0
Would there have been 21 candidates for mayor instead?
01 November 2010
"If I had run again, would there have been six people running for mayor? Who knows?"
That's what Mayor Carrier told The Enterprise Bulletin, last week, when asked to comment on the results of the municipal election that saw five incumbent councillors lose their seat, all of who had been his supporters during most of his term, several of them still loyal to the bitter end.
But not only would the mayor not accept any responsibility for their defeat, he didn't have any words of praise for them, either. No thanks for following his lead on such controversial issues as killing the Admiral Collingwood development, or backing him to waste more than $500,000 on legal fees.* No credit for voting with his motions, or for making such lines made at the table as "I never lost confidence in you, your worship."
Had I been one of those five, I think I'd be feeling I had been abandoned. After four years, that's got to hurt.
As the EB also noted: "Carrier said he wasn't going to discuss whether the election showed a backlash by voters clearly eager to repudiate the actions of the current council over its term in office."
Everyone I've spoken to, post-election, has agreed it was a serious repudiation of his administration. Maybe the mayor is the sole person in town who didn't see that. I wonder how he accounts for the record voter turnout and the record number of council candidates? Or the landslide wins his political opponents - Sandra Cooper and Rick Lloyd - scored? Or even my own modest success coming in third (after he told a local reporter he didn't expect me to do very well in the results)?
I wonder what he made of all the election signs, flyers and speeches that called for change? Did he ever ask himself what people wanted change from?
"I won't play that game," he told the EB. "I'll match my record against anyone."
It would be an entertaining challenge to compare records. I'll have to go back through my posts to compile a list of events and issues over the past four years - a list that begins with spying on council emails in the first few months. Remember when he signed the Tampon? Or sent a scolding letter to staff of another municipality's airport? Or made a public presentation to council on behalf of a developer after staff refused to do so? Or when he shrugged off a 2,500-name petition as just people who "voted for the other guy"?
I wonder whose record he'd like to compare those actions to?
But that's for a future post, when I write the post-mortem of the past four years, a few weeks from now.
It's an interesting question, though, about how many might have run in the mayoralty race had he also done so. I believe the ABC sentiment (Anyone But Carrier) on the street was very strong, possibly strong enough to draw off some of the council candidates to run against the incumbent mayor. I seriously doubt his entering the ring would have scared off candidates, but might instead have encouraged others to step in. From what I saw, the sheer number of council candidates was a protest itself against his followers, that proved successful in ousting most of the incumbents.
Had he run with in the race with the other five, I suspect he would have come in fourth, after Jeffrey, polling under 800 votes. Had he run against Sandra alone - what a rout that would have been. Even if he polled as much as all the other candidates combined, it still would have been a landslide for Sandra.
Still, what matters is not what-if, but rather what happened. Even if the mayor can't - or refuses to - see it, his side lost, and lost by a significant margin. Next term we move to a wholly different sort of council, and start of the task of restoring public faith in local government - and repairing some of what was done this term.
Full story on the EB's Web site.
~~~~~
* $428,000 on his futile fight against the school boards over education development charges - a win in which would have benefitted developers and a few new home buyers, but ended up being paid for by all taxpayers. The town also spent $110,000 over the Admiral Collingwood development over the repeal of the heritage permits.
That's what Mayor Carrier told The Enterprise Bulletin, last week, when asked to comment on the results of the municipal election that saw five incumbent councillors lose their seat, all of who had been his supporters during most of his term, several of them still loyal to the bitter end.
But not only would the mayor not accept any responsibility for their defeat, he didn't have any words of praise for them, either. No thanks for following his lead on such controversial issues as killing the Admiral Collingwood development, or backing him to waste more than $500,000 on legal fees.* No credit for voting with his motions, or for making such lines made at the table as "I never lost confidence in you, your worship."
Had I been one of those five, I think I'd be feeling I had been abandoned. After four years, that's got to hurt.
As the EB also noted: "Carrier said he wasn't going to discuss whether the election showed a backlash by voters clearly eager to repudiate the actions of the current council over its term in office."
Everyone I've spoken to, post-election, has agreed it was a serious repudiation of his administration. Maybe the mayor is the sole person in town who didn't see that. I wonder how he accounts for the record voter turnout and the record number of council candidates? Or the landslide wins his political opponents - Sandra Cooper and Rick Lloyd - scored? Or even my own modest success coming in third (after he told a local reporter he didn't expect me to do very well in the results)?
I wonder what he made of all the election signs, flyers and speeches that called for change? Did he ever ask himself what people wanted change from?
"I won't play that game," he told the EB. "I'll match my record against anyone."
It would be an entertaining challenge to compare records. I'll have to go back through my posts to compile a list of events and issues over the past four years - a list that begins with spying on council emails in the first few months. Remember when he signed the Tampon? Or sent a scolding letter to staff of another municipality's airport? Or made a public presentation to council on behalf of a developer after staff refused to do so? Or when he shrugged off a 2,500-name petition as just people who "voted for the other guy"?
I wonder whose record he'd like to compare those actions to?
But that's for a future post, when I write the post-mortem of the past four years, a few weeks from now.
It's an interesting question, though, about how many might have run in the mayoralty race had he also done so. I believe the ABC sentiment (Anyone But Carrier) on the street was very strong, possibly strong enough to draw off some of the council candidates to run against the incumbent mayor. I seriously doubt his entering the ring would have scared off candidates, but might instead have encouraged others to step in. From what I saw, the sheer number of council candidates was a protest itself against his followers, that proved successful in ousting most of the incumbents.
Had he run with in the race with the other five, I suspect he would have come in fourth, after Jeffrey, polling under 800 votes. Had he run against Sandra alone - what a rout that would have been. Even if he polled as much as all the other candidates combined, it still would have been a landslide for Sandra.
Still, what matters is not what-if, but rather what happened. Even if the mayor can't - or refuses to - see it, his side lost, and lost by a significant margin. Next term we move to a wholly different sort of council, and start of the task of restoring public faith in local government - and repairing some of what was done this term.
Full story on the EB's Web site.
~~~~~
* $428,000 on his futile fight against the school boards over education development charges - a win in which would have benefitted developers and a few new home buyers, but ended up being paid for by all taxpayers. The town also spent $110,000 over the Admiral Collingwood development over the repeal of the heritage permits.
