Brenda Halloran's narrow-minded "vision" of Waterloo

[IEFBR14]

Brenda Halloran's "Vision" of Waterloo

I can't believe I voted for her even if it was only because she was the least worst of the candidates :( :RpS_thumbdn:

The next four years (http://www.waterloochronicle.ca/news/article/226632)
Over the next four years, Mayor Brenda Halloran will be leading Waterloo through big decisions that will impact the city for years to come.

And she has very firm ideas on what those decisions will be.

During the October election that returned Halloran as the city’s first two-term mayor since 1994, her campaign team knocked on 25,000 doors.

The message she heard loud and clear? Fiscal responsibility.

“People are feeling, ‘Enough.

We’re tapped out here,’” she said.

That’s why she won’t be supporting the light rail transit plan if it comes back to regional council without substantial cost-cutting measures.

“I will not be able to support that [LRT]” she said.

“It is, to me, not the right choice for this community because of the affordability. To me, we have to take a step back, take a deep breath and do a very fulsome, complete financial process with this.

“How much will this cost the taxpayers?” Halloran said she also won’t be supporting a potentially controversial change to the uptown streetscape on King Street. Of the five alternative designs, three of them include a reduction from the four current traffic lanes.

“I cannot see us reducing those lanes,” Halloran said.

“It’s going to cause a lot of congestion and you know the uptown core is going to continue to intensify.

We have to look at 20 years down the road. What’s it going to look like?” Halloran said she’s happy to see two new faces on council, along with a strong slate of incumbents.

“We spent four years learning the job, and I feel very positive about our future and where we’re heading as a city,” she said.

“Waterloo is really well-positioned as a global city.” Her second election was, in some ways, more difficult than the first. As the incumbent, she had to defend council’s record over the past four years.

That record included a costly decision to continue keeping the costs of ongoing RIM Park lawsuits under wraps.

Divisional court recently ordered the city to release those figures, and it was revealed that the city spent more than $730,000 in 2004 alone.

The city was also ordered to pay $15,000 in legal costs to the Waterloo Region Record, which had fought to have the RIM Park numbers made public. Halloran is determined to continue fighting the release of the information, even as legal fees around the Freedom of Information act continue to mount.

“We have to listen to the advice of our legal counsel, because they’re doing what’s best for us.
Anybody who’s in a legal situation knows you listen to your lawyer,” she said.

But Halloran also said that city council has decided on a dollar limit at which point they will go no further, and she wants the entire amount to be disclosed.

“We’re very close to getting this resolved,” she said.

“I’ve said all along I cannot wait for the day I will be sitting with you and saying, ‘Here it is.’”

One of her biggest sources of frustration over the past four years was her lack of success in establishing a community health care team in the city.

A former nurse, Halloran worked with a task force of volunteers for months and submitted two separate applications to the Ministry of Health.

“I was very hopeful, and then unfortunately we were turned down,” she said.

“But for me, it’s not a No. There will be a Plan B, and a Plan C. I will not stop working on this.” Halloran also took some flak earlier this year for refusing to get involved in the library board’s decision to terminate CEO Cathy Matyas.

“I was not involved in any of the decisions. I still don’t know any of the reasons why. I’ve probably heard as much as you have, through the grapevine,” she said.

Though the vast majority of library funding comes from the city, hiring and firing is the responsibility of the library board, she said.

“If it was involving finances . . . then yes, we would step in and address that. But on a personnel issue? No.” Over the next four years, Halloran hopes to focus on economic development, and is currently working to attract a major research facility to the city from China.

But she’s also concerned about how the city is going to transition to meet the needs of its growing group of seniors.

“I don’t think we have a true picture of where we’re going to be in the next 10 or 20 years, or where the boomers are going to go,” she said. “Are we going to have the right facilities?” At 55, Halloran will be almost 60 years old herself when election time rolls around again.

“I really need to focus on getting into a better health routine for myself,” she said.

She admits to getting up extremely early, rarely getting exercise and finding difficulty in carving out time for family and friends.

“This job, it’s a difficult lifestyle,” she said.

But right now, she’s not ruling out a run for a third term.

“I love my job. I really love my job.”

[Ktown4ever]

I was very disapointed with these comments too.

[WatDot]

I can't believe I voted for her even if it was only because she was the least worst of the candidates :( :RpS_thumbdn:


Ditto. She is completely lost.

[Trogdor]

These comments show, if anything, a huge lack of vision for the city. All she can see are consequences of actions without embracing some of the huge rewards that come from taking risks. Oh well! Hopefully she manages not to screw us over too much.

