All candidates’ meetings
Administrator | Sep 03, 2014 | Comments 180
Municipal Election Day Oct. 27, 2014
The candidates are:
Mayor
Robert Quaiff
Jeff Goddard
Paul Boyd
Ward 1 Picton (Two to be elected)
Lenny Epstein
Phil St. Jean
Treat Hull
Ray Hobson
Stephanie Bell
Laverne Bailey
Ward 2 Bloomfield (acclaimed)
Barry Turpin
Ward 3 Wellington (One to be elected)
Jim Dunlop
Marilyn Szoldra
Tina Konecny
Ward 4 Ameliasburgh (Three to be elected)
Rachael Tracey
Nick Nowitski
Roy Pennell
Janice Maynard
Tim Fellows
Diane O’Brien
Ward 5 Athol (One to be elected)
Tim Vanhecke
Jamie Forrester
Stan Grizzle
Ward 6 Hallowell (Two to be elected)
Keith MacDonald
Brad Nieman
Kathryn Noxon
Gordon Fox
Ward 7 Hillier (One to be elected)
Alec Lunn
Steve Graham
Ward 8 N. Marysburgh (One to be elected)
Ronald Hendrikx
David Harrison
Ward 9 S. Marysburgh (One to be elected)
Kyle Douglas Mayne
Steve Ferguson
Ward 10 Sophiasburgh (Two to be elected)
Bill Roberts
Terry Shortt
Kevin Gale
Public School Trustee Wards 3,4,7, 10
Jennifer Cobb
Public School Trustee Wards 1,2,5,6,8,9
Dwayne Inch
English Language Separate School Board Trustee
Gavin Cosgrove
Kirk Romany
Catharina Summers
French Language Separate School Board Trustee
Dianne Burns
French Language Public School Board Trustee
Robert Comeau
Rachel Laforest
Here’s what happened in 2010:
Of the 21,351 eligible voters, 10,598 cast a ballot for a 49.63 per cent turnout for the county – much improved over the 39.4 per cent in the 2006 election.
(* elected)
Mayor
*Peter Mertens 3496
Sandy Latchford 2328
Monica Alyea 1832
Lori Slik 1203
Gord Fox 1075
Paul Boyd 594
Picton: (2 elected)
*Bev Campbell 655
* Brian Marisett 561
Laverne Bailey 526
Don Ward 353
Paul Morris 288
Richard Rowe 237
Doris Lane 140
Bloomfield: (1 elected)
*Barry Turpin 175
Phil St.-Jean 128
Wellington (1 elected)
*Jim Dunlop 827
Bill Boultbee 305
Ameliasburgh (3 elected)
*Janice Maynard 1462
*Dianne O’Brien 1306
*Nick Nowitski 930
Kathy Vowinckel 714
Athol (1 elected)
*Jamie Forrester 399
Paul Johnson 260
Hallowell (2 elected)
*Heather Campbell 987
*Keith MacDonald 644
Richard Parks 582
Knowlton Hunter 277
Scott Johnston 185
Hillier (1 elected)
*Alec Lunn 436
Peggy Burris 370
North Marysburgh (1 elected)
*Robert Quaiff 418
Ray Best 256
Chris Billard 77
South Marysburgh (1 elected)
*Barb Proctor 305
Duncan Fischer 119
Ray Hobson 79
Sandy Blackford 43
Jack Dall 26
Erin Johnston 22
Sophiasburgh (2 elected)
*Kevin Gale 592
*Terry Shortt 537
John Thompson 463
Kristien Buikema 113
Trustee Hastings & PE School Board Wards 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9
Dwayne Inch (acclaimed)
Trustee Hastings & PE School Board Wards 3, 4, 7, 10
*Jennifer Cobb 2386
Harry Marissen 966
Rick Langstaff 697
Trustee French Language Public Board
Marc Bissonnette 23
Frederic Tremblay 5
Trustee French Language Catholic Board
Andre Ouellette acclaimed
Algonquin & Lakeshore Catholic School Board
Paul Candon 268
Greg Speagle 249
Question on the ballot: Are you in favour of council commencing a public consultation process to review the size of council for the County of Prince Edward?
