James Howe's Columns

[Spokes]

Missing! Your voice at City Hall
By James Howe | September 24, 2010

Did you vote in the last municipal elections in 2006? Whether you did or not affected our lives over the past four years. The people elected have been making decisions on your behalf.

These include many issues that have sparked spirited debates such as:

• decisions on school boundaries and closures
• the increasing use of roundabouts
• the shape revitalizing downtown Kitchener is taking
• plans for rapid transit
• storm water management fees

These issues and many others had people flocking to council chambers and packing meeting rooms. I suspect that many of the people concerned could not be bothered to vote in the last election since only 27% voted. In some cases, concerned citizens were able to influence decisions by having their voices heard on an issue. In many more cases, it was too late.

Whether you voted or not affected the cast of players who made these decisions. A higher voter turnout could have elected a substantially different set of decision-makers. Would they have made different decisions we will never know for sure but they certainly could have. A single vote at a council or a board meeting could make a huge difference to your life. The question is: Did you play a role in determining the person with the deciding vote?

Maybe you decided not to vote but you have been happy with all of the decisions by local government. That is unlikely but maybe you are truly satisfied. Consider yourself lucky. What if the people voting had elected people who had a different perspective on what makes your municipality and Waterloo Region a better place? Are you really willing to take that chance again?

In short, by not voting your voice is missing in the most important stage of local decision-making—the election of the people with the ultimate responsibility for making the decisions.

This year a couple referendums are being held where your voice could directly make a difference:

• In both Kitchener and Waterloo, voters are being asked if the two cities should open merger talks
• And in Waterloo, voters are again being asked to decide whether the water should be fluoridated.

In an effort to try to increase voter turnout, a loose coalition has formed under the banner Waterloo Region Votes. Coordinated by anti-poverty coalition Opportunities Waterloo Region, the group is trying to get the word out about the importance of voting. Particular emphasis is being placed on low income groups which historically have the lowest rate of participating in elections but the desire is to increase the number of voters across the board.

The centerpiece of the effort is the WaterlooRegionVotes.ca website which provides a single resource to connect voters from all parts of Waterloo Region with the information they need to know about voting. It provides information about how to vote in each municipality on October 25 or in advanced polls and who can vote. All Canadian citizens who is at least 18 years old can vote where they reside or own property. It includes information on voting as it relates to post-secondary students (who can vote in their hometown and where they live for school), people experiencing homelessness and those who need to vote by proxy.

If you want to make sure that your voice is heard in the election, you can vote in advance poll. Anyone can and you don’t need a special excuse. Check the website for links to advance voting in your area. One note of caution if you live in the core of Kitchener and you do not have a car or are experiencing homelessness, there are no advance polls in the core in advance of election day. You must make your way out to one of five community centres which is something not many of those people are likely to do.

Your vote matters

In one local race in 2006, a candidate won by 11 votes. Just a dozen more people voting for the second place candidate could have changed lives. Maybe a good choice was made maybe a better choice existed. The point is by not voting, you let other voters determine who is making decisions about your life.

Will your voice be heard at City Hall, in the Regional headquarters and around the table at the school boards? The most important time to do it is now. Be sure you get out to vote!

Visit WaterlooRegionVotes.ca to learn more.

James also writes on his blog, Perspectives from King and Ottawa.

[Spokes]

What did the municipal election mean for light rail?
By James Howe | November 3, 2010

The votes have all been counted and the signs are pretty much gone. Life has returned to normal. So what did the municipal election mean for Kitchener? In this post, I'll take a look at the results for the Region of Waterloo.

The issue of the election: Light Rail Transit

The election seemed to be all about light rapid transit--and it experienced a very rough ride. For many voters, they just started paying attention to the proposal when the federal government announced its contribution to the project just before Labour Day when municipal elections typically begin to ramp up. They were clearly upset about what they learned especially the so-called "shortfall" in funding from the senior levels of government especially since they understood it meant a significant tax increase. Opponents used these financial concerns to try to kill the light rail option and replace it with an alternative.

