man. He is likely a very good volunteer and I am sure he loves his family and they love him too.
But is he any different from the today's crop of Gruesome-Twosome bloq councillors that we currently have "representing" us? No, because his actions over these past few months show us that he behaves in exactly the same manner as they do.
So you are entitled to believe that I am harsh, shameless and nasty. I prefer to think that by exposing his behaviour, I have given Newmarket Ward 1 voters a clear insight to the man who wants to represent them.
And the process of vetting candidates is exactly the reason why we have election campaigns.
Saturday, 13 September 2014
Newmarket Election Predictions Part 1
With the deadline to register for candidates now passed, I will begin reviewing various contests and will make predictions about their outcomes.
Like many residents, I am disappointed with the lack of choice in many of the Newmarket wards. In many cases, I will be advising voters to plug their noses and pick between Eeny, Meeny, Miney, and Moe.
Some races are easy to predict, even six weeks out. Today, we are going to make predictions on a number of "sure-thing" races.
For the Catholic School Board, Theresa McNicholl is acclaimed.
I also expect long term Town of Newmarket employee, Mubs Van Beek, to cruise to an easy victory as the Public School Trustee.
Regional Councillor - Hold for John Taylor
The only mystery in this race was whether Taylor would challenge Van Bynen (a decision I am sure he is regretting as Van Bynen appears remarkably weak at this point), or if Maddie Di Muccio would challenge Taylor. When these questions were decided, the race was over.
With a campaign that has run the gamut between sublime and ridiculous, challenger Darryl Wolk has made a stir with a number of fantastical claims, (including that he would be endorsed by MP Lois Brown), and promises, (such as bringing a balloon festival to Newmarket and annexing huge swaths of land from neighbouring municipalities). Wolk has not given voters any reason to trust him with their vote.
All in all, I expect Taylor to cruise to an easy victory.
INTERESTING TO WATCH (REGIONAL COUNCILLOR RACE): Wolk boils over on Social Media (particularly Twitter). There are a number of twitter users who have made a sport over baiting Wolk who spectacularly transforms from a mild mannered Bruce Banner type into "HULK WOLK" (and he shares all the subtlety of the green Marvel comics character). I will be interested to see if John Taylor will provoke him into a similar tirade at Regional Councillor debate.
Ward 2 - Hold for Dave Kerwin
I believe that the majority of residents in Ward 2 feel it is time for Kerwin to go away. With one of the worst attendance records on Council, and a voting record that mirrors Van Bynen's on every major issue, there are few reasons to trust Kerwin with your vote.
Unfortunately, it is a numbers game. With so many challengers to split the vote, Kerwin will squeak through to another term.
INTERESTING TO WATCH (WARD 2 RACE): Ward 2 has five senior homes. When Van Bynen won the Mayoralty against Diane Springstein by a razor thin margin, there was a persistent rumour that Van Bynen's campaign used proxy votes from the residents of the seniors homes in great numbers to eke out a win. I personally don't like the practice of allowing proxy votes but they are legal. If the race gets close, will a challenger exploit this opportunity of having senior homes residents sign over their vote via proxy?
Ward 4 - Hold for Tom Hempen
If you were to ask me in January which incumbent Council member was most vulnerable to being defeated this year, I would have said Hempen. After all, Hempen doesn't live in Ward 4. He misses meetings and rarely attends community events. He hardly ever speaks at council and the only legislative achievement you can point to is the special tax levy he pushed for while nobody was looking (the Maple Leafs had a play off game against Boston that night when Hempen tabled his motion).
For some reason, only Ray Luff stepped forward to challenge Hempen. I like Ray personally. He is a good, honest, salt of the earth type of man. But he just doesn't have the chops to defeat Hempen. To beat Hempen, you need a candidate willing to fight.
INTERESTING TO WATCH (WARD 4 RACE)): Residents of Ward 4 will recall the dirty tactics Hempen used against the late Larry Blight to unseat him in 2010. Hempen is extremely vulnerable to attack ads (because he lives out of the ward in one of Newmarket's largest luxury homes, because of his voting record, his absenteeism, and his lack of community spirit regarding events). It would be out of character for Ray Luff but I think his only chance to defeat Hempen would be to campaign like Hempen did in 2010.