Yes 7569
No 1798
Filed Under: Local News
Benson Park, there is a very small parking lot there. Used to park 5 cars, this way and that way. lol
A few notes;
The splash pad is proposed for behind the skatepark. There is no parking lot in Benson Park. A lot of residents especially those raising children support a splash pad.
Remember, Ameliasburgh Ward is the largest area allowing for numbers of ppl. Bloomfield Ward ? still befuddles many folks. Comparing Wards with Wards is a fruitless endeavour, due to what little there is that’s comparable.
There is still a large chance of 8 councilors with special friendly agendas getting elected from the whole county voting. A take over. I do believe that 8 is not enough to prevent this from happening. 10 is better. It’s STILL about control and not for the ppl!
Doris, QUOTE:
“Is council not ruled be Roberts rules of order?
If I were Mayor and nonsense started at Council meetings I would shut the meeting down.”
Um, Councilor Bev Campbell answered that question to me with: “No, it is a form of it. You can get a copy of the rules that govern the county from Shire Hall”.
Doris, therein lies the problem with the Mayor governing in the horseshoe. It’s referred to as: “The County way of doing things”. No wonder the admin. can govern. Any mayor I’ve seen has never had the balls to stand up and take control of the chaos, stop the bullying tactics. It’s shameful.
Sounds like you’d make a good mayor ! ! ! You have the knowledge, courage and integrity simply by asking the question.
Would they put the splash pool in Benson Park where the parking lot is now?
Water, water everywhere but, not a drop to splash in ! I’d be against this kind of expenditure.
Marnie, “no way to get to Picton”. First the county would need buses for ppl to show up at the splash pad.
With respect Paul, all voters I suspect vote from a personal or broader special interest. The present system also hurts our female representation on Council. We have lost 3 female councilors from Picton, Hallowell and South Marysburgh! We only have a slim possibility of electing females from 4 of 10 wards. I believe that female representation is very important balance wise. My proposal puts a more positive option. Voters in 6 wards, Athol, Sophiasburgh, Hillier, North Marysburgh, South Marysburgh, Bloomfield would have the option to vote for a women. They don’t have that now. More equality in voting is not a scary thing. It’s democratic and provides opportunity for a more balanced Council.
Allowing each person in the County 8 votes opens the doors to voting alliances to accomplish agenda’s possibly creating lopsided governance. Lets say a large special interest group vote only for candidates who support their cause it could spell trouble Mark don t you agree..
Toronto city council structure is 1 Mayor and 44 Councilors each representing Wards. The structure is tried and true. A smaller council one representative from each ward would be best with proven residency in their respective ward.
Explain “lopsided governance”? I know that presently a persons vote in Athol is not near as significant as one’s vote in Ameliasburgh. I would like to see voting equality. As long as we attempt to maintain former boundaries in an amalgamated County it is a recipe for failure. The mindset has to change. It is not about Bloomfield, Picton, Cressy, Consecon etc. It is about a true County government. We can elect 8 representatives who are smart, have a County interest first and come to the horseshoe for the betterment of all not a small area of times from the past. What we have now is not effective or democratically representative. Change can be good. Getting mired down in old townships and the need to fight and protect each is not productive. A time for change.
A splash pad is the last thing we need. We had to have that fancy skateboard park and I drove past it lots of times this summer when hardly any teens were using it. The splash pad would be a big expense for something that could be used for only a short time each summer. Fine to argue that lots of kids never get to the beach but if they don’t live in Picton how are they supposed to get to the splash pad either?
If County elections are implemented the way Mark suggest the potential for lopsided governance is there.. With uninterested voters and many special interests groups in the County that should be a concern..
No splash pad I agree and there shouldn’t have been a $40k gas tank put in at the Marina either…
Been reading Mark and friends comments
Is council not ruled be Roberts rules of order
If I were Mayor and nonsense started at Council meetings I would shut the meeting down.
As for all eight people getting elected from one ward–there are not 8 running in any one ward
Latest I read is someone wants a splash pool–well the county can not afford one–we do not need it and the sanitation of one would be in question–exposed water with dirty feet running around in it
I have clearly presented it here and to the continual rush of candidates at my door most recently.