[DHLawrence]

I can't remember, were there any pro-LRT candidates in Waterloo this time around?

[RangersFan]

These comments show, if anything, a huge lack of vision for the city. All she can see are consequences of actions without embracing some of the huge rewards that come from taking risks. Oh well! Hopefully she manages not to screw us over too much.

I agree, I am very diapointed with the lack of vision demonstrated here, espically with these comments:
“Waterloo is really well-positioned as a global city.”

A global city that doesn't have a long term vision for transit infastructure. I know everyone wants to show finanical results, because people want to see lower taxes but everyone is always so focused on the cost rather than all of the benefits LRT would bring economically, environmentally and a noticeable culture change.

[IEFBR14]

These comments show, if anything, a huge lack of vision for the city.
What Halloran said, “I will not be able to support that. It is, to me, not the right choice for this community because of the affordability."

What a leader with vision should have said, "I support the LRT. It's essential to our future. I will find a way to make it as affordable as possible."

[Spokes]

What Halloran said, “I will not be able to support that. It is, to me, not the right choice for this community because of the affordability."

What a leader with vision should have said, "I support the LRT. It's essential to our future. I will find a way to make it as affordable as possible."

She's still acting like an incumbant mayor seeking approval in a city that hadn't seen a multiple term mayor in a long time. Now's the time for her to step up and show that she can lead this "global city" because right now she's showing NO leadership at all, but rather letting citizens dictate the city's every move.

I'll be curious as to if her opinion on LRT changes at all when the new report comes out and if it does, how much the cost savings really are. It could be her positioning herself to say, I don't want LRT with this price tag, but as soon as the price is lowered, she can justify getting behind it. If that's the case, it's sad. You see strong leaders like Zehr and Seiling standing behind it regardless.

[KevinL]

“I cannot see us reducing those lanes,” Halloran said.

“It’s going to cause a lot of congestion and you know the uptown core is going to continue to intensify.

We have to look at 20 years down the road. What’s it going to look like?”

Argh! How disingenuous is that? "LRT lanes will cause too much congestion"! Has she not considered how much congestion they will remove?

Idiocy. :RpS_cursing:

[Spokes]

Argh! How disingenuous is that? "LRT lanes will cause too much congestion"! Has she not considered how much congestion they will remove?

Idiocy. :RpS_cursing:

I don't think she actually drives on this section of King. People talk about how the reduction of lanes will create a bottle neck, well the real bottle neck already exists as people in the right hand lane realize they dont have enough room so they move over into the left, or worse, the middle. The bottle neck already exists, going to one lane with a right hand turning lane at northbound at erb rectifies this.

[Urban_Enthusiast86]

I can't help but feel very doom-and-gloom about Canada these days. We used to be a nation that was future-oriented and very much into the concept of nation-building. It was the kind of mentality that gave us the CN Tower, the TTC and Montreal subway system, the Confederation Bridge, and the CPR. Now, we're a timid people that can only find greatness in mediocracy because we're afraid of rocking the boat. Big ideas are scary for us. And to think that this national trend is now being reflected in a place that likes to think of itself as a beacon on innovation. Oh Canada...

Oh well, I guess we could always throw away tax dollars at more worthless projects like RIM Park or Drayton Theatre. Just as long as the initial numbers themselves aren't as big.

[Spokes]

Big ideas have for the most part always been scary for the general population, but in the past we've had politicians with the guts to be daring and swing for the fences. These days, Im not sure if it's that they're too concerned with re-election, or just public criticism, but they're quite timid like you said.

[DHLawrence]

Oh well, I guess we could always throw away tax dollars at more worthless projects like RIM Park or Drayton Theatre.

A theatre and production and administration centre that will bring jobs and tourists to an area with few amenities is a worthless project? News to me.

[IEFBR14]

I can't remember, were there any pro-LRT candidates in Waterloo this time around?
I couldn't find any, at least not for Mayor. The others were all clearly anti-LRT. Halloran waffled on the issue. Even in the quote above she's not ruling the LRT out, "To me, we have to take a step back, take a deep breath and do a very fulsome, complete financial process with this." But she certainly doesn't have the vision and conviction that Zehr and Seiling have to make the LRT happen.

(IIRC only a few candidates for Waterloo council, e.g. Erin Epp in Ward 7, were clearly pro-LRT.)

[Rowe]

I love Carl. Glad that Kitchener has a Mayor with at least a vision for the future.

