Loading...

The property owners association speaks!

Posted by bub on October 24, 2006 - 10:33pm

The Amabel Property Association has released its list of candidates that it backs in this coming election, and giving reasons for such.Many of those same reasons can be found right here on this very blog, or googling the names..which will almost certainly lead you back here.In a well written, and well thought out newsletter, true democracy comes through to the forefront:

"Councillors Pat Varley and Gwen Gilbert have struggled valiantly these last three years to try to get the Mayor and the rest of council to listen to the residents and to act in the best interest of the residents. But in spite of Gwen’s and Pat’s efforts, Mayor Noble, with support of the rest of council, has wasted scarce taxpayer dollars, and ignored any resident who dares to disagree with his wasteful decisions."

You can read more by browsing the A.P.O.A website.
The list of approved candidates so far that will represent you, and not big pipeline business and developers that will increase your taxes are:
Gwen Gilbert, Mayor
Ana Vukovic, ward 3
Pat Varley and Art King, ward 1
Betty Hall, ward 2
John Burley, ward 4

Now stand up and be counted..its all up to you what kind of S.B.P. that you want..don't for a moment think that your vote won't make a difference..it will.Time for no more hogs at the trough.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Greening of the Government

Submitted by garym on October 25, 2006 - 10:35am.

That's pretty significant, if you ask me. Not that the APOS would endorse a roster of change per-se, but look at that list: It is almost entirely female. That says something. Something big.

Scooting over to the sidebar links that follow the Greening of Owen Sound link, I don't know if it is their editorial bias or just telling it like it is because the media won't, but I notice the Owen Sound municipal elections also appear to be bringing out a more sensitive and caring attitude, a mindfulness of the future for a quality of life that isn't measured in square-feet. Way over in Ottawa we have Conservatives talking softly about environment, trying to appease what they call The Left, but which isn't about labour and class struggle, it is about Planetary Citizenship and a caring, nourturing attitude that includes Nature in our plans.

Is this Willie's Revenge? He's always been deep in Mother Nature's Underground.

Apparently, if this announcment means anything, if the Owen Sound greening means anything, if a veering away from development for develoment's sake means anything, could it be that we rural hicks are finally showing our colours as smarter than the urban world-eaters? If so, and this election may tell, then it seems we're poised here to escape our typecast roots of going fishing with dynamite :)

Imagine the press we'd get with a 100% female council! Yes, ma'am, we've come a long way, baby.

garym: ict evangelist - musician - whatever

Developer Free Candidates

Submitted by Dodge on October 29, 2006 - 6:12pm.

In today's Toronto Star is an article " Contributions Unwelcome" on how candidates are winning favor with the GTA voters by refusing contributions from developers. It is hard to do because it takes a lot of small contributions to equal one developer's hand out but it looks like a winning strategy. It makes you wonder if people all over the province are beginning to get the message that developers cost everyone money in the long term and some of the sacrifices cannot be valued.

"Across Greater Toronto, more than 40 candidates are mounting corporate-free campaigns to protest what they see as an improper relationship between developers and city hall. They say the widespread practice of using developer donations to fund municipal campaigns has led to bad planning, environmental degradation and soaring property taxes. "

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_PrintFriendly&c=Article&cid=1162034471533&call_pageid=972514080738

That article is available for 7 days. Very interesting that Councils may change elsewhere on development issues. Another quote:

"In Oakville, where development in the town's north end is once again a major election issue, voters "are connecting the dots," says Ward 4 regional Councillor Alan Elgar, who ran without corporate or donations in 2003.

With two corporate-free challengers hoping to unseat incumbent mayor Ann Mulvale, and with several candidates for local council also taking the pledge, Elgar predicts the new council could see a major shift in the way it approaches development.

"Any business or group that stands to gain financially from a council decision should not be financing municipal campaigns," he says.

But in communities where incumbents are heavily supported by developers, "green" candidates don't stand a chance if they aren't well financed."