Voters just tuning into the debate wondered why we were even having a debate about rapid transit. Some of the questions repeatedly asked were: Weren't we better suited for buses? Shouldn't we make our current bus system better first? Why would we return to "streetcars"? Why are we doing it now? Why don't we wait until we're big enough?

The dissatisfaction with the LRT proposal did not translate to any significant changes in the makeup of regional council. In Kitchener, all four incumbents (including the Mayor of Kitchener) were re-elected. A pattern that was repeated in both Cambridge and Waterloo.

LRT opposition noticeable in results

But the anti-LRT vote was still noticeable in the results. The only new councillor is Geoff Lorentz who combined his strong name recognition with an anti-LRT platform to finish third. DaSilva, Satnik and Porritt who came 5th, 6th and 7th were all opposed to the region's preferred option too. Jason Hammond who strongly supported LRT came in 8th close behind Porritt (who also got some pro-LRT votes) and within arm’s reach of Satnik.

Digging a little deeper reveals that Wideman went from fourth last time to second while Haalboom fell from second to fourth. I think that Wideman's questioning of LRT as the preferred choice and his desire to actively look again at BRT contributed to his increase. Haalboom's pro-LRT position likely cost her some votes but I think her declaration that we should spend less on pipes, police and pavement and more on the arts, culture and heritage caused more damage--especially among those who equate policing with keeping our community safe from crime and those with an unquestioned love affair with the automobile.

A message has been clearly heard. People are upset by what they know about the LRT proposal--or at least what they think that they know. But does that message mean that light rail is dead or on life support? I don't think so.

Another message was also sent in the election that must be heard. Ken Seiling enjoys a strong region-wide mandate to continue his leadership on this and other related issues. An anti-LRT candidate for Regional Chair might have made waves but we'll never know since a credible alternative from that camp did not emerge. I read that as an endorsement of the Region's direction. I also believe that Tom Galloway's strong first-place finish while backing an affordable LRT plan shows support for this approach as does the re-election of Haalboom. Even Wideman would have been swept aside if opposition to the LRT was as strong enough to send a message that couldn't be ignored.

Our future will feature light rail trains

I remain optimistic that we'll see light rapid trains in Waterloo Region in a few years. Here's why:

• The debate featured hypothetical scenarios about our local contribution and our ability to afford it. I remain confident that the Region of Waterloo can find a combination of options that will make proceeding with rapid transit's first phase affordable.
• I found much of the opposition (though certainly not all of it) featured a lot of misinformation and a lack of understanding of the context of the proposal. An opportunity now exists to correct misinformation such as that the LRT was at the expense of a better traditional public transit using buses when the Region's information clearly shows that improvements to Grand River Transit are integral to the LRT proposal. We can also now look at rapid transit within the context of the larger growth management issues that we face. For example, deciding against investing in light rail does not save any great sums of money since we'll need to spend it to build and expand roads and other infrastructure to handle growth that will increasingly be widespread.
• Chair Ken Seiling and the vast majority of Regional Council were around the table the first time a decision needed to be made to endorse light rail as the preferred option. They know the facts and understand the context. I expect they will make the same decision again but not lightly or quickly. I am confident they will only do so if they have an affordable, responsible option to support. I am also confident that support for the proposal will increase as people understand the facts as expertly articulated by Jeffrey Casello in the latter stages of the election.

The decision on the future of light rail cannot be made in isolation from the big picture. Failure to move ahead with light rail could mean rethinking the Region's official plan, growth management strategy and transportation master plan and affect our ability to handle the implications of the Province's Places to Grow agenda. So while we need to listen to the message sent by voters, how we respond may be different than what politicians were hearing in the heat of a campaign. We elect politicians to make the best informed decisions that are in our best interest both today and tomorrow and that is what I expect to happen.

James also writes on his blog, Perspectives from King and Ottawa.

[Urban_Enthusiast86]

There is no low cost solution to accomodating the transportation needs of additional 200,000 people in Waterloo Region. Given that provincial legislation mandates we take an approach of building up instead of outwards, there is clearly only one way to accomodate this type of growth.

Don't like the idea of building up and think we should sprawl outwards instead? Take it up with the Province, since they created the Places to Grow Act.