Ward 6 - Hold for Maddie Di Muccio
Earlier this year, people (including her detractors) were speculating, would she be the next MPP, the next Mayor, or the next Regional Councillor? In the end she decided to return to Ward 6 and I believe that she will hold this seat for how ever many terms she wants.
Talking to friends and neighbours, people appreciate that Maddie has kept Council honest this term. Even people who are supporters of Van Bynen recognize that Maddie has stood up for taxpayers very effectively and she can boast an impeccable voting and attendance record. Maddie's election materials highlights an impressive string of accomplishments that few can deny that she deserves to return.
Running against Maddie is realtor, and Ward 5 resident, Ian Johnston who is advocating for more social housing in Ward 6 and higher taxes. Neighbours tell me that they find him abrasive and his platform has not captured the public interest.
Also running is Kelly Broome-Plumley who is appears to be well funded but clearly her campaign lacks any substance and can't be considered a real threat. If I don't have much to say the Broome-Plumley campaign it is only because she herself doesn't have anything to say about it either. I can not point to a single municipal issue that Broome-Plumley either supports or opposes.
INTERESTING TO WATCH (WARD 6): Broome-Plumley has close ties to Aurora and has the backing of Aurora insiders Steve Hinder and Tim Jones. In 2010, Hinder and Jones backed Brian Johns's campaign who was equally well funded but finished in third place. I have no idea why Aurora bigwigs are so interested in this ward (and Ward 7 it seems) but many residents see this as a red flag.
Other Mentions - Ward 5
24-hours ago, I was set to call this for Joe Sponga. But with the last minute entries of John Heckbert and Ann Martin, I have decided to take a wait and see on this Ward.
Sponga does not deserve to be re-elected. The businesses on Main St. have found him very useful because he does what they tell him to do. Every where else in the ward, residents have very little use for him.
With his work on promoting Davis Drive, Heckbert has accomplished more in a few weeks than Sponga has in three terms on council. I don't know anything about Heckbert's platform or if he has the funding and campaign skills to mount a serious challenge.
Ann Martin has run against Sponga before. She has ties to Main St too. She ran a solid campaign but came up just short in 2010.
I am still heavily leaning towards a Sponga hold but I am keeping an open mind to see if either of these challengers gets their campaign rolling along.
Like many residents, I am disappointed with the lack of choice in many of the Newmarket wards. In many cases, I will be advising voters to plug their noses and pick between Eeny, Meeny, Miney, and Moe.
Some races are easy to predict, even six weeks out. Today, we are going to make predictions on a number of "sure-thing" races.
For the Catholic School Board, Theresa McNicholl is acclaimed.
I also expect long term Town of Newmarket employee, Mubs Van Beek, to cruise to an easy victory as the Public School Trustee.
Regional Councillor - Hold for John Taylor
The only mystery in this race was whether Taylor would challenge Van Bynen (a decision I am sure he is regretting as Van Bynen appears remarkably weak at this point), or if Maddie Di Muccio would challenge Taylor. When these questions were decided, the race was over.
With a campaign that has run the gamut between sublime and ridiculous, challenger Darryl Wolk has made a stir with a number of fantastical claims, (including that he would be endorsed by MP Lois Brown), and promises, (such as bringing a balloon festival to Newmarket and annexing huge swaths of land from neighbouring municipalities). Wolk has not given voters any reason to trust him with their vote.
All in all, I expect Taylor to cruise to an easy victory.
INTERESTING TO WATCH (REGIONAL COUNCILLOR RACE): Wolk boils over on Social Media (particularly Twitter). There are a number of twitter users who have made a sport over baiting Wolk who spectacularly transforms from a mild mannered Bruce Banner type into "HULK WOLK" (and he shares all the subtlety of the green Marvel comics character). I will be interested to see if John Taylor will provoke him into a similar tirade at Regional Councillor debate.
Ward 2 - Hold for Dave Kerwin
I believe that the majority of residents in Ward 2 feel it is time for Kerwin to go away. With one of the worst attendance records on Council, and a voting record that mirrors Van Bynen's on every major issue, there are few reasons to trust Kerwin with your vote.