In 2003 there were developer contributions in the Town of South Bruce Peninsula race. In 2006 we still have if I can use Mayor Noble's phrase developers waiting in the wings. One of them named Jaymor was expected to be active in this campaign but so far we have not seen a public presence. The contributors will be named eventually.

I just have to bite my tongue before following Gary's lead and dumping all female candidates in the green category. Mankind always leaves an ecofootprint. We damage things but sustainability is the art of keeping that damage to a minimum. Sometimes good government is not green. Think of the many interpetations of jobs and nuclear power. I am not entirely comfortable with the green approach in Owen Sound. Can we have good government decisions and an ecofootprint with a green label government? It is a slippery slope and the deep greens are always ready to attack.

But good government with women in voting control? Yes the thought has crossed my mind these many months leading up to the vote.

Here come the 'small g' greens

Submitted by garym on October 30, 2006 - 2:19pm.

I hadn't really meant to identify these candidates as Green in the registered political party trademark logo sense, only in the sense of that old sticker I had on my guitar case in the seventies, the green circle that meant 'mindful of our footprints' and maybe even more important, 'mindful of how our footsteps echo'. The very good news is that this sort of thinking is not just Toronto, not just our own SBP hopefulls, google tells me things is changin' all over!

And yes, as Dodge points out, I'd also hesitate to attribute such thinking blankly to any gender or group having a monopoly, and I have admit to any political dogma being largely useless without true unifying guide-star vision (especially considering what I've already posted elsewhere) but I still do expect an all-or-nearly-all female council would catch some eyes and maybe shake a few people by the shoulders and maybe just maybe get them to wake up :)

In any political discussion, I am always reminded to revisit James Joyce's wonderful parable of The Mookse and the Gripes from finnigans wake, a tale wherein the pompous rich and educated Mookse debates ad nauseum with the snarky steel-edged self-appointed Gripes, all the while Anna Livia looks down and watches as both oafs tussle and shove and trample the precious flower beneath their feet. If I have a political bent, it's likely to be among the Plurabellites.

garym: ict evangelist - musician - whatever

Election Stunner - More Than 10% of the Ballots Are Spoiled

Submitted by Dodge on November 9, 2006 - 11:51pm.

I might as well break this here it will be in the news soon anyway. Town of South Bruce Peninsula ballots are mostly in. There are more than 5500 ballots in and a few more to come. The shocker is the number of spoiled ballots.

There are about 750, more than 10% that are spoiled. The reason is that no declaration was present in the yellow envelope along with the white ballot envelope.

The instructions were clear I don't know how so many could have missed them. I have one report where the couple swears there were no instructions or declaration form in the kit. Something is clearly wrong and hundreds of people are about to find out their vote did not count.

This could be serious and I do not expect uncontested results where there are close races. We may be in trouble here. There cannot be any room for contesting the results or we might not finish this election for a long time.

The big concern now is what to do with 750 odd ballot envelopes that may also contain a declaration that was mistakenly put in with the ballot. There may be 100 or more like this and the fate of some races could be less than half of that range.

What to do? It looks like there might be a scenario where open ballot envelopes, ballots and peoples names on declarations might be all on the table at the same time while surrounded by scrutineers and staff deciding individual cases. This is a recipe for disaster. In event of a court case this is the kind of thing a judge does not want to hear about. It is the responsibility of the town to handle this correctly.

The best route would be to call in an outside accountant's firm and have them open and tabulate the results from all the envelopes which did not include a declaration along with the ballot envelope inside the yellow envelope. Before this takes place on Monday afternoon all candidates representatives would have to agree to accept the accountant's submission of ballots which were found to be accompanied by a valid declaration. It would have to be all or none. Any other method would leave room for disputes. This election must be beyond reproach. We are already in trouble with the high number of spoiled ballots.

Tinkham and Associates has a lot of experience with elections and mailed in ballots:
Tinkham & Associates, LLP Chartered Accountants (Dale C. Tinkham FCA)

Long established highly reputable firm. They have no connection with this election.

2842 Bloor St. W. Toronto ON M8X 1B1 CA
Phone: 416-233-2139

Even more stunning...