Don't like the idea of growing at all? Take it up with the Federal Government, since they determine Canada's Immigration policies.

The Region is just dealing with what is being handed to us and what can be best done given circumstances that are largely out of our control. I'd rather see us having the right infrastructure to deal with what is coming.

[KevinL]

Don't like the idea of growing at all? Take it up with the Federal Government, since they determine Canada's Immigration policies.

Or, more locally, take it up with local business leaders, who had the temerity to be successful and create so many attractive jobs! Why, the very cheek...

[IEFBR14]

Don't like the idea of growing at all? Take it up with the Federal Government, since they determine Canada's Immigration policies.

Or, more locally, take it up with local business leaders, who had the temerity to be successful and create so many attractive jobs! Why, the very cheek...

I agree that it was Lazaridis and Balsillie, not Ottawa, who created the circumstances under which 12,000 high-tech workers and their families came to this region in the past decade, not to mention all the other entrepreneurs and visionaries who together added even more to our total population.

[Urban_Enthusiast86]

I agree that it was Lazaridis and Balsillie, not Ottawa, who created the circumstances under which 12,000 high-tech workers and their families came to this region in the past decade, not to mention all the other entrepreneurs and visionaries who together added even more to our total population.

It's both. Canada's population only continues to grow with immigration. Either that, or we have another baby boom. If Canada's population were to stop growing, Waterloo Region could only grow by causing decline in other parts of Canada. Those new high tech workers have to come from somewhere!

That said, if our economy was in the gutter, immigrants would just decide to go elsewhere. So again, it's both.

The moral of the story is that our growth is out of the Region's control unless we impose draconian measures to keep people from coming (unlikely!), so the naysayers might as well get comfortable with the idea of living in a large city or leave.

[Greg Moore]

I have to disagree that "The election seemed to be all about light rapid transit". It was almost a non-issue in the news. It was all about amalgamation and fluoridation. It was shocking how little I heard about LRT, and I followed the coverage.

I think the LRT is the expressway argument all over again, except this time we have the foresight to plan out long term routes. This time, we won't be saying "we should have made it a ring around the city". We already planned for this ring. Now we need the engagement.

[Spokes]

What did the municipal election mean for Kitchener?
By James Howe | November 16, 2010

I can sum up the newly elected Kitchener City Council in one word: balanced. I believe this to be a good result.

There are a solid core of experienced veterans in Mayor Zehr, Berry Vrbanovic, John Gazzola and Kelly Galloway.

There are new progressive voices such as Yvonne Fernandes, Bil Ionnidis and Frank Etherington. I also believe that if he stays true to his neighbourhood association roots that Daniel Glenn-Graham can also be included as a new progressive voice.

Then there are new fiscal conservative voices in Zyg Janecki and Scott Davey.

To be honest, I’m not sure where Paul Singh fits into the mix. Time will tell. In fact, one of the benefits of municipal politics is that councillors are not restricted to toeing the party line. Singh and the others are free to act in support of the best interests of Kitchener. Allies on one issue may see another from different angles. Each councillor can make a decision on each issue based upon its merits.

While overall the council is not as progressive as I had hoped to see, I believe that the incoming council is reflective of the perspectives found across the city. That is a good. I just hope that despite their differences that the new council can find ways to work together in the best interests of the people of Kitchener. I hope that the veterans and progressive voices can work together to present and implement a compelling vision for Kitchener and that the fiscal conservatives can help to ensure that we do so in an affordable, responsible manner.

I am concerned that the different perspectives could become different camps that may have trouble working together. But I am willing to give the new council the benefit of the doubt that they will work collaboratively. Ideally, there will be more debate and discussion than we have seen recently though hopefully those exchanges can lead to finding solutions with wide spread support. A sign that this is happening if there is a variety in the mix of councillors in favour or opposed to various initiatives. If defined camps appear then we have lost a potential strength of this new council.

In short, I am hopeful that the result of the municipal elections means a better future for Kitchener.

What do you think?

James also writes on his blog, Perspectives from King and Ottawa.