Unfortunately, it is a numbers game. With so many challengers to split the vote, Kerwin will squeak through to another term.
INTERESTING TO WATCH (WARD 2 RACE): Ward 2 has five senior homes. When Van Bynen won the Mayoralty against Diane Springstein by a razor thin margin, there was a persistent rumour that Van Bynen's campaign used proxy votes from the residents of the seniors homes in great numbers to eke out a win. I personally don't like the practice of allowing proxy votes but they are legal. If the race gets close, will a challenger exploit this opportunity of having senior homes residents sign over their vote via proxy?
Ward 4 - Hold for Tom Hempen
If you were to ask me in January which incumbent Council member was most vulnerable to being defeated this year, I would have said Hempen. After all, Hempen doesn't live in Ward 4. He misses meetings and rarely attends community events. He hardly ever speaks at council and the only legislative achievement you can point to is the special tax levy he pushed for while nobody was looking (the Maple Leafs had a play off game against Boston that night when Hempen tabled his motion).
For some reason, only Ray Luff stepped forward to challenge Hempen. I like Ray personally. He is a good, honest, salt of the earth type of man. But he just doesn't have the chops to defeat Hempen. To beat Hempen, you need a candidate willing to fight.
INTERESTING TO WATCH (WARD 4 RACE)): Residents of Ward 4 will recall the dirty tactics Hempen used against the late Larry Blight to unseat him in 2010. Hempen is extremely vulnerable to attack ads (because he lives out of the ward in one of Newmarket's largest luxury homes, because of his voting record, his absenteeism, and his lack of community spirit regarding events). It would be out of character for Ray Luff but I think his only chance to defeat Hempen would be to campaign like Hempen did in 2010.
Ward 6 - Hold for Maddie Di Muccio
Earlier this year, people (including her detractors) were speculating, would she be the next MPP, the next Mayor, or the next Regional Councillor? In the end she decided to return to Ward 6 and I believe that she will hold this seat for how ever many terms she wants.
Talking to friends and neighbours, people appreciate that Maddie has kept Council honest this term. Even people who are supporters of Van Bynen recognize that Maddie has stood up for taxpayers very effectively and she can boast an impeccable voting and attendance record. Maddie's election materials highlights an impressive string of accomplishments that few can deny that she deserves to return.
Running against Maddie is realtor, and Ward 5 resident, Ian Johnston who is advocating for more social housing in Ward 6 and higher taxes. Neighbours tell me that they find him abrasive and his platform has not captured the public interest.
Also running is Kelly Broome-Plumley who is appears to be well funded but clearly her campaign lacks any substance and can't be considered a real threat. If I don't have much to say the Broome-Plumley campaign it is only because she herself doesn't have anything to say about it either. I can not point to a single municipal issue that Broome-Plumley either supports or opposes.
INTERESTING TO WATCH (WARD 6): Broome-Plumley has close ties to Aurora and has the backing of Aurora insiders Steve Hinder and Tim Jones. In 2010, Hinder and Jones backed Brian Johns's campaign who was equally well funded but finished in third place. I have no idea why Aurora bigwigs are so interested in this ward (and Ward 7 it seems) but many residents see this as a red flag.
Other Mentions - Ward 5
24-hours ago, I was set to call this for Joe Sponga. But with the last minute entries of John Heckbert and Ann Martin, I have decided to take a wait and see on this Ward.
Sponga does not deserve to be re-elected. The businesses on Main St. have found him very useful because he does what they tell him to do. Every where else in the ward, residents have very little use for him.
With his work on promoting Davis Drive, Heckbert has accomplished more in a few weeks than Sponga has in three terms on council. I don't know anything about Heckbert's platform or if he has the funding and campaign skills to mount a serious challenge.
Ann Martin has run against Sponga before. She has ties to Main St too. She ran a solid campaign but came up just short in 2010.
I am still heavily leaning towards a Sponga hold but I am keeping an open mind to see if either of these challengers gets their campaign rolling along.