Submitted by CL1368 on November 10, 2006 - 4:26pm.

is how you know this information, prior to the election day. What you don't report is the number of ballots that have been "discarded" because they weren't signed on the back, or that the voters have come into the office and re-registered and re-voted, knowing they made a mistake - or even thinking they made a mistake.
With regards to the envelopes containing the declarations, it would be much simpler to simply weight suspected ballots and that would determine if they contained more than just the ballot itself.
Then lets not forget those that mark the ballot with an "X" which will be discarded. (I'll guess another 5-10 %
It just goes to show how many "informed" voters don't take the time to read and follow instructions. I hope they're not the same people that haven't taken the time to read exactly what each candidate stands for in this election. Then again, not all candidates want their views published for people to read.

Secret Ballot or Not?

Submitted by Dodge on November 10, 2006 - 6:04pm.

No ballot can be signed anywhere front or back or it would no longer be a secret ballot. No ballot envelope can be opened by staff to identify the voter or it would no longer be a secret ballot. The process is carefully designed. The only way not to breach it is to leave the envelopes sealed and not use them. That is the problem.

What the Town is proposing to do to solve the problem is break the secret ballot process carefully. They are actually holding a mail in ballot election and considering not following procedure. It will be fine as long as no one contests those ballots as being invalid on procedural grounds. The ballots should be segregated in case that happens.

Marking the ballot with an X is fine you just need some coverage in the box.

A number of local residents have realized their mistake after hearing a radio information piece and requested new voting kits. This does not help seasonal residents who live in Kitchener, London, Cambridge or Hamilton.

If anyone wants to check if their ballot was received they can phone Wiarton or check with a candidate in their ward.

HF Rule #1: Humans win

Submitted by garym on November 10, 2006 - 6:24pm.

I get that phrase all the time in my business (computer software) and it always makes me laugh. "The instructions were so simple," they always begin. My response is always the same so I'll repeat it here, and before you blame me for being a snarky old curmudgeon, let me state up front that this is not my original advice, but the advice of the astounding physicist Richard Feynman:

"I don't care how elegant your theory is, if it disagrees with observed facts, it is wrong."

I'm sure it looked easy to everyone that was in on designing it; as Galileo famously remarked, the truth is always easy to see when you know it is there. But here's the kicker: Did anyone think to test this process on typical participants who did not know? Or was it just assumed that everyone thinks as I do, a process we developmental psychologist types call egocentricism and attribute, often erroneously, as primarily a feature peculiar to preschoolers.

I signed mine, but I have to admit I did a second take, and I had a cold chill after I'd sealed the final envelope. I saw that form and thought, "They can't want me to ID myself in my ballot envelope! That defeats the purpose of anonymous voting!" so I read it more carefully and realized it was to be in the containing postal envelope. So I signed it, tucked it in, sealed it up, set it aside to await the next trip out to the mailbox.

And then it hit me: Don't forms which ask for a signature usually also ask for the date?

I thought of steaming it open, but then that would be a sure fire way to spoil it. Would they spoil my ballot if I didn't put the date? Was there even a date field? I didn't remember it, but I can't say that I really looked all that hard, really. I sat there staring at it, pondering if I could apply for a second copy, until May came home and assured me there was no date field on that form.

I'll trust her on that.

Here's my point: Back to plain ordinary human psychology we have an effect in human-factors design that we call expectation from experience or sometimes set and setting, but whatever the name, it means people do what they did before, and if you give them suddenly something that seems familiar, they will see what they saw before. What does m-a-c-d-o-n-a-l-d spell, or m-a-c-m-i-l-l-a-n, or m-a-c-h-i-n-e-s. Ballots, as we all know, have a box for an X, yet this one wanted a solid black box (honey, where do we keep BLACK markers?) and ballots never ever ever ever ever ask to be signed. Ever. Not now, not ever. Never (to quote Andy Williams)

Except this one, on another page, on a fold here tear off page, it says on the back, sign this. Makes sense, sure, once you know the truth but, as Ton Van Berjik said of ragtime guitar, to do this, you gots to know how. Sure, there's always one in a pack who just gets their sets and settings in a knot; out of the hundreds of subscribers here, we've had one that just could not get their head around the login process (even with help) but when there's more than one in ten, that tells you something else.