But I'm curious to know what some of our pro-Waterloo member and/or Moderators feel about her comments? I won't comment on what Brenda has said due to the out-lash I receive for making any comment about Waterloo.

[Spokes]

I love Carl. Glad that Kitchener has a Mayor with at least a vision for the future.

But I'm curious to know what some of our pro-Waterloo member and/or Moderators feel about her comments? I won't comment on what Brenda has said due to the out-lash I receive for making any comment about Waterloo.

Ya he has been really positive for his long term planning/vision from LRT to the EDIF.

Don't feel like you can't comment about Waterloo, just make sure it's not in an antagonistic/disrespectful kind of way or anything like that. You won't get any "out-lash" for commenting on Waterloo if it's backed up and done tastefully and logically. So what do you think about what Halloran said?

[Trogdor]

I love Carl. Glad that Kitchener has a Mayor with at least a vision for the future.

But I'm curious to know what some of our pro-Waterloo member and/or Moderators feel about her comments? I won't comment on what Brenda has said due to the out-lash I receive for making any comment about Waterloo.

I'm clearly disappointed (see above) by Brenda's comments. Also, I second Spokes' comments about you feeling free to criticize Waterloo. I might live in the city, but I don't feel that it is immune to criticism by any means. We are a bit egotistical in Waterloo and I think that our flaws definitely need to be pointed out where there are valid concerns.

[Spokes]

I'm clearly disappointed (see above) by Brenda's comments. Also, I second Spokes' comments about you feeling free to criticize Waterloo. I might live in the city, but I don't feel that it is immune to criticism by any means. We are a bit egotistical in Waterloo and I think that our flaws definitely need to be pointed out where there are valid concerns.

Having your flaws pointed out keeps you in check ;)

But ya, this goes for not just this particular comment, but anything, Wonderful Waterloo should be a place where you can criticise things freely, Im all for second guessing things, or calling something out, just always do so respectfully.

[Duke-of-Waterloo]

But I'm curious to know what some of our pro-Waterloo member and/or Moderators feel about her comments? I won't comment on what Brenda has said due to the out-lash I receive for making any comment about Waterloo.

I'm interested to hear what you have to say on Mayor Halloran's performance and "vision", as well as anyone else on this forum. As Spokes said, this is the perfect place to express these views, as long as it's done tastefully and respectfully. Everyone is encouraged to share their comments.

One thing I applaud Mayor Halloran on is her committment to citizen involvement and participation. She has created many advisory committees and boards on various topics and issues. I don't recall any other Mayor doing this to the extent she has done. I do hope that she changes her opinion on LRT though. She needs to realize that if Waterloo is to become a supposed "global" city, we need to start thinking outside the box and drop the small town, status quo mentality (which I think in a way, she's trying to protect). We hear a lot from Mayor Halloran of what she has accomplished in the past and how proud she is of that, but really, what will she do for the future? A lot of the projects she accomplished in the past were initiated by previous councils.

[Spokes]

Duke, I too like that she'd involved citizens a lot, but that seems to almost be a cop out. She's doing that so she can say she's doing it and taking lots of their input and could easily be letting them make the decisions for her. Then if they back fire well it wasn't the mayor that made them, she was going by what "the people" wanted. I really think she's acting almost scared. Especially last year, she was scared of what her actions would mean for her election results. Look at Zehr (different case I know, but still) he did what was best for the city without thinking, 'could this hurt me in the polls?' and Im sure he lost some votes for some of his actions, but they were for the best.


A lot of the projects she accomplished in the past were initiated by previous councils.

Well said! And not that shes necessarily TRYING to take credit for them, but these things, they add to the "legacy" of politicians. Not that actions should be made to create a legacy, but it happens on it's own. When you think of Zehr after he retires his legacy will likely be that he was the Mayor that turned downtown around. Was the EDIF popular? Nope but he stuck to his vision and it worked.

Sometimes you need to gamble to do the right thing. If it works you look like a genius, if not, you don't. The problem with LRT is that it won't be up and running by the time the next election rolls around (or will it?) so the positive effects won't be seen yet. The money will be spent though and that's what people will see.

