Now you know what your tax dollars get you when all these politicians get together on your dime. They just simply discuss ways they can stick around longer each term and how much of a raise to give themselves.

For all the mumbling and grumbling we all do on here about politicians, I know that I sure don’t have the skills or knowledge to do a good job, nor would I want to make such a serious long term committment as they do. Three years or four years doesn’t matter to me, and I don’t think they get paid that much either. What I would really like to see is a cap on campaign funding! Course we can’t stop the other backroom promises that can and do occur!

Maybe it’s time we had some new faces on Council with some new Ideas. Some people with some back bone like Brian, who gets into lots of trouble and takes a hit but stands up for the little guy. I think three years is long enough.

I wonder if this will help with voter apathy at the polls? If people don’t have to vote as often, maybe they’ll actually get out and do it. Turn out to vote at the local gov’t level is dismal.

Politicians actually prefer low voter turn out, as it allows them to concentrate on those who actually vote (approx. 30%)and get them in their corner.

Prince George had a turnout of approx. 13000 voters in the last election out of a possible 52000.

There is voting and then there is voting. People tend to vote for a few politicians that they know then fill in the other spots randomly or not at all. Statistically I heard that the first person and the last person on the ballots get the most votes.

I think if we had the issue’s out in the open, more open debates with the ability to ask questions, and perhaps more Councilors on TV, radio, etc; we might get a better insight and therefore a better turn out. Who knows.

Murry figures 3 years isn’t long enough to get settled and get down to business?? Guys like him have been in there how many years in a row and still can’t seem to figure things out? Yup…a longer term is going to help. Time to go Murry.

Lets take the inane statement that one of the benefits of having an election every four years, is that we would save money.

When we consider the amount of money that is wasted by this City, over the years, why would be we concerned about saving a few dollars on elections???

Over a twenty year period having elections evey four years would save us apprx $6000.00 per year. Hardly an amount to be overly concerned about.

Another inane argument is that every other Province has four year terms, so we should do the same. Duhhhhhh.

I agree that four year terms gives Council more time to complete some of there aspirations, however if those aspirations, happen to be Dikes, Performing Art Centres, another Boundry Road etc; then perhaps its not such a good thing.

“If I am lucky enough to be elected, I’ve got four years to, hopefully, accomplish something meaningful.”

Lucky enough? This is an election not a lottery (although many politicians treat it as such). You need to work hard for the position.

Also, Mr. Krause is suggesting that nothing meaningful can be accomplished in three years, and that “hopefully” he can accomplish something in four? Hopefully?

So for Krause 15 years on council is not long enough to have continuity.
The election saving are not $76,000.00 as the term just changes from 3 to 4 years. It would take 12 years to realize a $76,000.00 saving.
City council spends 50 grand on a Nissan Leaf that can’t be used in the winter, 15 million on a money losing energy purchase agreement with Lakeland Mills, useless trips to China, was prepared to spend 10 million on a dike, and now saving $76,000.00 over a period of 12 years is a big deal.
What we really need is workable civic politician recall legislation.

Democracy requires elections. I find it superfluous and almost embarrassing that someone would suggest that 76k every three years is something that the City is being concerned about!

How about talking about needless really expensive ventures that the City had no hesitation embarking on!

What we need is a reduction in the current term not an increase. Two year terms ought to work well. Politicians seem to forget that their election to office is a civic service and voters forget it’s their civic duty to hold them to account.

It’s not as easy being a bum in a chair for only a two year term compared to a four-year term.

You could even do six month terms. That’s about the length of time it takes for the average PG resident to get dissatisfied with the current group and wants to replace them with anybody.

Jokes aside, being in municipal politics is just one no win situation after another. There is always going to be some segment of the population unhappy with something you said or a decision you made.

I have to give credit to those who throw their hats in the ring. At least they’re putting their name out there and not constantly blogging about how bad things are.

If people would constantly be blogging about how good and wonderful things are (and there are many more good and wonderful things, to be sure) there would be complaints that the bloggers are out of touch with reality, floating on pink clouds gazing at their navels and that this is unrealistic, boring and not worth visiting or participating in the blog!

Valid point JB. Its not like we can complain to City hall. Its all peaches and cream and Mayor and council are doing a splendid job spending your money foolishly on trips to China, law suits because city can not follow their own OCP, conflict of interest matters. After all Mayor Ford would not step aside even after all his foolish behavior. How the heck could we expect our mayor to step aside respectfully. In her opinion she is doing a great job. But so is mayor Ford in his own mind.