Who is at fault here? The voters? By definition, I say not: in human factors design, the objective of the design is to accommodate the human factors (hence the name :) and so, by definition, the voters cannot be wrong on this. It was the package designers who messed up, big time, because they did not do their homework, they did not do their due dilligence and they did not look before they lept or test the ice before they burst out to play shimmy, and because of their oversight, negligence and ignorance, it seems we have to endure a largely spoiled election.

I wonder how much they were paid for that ... and how much they'll pay back having botched the job. One final thought, I wonder if anyone has thought on the particular demographic most prone to falling for this newfangled process slight of packaging, and whether that might peculiarly skew the results.

garym: ict evangelist - musician - whatever

Growth Shake Up In 905

Submitted by Dodge on November 15, 2006 - 1:58pm.

I want to quote most of this article from today's National Post. I believe that we are starting to see a trend here that will be stronger by the time we have the next municipal elections in 2010. Sauble is not the big city but we came close a couple of times to a good start. What stopped it? First the size of the project prevented easy access to funding. Second the residents did not want it for a variety of reasons. The changes in the Toronto region have all started as a result of runaway development. We have chosen not to go that way. Now we must choose development at a slow and steady pace.

Jaymor has an approved plan ready to go for their Silver Lake property. There are plans afoot to build another lumber/building centre on the south end of Wiarton and there is no shortage of customers and builders who are for the most part quite busy.

We have a building centre, a grocery store and potentially a new GM dealership building in some stage of process for the south end of Wiarton. We need a servicing plan with Georgian Bluffs and we need to move fast. This area has the potential to become the serviced hub for the Town of South Bruce Peninsula.

Meanwhile look at the comments from 905 and remember intensification is the new buzz there. For 905 the horse has left the barn and the new attitude is late in coming.

Discontent over growth fuels 905 mayoral change

Matthew Coutts, Tim Shufelt and Melissa Dunne
National Post
November 15, 2006

Discontent over growth in the GTA's sprawling municipalities prompted a wave of change at municipal halls across the region.

New mayors were elected in half the 24 municipalities of the 905 region on Monday, including the toppling of veteran incumbents in Whitby, Oakville and Aurora.

In those three municipalities, winners and losers alike attributed the election results to concerns over the pace of growth and development.

"We are going to be concentrated on a quality community ... and keeping as many green spaces as possible," said Phyllis Morris, an Aurora city councillor who beat Mayor Tim Jones on an environmental platform.

Rob Burton, Oakville's mayor-elect, ran on the promise of slowing the pace of development around town, in an attempt to fight the ''tidal wave of growth.''

"It's a new perspective that seems to be viewed to be more productive by the people, according to the election," said Ann Mulvale, who had been elected mayor six times before losing to Mr. Burton on Monday.

He ran a similar campaign against Ms. Mulvale in the 2003 municipal election, but was beaten by 28 votes. This time, he won by more than 1,500 votes.

In Whitby, the mayor-elect, Pat Perkins, said residents don't blame the former mayor for recent explosive growth -- that stage was set by past mayors, councillors and official plans. "What they may have seen is that it happened so quickly," she said.

Ms. Perkins, who unseated three-term incumbent Marcel Brunelle by fewer than 200 votes, credited her win to long-standing residents, who "remember Whitby when it still had a small-town feel."

She said higher-density housing, townhouses and smaller lot sizes are changing the nature of the city. "We have no more residential land unless we expand our urban boundary," she said.

As Durham's fastest-growing municipality, Whitby's population has more than doubled to around 110,000 in the past 20 years.

In Aurora, Ms. Morris is faced with the challenge of running a town that is quickly running out of space.

Aurora is overflowing with residents -- the population is growing about 4% each year. Soon the town will reach its development and population capacity.

Ms. Morris's winning platform focused on solutions to the economic and environmental issues facing the town.

© National Post 2006