[IEFBR14]

Duke, I too like that she'd involved citizens a lot, but that seems to almost be a cop out. She's doing that so she can say she's doing it and taking lots of their input and could easily be letting them make the decisions for her...
Consider also her education and experience before entering politics, "Drawn back to Waterloo Region, Brenda joined the Canada Revenue Agency to work in several positions, most recently as an Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisor before being elected as Mayor of Waterloo.* Brenda earned her certificate in Conflict Resolution and Mediation through studies at Conrad Grebel College of the University of Waterloo and has many years of experience in conflict resolution, communications, facilitation and mediation. (http://www.brendaformayor.com/?cms_action=view&cms_id=147)"

ISTM that for a politician this sort of background could be a prescription for waffling, equivocating and accomplishing very little. No wonder she lacks that "vision" thing.

[Spokes]

Wow all of that plus a former nurse.

[Rowe]

I won't give my views on Brenda since she is not my Mayor. But I will say that her comments are what I would expect from a Waterloo(City) politician.

Its clear that she feels that a four-lane downtown road with more buses is less congested than a two-lane road with a Rapid Light Rail Transit Line.

Because driving in Uptown Waterloo is less stressful than driving in Downtown Kitchener.

[Spokes]

I won't give my views on Brenda since she is not my Mayor. But I will say that her comments are what I would expect from a Waterloo(City) politician.

Postal Code shouldn't matter. She's not my mayor and I've made my views quite clear. Lets hear it. And please, elaborate on the "what I would expect from a Waterloo(City) politician"...Im intrigued.


Because driving in Uptown Waterloo is less stressful than driving in Downtown Kitchener.

How do you mean?

[Rowe]

The 'driving in Uptown Waterloo' comment was sarcasm. As a planner I see her views on density and the amount of lanes/rapid transit very mistaken.

Brenda and other Waterloo politicians understand the potential of the city... they just don't trust that potential enough. They seem to enjoy the status of what their city currently is.

"It is, to me, not the right choice for this community because of the affordability" (On LRT).....“It’s going to cause a lot of congestion and you know the uptown core is going to continue to intensify" (a two-lane Uptown).

Potential... but no trust.

[Spokes]

Rowe I think you said it perfectly. "They seem to enjoy the status of what their city currently is." And thus we see the lack of vision from Halloran and others.

They know the potential is there, but will they step up to achieve it? I think they (and this goes for some other local politicians too) are too worried about the public approving every single decision. At the end of the day the public just needs to think you've done a good job for four years, they won't scrutinize every single decision (unless one was a massive screw up.)

One thing that seems to get overlooked is that politicians keep saying there isn't the population to support it, and they keep saying that the cores will continue to grow and become denser, but they haven't put two and two together yet to realize that all of those people living in the dense cores are those people that will support the LRT system.

[Waterlooer]

I have been really thinking hard about the 2 lane King street in uptown, and am really starting to think it is a really good idea.

As a resident living in Waterloo, I am very fed up with mayor Brenda Halloran. We need a mayor that can both listen to the community, and also be a strong leader and make decisions for themself that will benefit the community the best...

If every leader just listened to what other people want, the future wouldn't turn out so good.

[eizenstriet]

It has been difficult since the early days of her political career to find out what Ms. Halloran stands for. She had never been a city councillor before running for mayor, and was thus a tabula rasa in terms of track record. In her first election, a central and popular plank in her mayoral platform was her opposition on firmly held environmental principle to proposed subdivisions on the Waterloo Moraine. After she was elected, she promptly reversed direction, saying she had been mistaken.

She tends not to advance any sort of vision or stance beyond platitudes. The central feature of the resume she puts forward is her training and inclinations as a “conciliator”. This may rationalize her pattern of swaying on contentious issues before eventually moving with the opinion or influence wind which is blowing the strongest. Influential movers and shakers were successful in molding her position on the amalgamation referendum. When public opinion on fluoridation was unclearly divided, she declined to reveal her own opinion.

City staff influence can create a strong airstream for an inexperienced or uncertain politician. It was interesting to learn before her second mayoral campaign that under her stewardship, city staff costs had quietly risen just under 40% over a period of 4 years. City staff are no doubt content to have a malleable person in the mayor’s chair. In the last election, Ms. Halloran received 12,247 votes, with a greater number being split among 3 other candidates. It is interesting to speculate as to how many staff members are Waterloo voters, and as to what extent they and friends and relatives could swing an important portion of 12,000 votes.

It does not seem that her movement on issues is as a result of being politically “canny” or duplicitous. It is simply that she sways. Thus it should not be surprising to posters that when the popular wind shifted on the LRT system, so did she. The upside for LRT proponents is that the Mayor probably does not have a vision on the matter; she will not lead opinion on this issue, she will follow. So if you have influence or persuasive powers of any sort, your chances are as good as they were before.