“and I don’t think they get paid that much either” .. the mayor gets paid pretty damn good actually and as for the councillors, you do know those are part time jobs, right? Pretty good coin for a part time job in my opinion.

Any corporate entity, whether a board of a private corporation or a public corporation or organizations such as city councils, is an entity of its own with a characteristic of its own.

I have never heard of any other board, whether they are the several I have been on or others that I read about having Directors who are hell bent on staying on till new goals set by the newly populated board are seen to completion.

The administration of large organizations are the one who keep the ship moving and keep it from capsizing. The Directors are the ones who may steer the ship to a different destination. But let us face it, the destination a city goes in is relatively steady. We do not steer to the Arctic for one Council and then another Council steers us to Hawaii. There are minor variations on the financial, social and environmental course. Steering back and forth to the left at one time and to the right at another time is extremely costly.

So, this prima donna, selfish view of individuals on Councils or even one Council over another Council wanting to see projects through is more in the interest of Councillors than the population at large. In fact, if the people wanted to make sure a goal is maintained rather than dropped or altered. The people will vote for the Councillors who have set goals the population supports. If Council has set the right goals, the Councillors who support those goals will be voted back in.

Somebody is trying to pull the wool over our eyes for some totally different reasons than given.

I have posted previously on the original story about this about the fallacy of saving any significant amount of money. That is a bunch of hogwash and shows how much they are grabbing for anything within reach to make their argument.

I would say a 4 year term with Councillors serving alternate election years with elections every two year. That is the way it used to be. I think there was good rationale for that.

76000 to hold a election and how much did she spend to get elected ?

Just seems weird to me

but thats probably just me

Actually Mayor Ford is doing a great job for the city of Toronto. His “PERSONAL LIFE” is his own business.

So what has Mayor Ford been doing for the City of Toronto?

I think anyone in public life has to make sure that they keep private life and public life separate.

Being a drunk, drug induced nouveau riche jerk does not help the image of the City of which he is supposed to be the Mayor.

If he acts that way in public, it is the public’s business. If he acts like that in private, it is none of the public’s business.

There is a dividing line and most people with a proper upbringing know that.

Its a dangerous road that we go down if we extend the terms of a council, while we have legislation that allows councils to spend near unlimited amounts of tax payer indebtedness through a simple reverse petition processes.

Keep in mind that if council rushes to a decision behind closed doors like the $10 million dollar dyke proposal, and is willing to borrow these funds through a reverse petition process.. then they not only have the deck stacked in their favor to carry out covert agenda’s, often not discussed at election time, but also have the added benefit that any opposition has to declare their name and who they are to have a vote.

Then we have an election process that is essentially an advertising campaign fueled by contribution dollars from special interests and we fail our democracy because we fail to uphold the other side of voting, and that is the part about voting informed of the issues, and not giving blank check consent. If elections are reduced to name recognition, then we don’t have a democracy.

The biggest danger to a democracy is to have people alienated from the social aspect of policy discussions. Great empires throughout history fell when citizens became prostrate to an alien ruling class. The same holds true for democracy, and once people no longer feel their voice makes a difference, or that they are not represented, then people no longer feel connected to voting, and then if the numbers get low enough the whole concept of calling it a democracy becomes a lie.

Currently we are at 30% turn out for civic elections and that should tell us a lot… enough that allowing an extra year on a term is not what we need to strengthen peoples participation in the democratic process.

I like the idea of off setting elections every two years, and major issues going to referendum each election for political guidelines of accountability on the larger issues. I shouldn’t have to identify myself and who I am to a public enemies list in order to vote on major issues like the River Road Dyke, a Boundary Road, or a new PAC… the secret ballot should be extended at election time to cover those issues at referendum as well, and that would be democracy worthy of participating in. We all have issues that would bring us to the voting both.

I think the thing people find attractive about Rob Ford has nothing to do with his policy or his private life. I think people are attracted to him because he exemplifies breaking the mold expected of politicians from the ruling class.

For good or for bad Rob Ford is a man that doesn’t care what anyone thinks of him as a person, and is willing to let the chips fall where they may… disrupting the hidden agenda’s of other politicians and inviting a scrutiny to the whole lot of them that really opens up the democratic process. Its a total gong show, but its also democracy in process and just enough people might feel alienated from the puppet show of the political arena, that Rob Ford might be able to maintain a Ford nation base from the chaos he creates alone.