Saturday, 30 August 2014
Don't Re-Elect Lousy Mayor, Newmarket
If anyone needs an example why Tony Van Bynen should not be re-elected this fall, then watch this week's council meeting (archived on the www.newmarket.ca website). Clearly, our current Mayor has been watching archived recordings of the North Korean Politburo because he is modelling his style of chairing meetings after tyrant Kim Jung Un.
It shows a lack of confidence in his own platform with the way that he deals with questions that challenge him. If he thought his plan through, he would have all the answers.
And the same example is permeating the various ward races. There are many candidates who will openly criticize the incumbents' voting records on various issues. Almost none would dare to criticize Tony Van Bynen, even though he is the person who actually instructed his bloc how to vote. It is almost as though new candidates fear reprisals if they are critical of our current Mayor.
It isn't clear why Tony Van Bynen feels he needs to control everyone all the time. After all he has accomplished very little in his tenure and if elected again, I don't expect that he will achieve much afterward either.
Let's summarize Tony Van Bynen's "accomplishments" as Mayor Newmarket:
1) Shared Digital Infrastructure - millions of dollars poured into scanning back issues of the Era and some personal papers belonging to heiress Belinda Stronach while our public library fails to meet the grade as far as books and other resources are concerned.
2) Magna Centre Construction - at almost double the cost because of the mayor's folly regarding the MayStar lawsuit.
3) Rapid Bus Lane Construction - years behind schedule and tens of millions over budget
4) Old Town Hall Restoration - now double the original costs and years behind schedule
There is not a whole lot to recommend the mayor for re-election.
It shows a lack of confidence in his own platform with the way that he deals with questions that challenge him. If he thought his plan through, he would have all the answers.
And the same example is permeating the various ward races. There are many candidates who will openly criticize the incumbents' voting records on various issues. Almost none would dare to criticize Tony Van Bynen, even though he is the person who actually instructed his bloc how to vote. It is almost as though new candidates fear reprisals if they are critical of our current Mayor.
It isn't clear why Tony Van Bynen feels he needs to control everyone all the time. After all he has accomplished very little in his tenure and if elected again, I don't expect that he will achieve much afterward either.
Let's summarize Tony Van Bynen's "accomplishments" as Mayor Newmarket:
1) Shared Digital Infrastructure - millions of dollars poured into scanning back issues of the Era and some personal papers belonging to heiress Belinda Stronach while our public library fails to meet the grade as far as books and other resources are concerned.
2) Magna Centre Construction - at almost double the cost because of the mayor's folly regarding the MayStar lawsuit.
3) Rapid Bus Lane Construction - years behind schedule and tens of millions over budget
4) Old Town Hall Restoration - now double the original costs and years behind schedule
There is not a whole lot to recommend the mayor for re-election.
Sunday, 24 August 2014
Why the Davis Construction is Such a Cock Up
A Newmarket resident tweeted some important advice to the Town of Newmarket. Apparently, while walking, she was almost struck by a car as she crossed Davis Drive at Main St. She noticed that cars turning left were blind to pedestrians because of the construction fencing that obstructed drivers' view.
The Town of Newmarket twitter account replied and informed her that they have passed the message on to York Region.
The York Region twitter account then acknowledged that they have forwarded the message on to Viva Next.
Then, (and it would be funny if the potential consequences weren't so tragic), the woman tweeted that she was again almost struck by another vehicle at the same intersection just a few days later.
So while our local municipal government bodies are playing "pass the buck" with this pedestrian's safety, ordinary people are still at risk of being run over in traffic at the corner of Davis and Main.
All that has to be done is to address the positioning of the construction fencing.
What we don't need is for the Town of Newmarket, York Region, and Viva Next to say, "It's not my problem."
The Town of Newmarket twitter account replied and informed her that they have passed the message on to York Region.
The York Region twitter account then acknowledged that they have forwarded the message on to Viva Next.
Then, (and it would be funny if the potential consequences weren't so tragic), the woman tweeted that she was again almost struck by another vehicle at the same intersection just a few days later.
So while our local municipal government bodies are playing "pass the buck" with this pedestrian's safety, ordinary people are still at risk of being run over in traffic at the corner of Davis and Main.
All that has to be done is to address the positioning of the construction fencing.
What we don't need is for the Town of Newmarket, York Region, and Viva Next to say, "It's not my problem."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)