News   Apr 03, 2020
 4.6K     1 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 6.5K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 3.7K     0 

Mayor Naheed Nenshi's Calgary

WislaHD

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Messages
10,036
Reaction score
9,614
Location
Midtown Toronto
Naheed Kurban Nenshi (born February 2, 1972) is the 36th mayor of Calgary, Alberta. He was elected in the 2010 municipal election, becoming the first visible minority mayor of a Canadian municipality with a population of at least 100,000 and the first Muslim mayor of a large North American city. He was re-elected in 2013 with 74% of the vote. The next municipal election will take place in 2017.
 
Calgary versus the car: the city that declared war on urban sprawl
Calgary is like any other Canadian city that grew outwards, not upwards. But led by progressive mayor Naheed Nenshi, the oil-rich, car-friendly city has become an unlikely leader in the battle to limit urban sprawl

Full Story (The Guardian)
 
Kind of an odd and somewhat stilted profile of the city if you ask me. Not that I expect much more from the Guardian. It's as though Nenshi invented the bicycle, banned cars and got us all humming the Internationale.

The vaunted civic elite of the 2010 election was dim bulb who likes to say no to stuff (see my previous comment on MacIver, skepticism, competence and vision), a news anchorwoman of dubious substance and unclear political leanings and a guy whose mission in life was that a tunnel not get built. (Was that Hawkesworth? If so ironically, he was the hardest left of the bunch and couldn't even get swept in during the "Orange Crush") When Nenshi showed up with his pants on it was not shock that he won. The article's shameless NDP plug also failed to mention the factors that lead up their their election and their abysmal current popularity.

Our vast system of bike paths well precedes Nenshi and better integration with downtown was not only necessary but inevitable. What bothered me, was the suddenness, heavy handedness and obtrusiveness. Anecdotally, I saw too many cyclists not even using them. We've all learned to coexist, but I still don't think they should have been the priority.

Too much of the stuff about mass transit and suburbs too glowing and Nenshi centric. The odd personal battles between that builder and Nenshi were weirdly an issue in the last election (e.g. not current) and seemed to disappear rather quickly after and haven't been heard from since. I got the feeling at the time that he was just doing it so he had someone to fight in the media just to try to keep people awake since he effectively had no opponent. The Greenline is not a Nenshi initiative, it is a response to decades of people begging for it. The route is also noticeably kind to heavy car traffic routes. Adding to the overall capacity, rather than changing it.

As for burbs. I live in the them. I love them and I hate them. Parking is murder in this city and less a future job comps me, I'd have to live near a train. A lot of people don't work downtown and the more far flung the cheaper you get. They may not be my cup of tea, but if you're person who wants a home you can at least get one in this city. It's hilariously bourgeois of the Guardian to hate on cheap curddy burbs, because that's where working class folks can afford to live.

The only thing in there that I don't really get is the whole SW BRT thing? I'm not sure who does or doesn't want what and what will become if it. I'd be open to someone explaining it to me like I'm 5.

We are a city of douchy giant pick-up trucks though. There's no camouflaging that truth. Unless it's a camouflaged giant pickup, in which case it tends to have to opposite effect on the pick-up truck's visibility.
 
Last edited:
It's funny how things often come out in the media, especially from foreign news sources. IMO the truth is somewhere halfway between the article and real life. Nenshi did help push to end the sprawl subsidy and helped introduce the higher levies for new homes, but he did it with the help of a council, not just himself. I think these new outlets don't realise that these things are decided by council vote, not the mayor himself.
 
It's funny how things often come out in the media, especially from foreign news sources. IMO the truth is somewhere halfway between the article and real life. Nenshi did help push to end the sprawl subsidy and helped introduce the higher levies for new homes, but he did it with the help of a council, not just himself. I think these new outlets don't realise that these things are decided by council vote, not the mayor himself.
Isn't that just the way things are globally and throughout history?

