I will vote for Nenshi because I agree with him on most things, but I find him extremely irritating and I hope he passes the torch to someone better socialized.
I think Evan Wooley is going to have a hard enough time winning his seat again this election. The changes to the ward boundaries I think have really hurt him and his re-election chances.I find myself in exactly the same position. If Nenshi had better people skills and was more likeable he would easily have this election won already.
Supposedly he wasn’t going to run even for this election, so I wouldnt be surprised if he won’t be running next time. Maybe someone like Evan Wooley will take a run at it.
It doesn't help that people have been going around the ward trashing his signs. Seriously, conservatives in this city have a serious entitlement problem. They're so convinced that they should govern the city by right, that they're willing to stoop to the lowest levels to take back control: vandalism, lawsuits, push polls, PACs, etc.I think Evan Wooley is going to have a hard enough time winning his seat again this election. The changes to the ward boundaries I think have really hurt him and his re-election chances.
This is from the approved 4 year budget, so may not have been followed exactly.Despite the claims of wanting to cut red tape, getting applications through has taken longer and gotten much more expensive, while the administration has grown by thousands.
Ironically, a conservative council will likely be much more supportive of anti-urban NIMBYism in the inner-city, since it fits with their view of city-building. The best way to handle development in the inner-city is not to fight density, but to ensure that density is added in a way that produces walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods and not the "vertical suburbs" that we see in the west side of downtown. So even in the inner-city, developers cannot be left to "run wild". They need urban-minded councilors to press them on the principles of good urbanism.Developers running wild at public expense..... Ask some of the residents of the Marda Loop area their thoughts on that statement, under Councillor Wooley's term. Maybe DougR would like to weigh in? How many projects got approved that did not conform with the ARP, so the developer could get extra density? I know you probably mean more along the lines of urban sprawl, but I am just trying to point out how it is not a simple issue of pro-sprawl = pro-developer = bad councilor vs. anti-sprawl - anti-developer = good councilor.
From what I have heard through many members of industry, both inner-city and greenfield builders, is just an entire group fed up with the ever increasing red tape and bureaucracy they have faced in the past 7 years under Nenshi and this latest council. Despite the claims of wanting to cut red tape, getting applications through has taken longer and gotten much more expensive, while the administration has grown by thousands. The levies have increased, but the service has not. Growth Management reviews have not been objective or consistent, and decisions have caused delays of over a year at times.
While having a grand vision of Calgary is great, people don't see the value of the vision if it is struggled to be implemented. Right now, I get the sense that people like the vision Nenshi has put forward, they just have less and less faith in his ability to implement it.
Thanks for the figures. Most of the growth seems to be occurring in the "front line" services (transportation, police, bylaw officers, etc.). Perhaps the reason people are complaining about red tape is because there are too few people working in the bureaucracy. Planning fell by 30 people!! No wonder we're still stuck with all of these planning guidelines that are relics of a bygone age.This is from the approved 4 year budget, so may not have been followed exactly.
A thousand. The growth came and will come from:
Corporate Administration: 35
Corporate Services: 72
Civic partners: -2
Community Services and Protective Services (ex. Bylaw, Fire): 352
Utilities and Environment: 194
View attachment 123910
Page 1014- 1015 of http://www.calgary.ca/_layouts/cocis/DirectDownload.aspx?target=http://www.calgary.ca/cfod/finance/Documents/Action-Plan/Approved/Action-Plan-2015-2018-Complete-Approved.pdf&noredirect=1&sf=1
7% FTE growth while the population grew from 1,120,225 --> 1,246,337 (11.3%) and the number of dwellings grew from 459,339 --> 506,392 (10.2%).
Seems reasonable to me.