We don't hear about the City Planner's role in various planning initiatives, only that it 'happened' under the mayoralty of someone.
 
The only thing in there that I don't really get is the whole SW BRT thing? I'm not sure who does or doesn't want what and what will become if it. I'd be open to someone explaining it to me like I'm 5.

Who wants it: people in the SW without access to the LRT network who want reliable, rapid transit (e.g. Mount Royal University students, people living west of the Crowchild who work downtown, people like me who currently stand on the side of the Crowchild exposed to the elements and dodging the debris flying out the wheels of passing trucks while they wait 15 mins+ for a bus to arrive)

Who doesn't want it: older, wealthier conservative suburbanites who feel that public transit is a threat to their way of life and that buses will bring poor people into their neighbourhoods (e.g. this guy)

What will become of it: Depends who wins the election. Candidates for mayor and council have taken clear positions for and against.
 
Seems like the best thread to deal with municipal politics generally...

LGBTQ student club demands Calgary cancel event at city hall over pastor’s ‘bigotry’

Once again Calgary is advertising itself to the world as a bigoted, backwater hick town and doing its best to scare away anyone under the age of 40. There's absolutely no reason to permit anti-LGBTQ activists from taking over the lobby of City Hall. It is a statement on the part of our municipal government that bigotry is a legitimate part of our civic culture.
 
Westboro Baptist church called, and they want their protesters back. :rolleyes:

This kind of stuff drives me nuts. I'm not religious, but I respect people's religion.....as long as it's not an affront to other people.
 
Makes me sick!

A bunch of Nazi's trying to voice their opinion and hold a rally. City hall should cancel their right to speak in a public space.
 
So... you support the "rights" of people to oppress others.... ok... good to know.
 
So... you support the "rights" of people to oppress others.... ok... good to know.
I think he's referring to the anti-LBGTQ crowd. Same for me...when I re-read my message it looked like it could be taken as against the student club protesters, but it's directed at the pastor and his group.
 
So... you support the "rights" of people to oppress others.... ok... good to know.

I'm on your side.

This bigoted, straight, white pastor should not be allowed to commit violence with his words. I'm against the oppression of people! That's why we need to use the full power of government to forcefully stop this man from speaking in a public space.
 
City hall should cancel their right to speak in a public space.
That is the thing though ... public space. It is either almost all (no criminal hate speech) or nothing. I'd rather live in a society where the rights of the opinioted bigots are protected, so that should the government swing the other way, similar protests are protected to advocate for the systemically oppressed. This is different from trying to de-platform someone from Twitter, or advocate for a private or quasi private space to not rent facilities to certain groups/people.
 
I agree we need to have freedom of speech. When it comes to hate speech it gets blurry, how far can someone go before it becomes a hate crime?
That is the thing though ... public space. It is either almost all (no criminal hate speech) or nothing. I'd rather live in a society where the rights of the opinioted bigots are protected, so that should the government swing the other way, similar protests are protected to advocate for the systemically oppressed. This is different from trying to de-platform someone from Twitter, or advocate for a private or quasi private space to not rent facilities to certain groups/people.
 
Social Justice, your sarcasm and hyperbole is just complicating matters. Just speak plainly and say what you mean.

Here's what I mean: Canadians are guaranteed freedom of expression; they are not entitled to hold rallies in the lobby of City Hall. I don't think this pastor should be arrested for his speech or his beliefs, but I do think that permitting him to hold an event in the lobby of City Hall is an implicit endorsement of his views by our municipal government. I feel the same way about the Downtown Calgary BIA issuing a permit to the Billy Graham organization to set up a proselytization trailer on Stephen Ave during Pride Week.

Speech also has consequences. When we keep providing high-profile venues for bigoted speech, we are advertising a certain image to the rest of the world. We have a problem attracting and retaining young people in this city. I think it's reasonable to reflect on how we are presenting our civic identity to the rest of the world and whether that contributes to this problem.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top