Good luck with your editing! Lol
MARK
While I’m at this editing:
Where is your solution for equality? in the failed file? At Shire Hall buried by someone who thought you might have a good idea?
Hope you still have it handy.
MARK
oops, sorry for my faux pas. Silly that one cannot edit their post. So I will edit in this post:
I QUOTED:
But what goes on in Shire Hall, sometimes is blatant disrespect to the mayor, when he states the parliamentary rules of order and some councilors have their own agenda firing insults across the horseshoe at others. This looks like monkey behavior to me > very primal. Out of place. Out of Order.
REMOVE [[[[[ “Useful and healthy debate” ]]]] REMOVE
I see that activity [firing insults across the horseshoe at others] as worthless and unhealthy to all.
Never for dictatorship of any kind, in any measure. There’s no reason for it when other methods would prove to be move effective and beget better results for all.
Useful and healthy debate;
Sanmc Quote “I see that activity as worthless and unhealthy to all”
Wow. For someone that continues to debate on here that is quite a statement. It reveals a lot. Debates are good for our democratic process. To oppose that would suggest that dictatorship would be your favour.
MARK QUOTE:
“The present system nurtures protectionism for the councilor’s turf. … put forth a reasonable solution … also brings equality …
protectionism:
If one councilor in a ward is related in some way to almost all of the ppl in that ward who are going to be voting, that in itself effects the results as it includes friends of family as well. And so goes it in every other ward. The family lineage to each other goes back many decades. You might have to admit that’s the way some like it > protectionism. Do you think reducing to only 8 councilors would contribute to that protection?
You may get another opportunity to put forth a solution that brings equality, nice thought but it’s really all about money (capitalism > profit). Where is your solution? in the failed file?
MARK QUOTE:
“censoring useful and healthy debate.”
NO Way am I even suggesting that. You got to be kidding! Never gave that idea whatsoever. But I have now observed by this example that your perception does have a filter over things. Censorship went out in the last century, freedom of speech is here but, hate speech is not.
But what goes on in Shire Hall, sometimes is blatant disrespect to the mayor, when he states the parliamentary rules of order and some councilors have their own agenda firing insults across the horseshoe at others. This looks like monkey behavior to me > very primal. Out of place. Out of Order.
“Useful and healthy debate”
I see that activity as worthless and unhealthy to all. And frankly it’s got to stop. Why do you think there was as discussion in Shire Hall about bringing back the “Code of Conduct”. It was for this very reason.
No wonder admin. has so much power.
Sanmc; Have lived here my entire life and I am well tuned into what has been happening for decades. The present system nurtures protectionism for the councilor’s turf. It creates a situation where it is more important for what they can get for their little township than what is for the better good of the County. I put forth a reasonable solution that removes that barrier and elects a County Council. It also brings equality to the electorate as each residents vote is as important and carries the same weight as anyother. I have also attended Council regularly and I don’t know whwerey you get the monkey in cages cliche. I hope you are not recommending censoring useful and healthy debate. Perhaps you have not been in the County very long and have yet to hear the screams for change.
And oO, how interesting; look at how many pics are displayed at the top right side of this article. On my screen only one candidate ad:
Nice pic of a candidate for mayor.
(this issue matters little as to whose pic is there)
Um is this partisan? or is this money talking? Or is this a campaign manager, wiser and quicker than the rest.
MI: and what happens to county issues beyond ei: Picton’s borders, if all 8 candidates elected are from Picton? or ei: Ameliasburgh?
MARK QUOTE:
” As I have said before, protecting the turf of historical townships, villages and a town is outdated and creates the issues we have. It’s now one County, one government ”
You are sounding like you have not lived and breathed in the county for very long, as well as not plugged yourself into the lifestyle and the people’s community be saying all this. Begs the question: from what perspective(s) are you seeing this, through what filter? from what personal history? from what pocket book?
MARK: QUOTE: [ get over the “my little township” syndrome. It died or should have with amalgamation ]
Lest you don’t know, it was the wisdom of the OMB that divided the county at amalgamation. Are you a political agitator, as well?
SNOWMAN:
QUOTE: “Ever wonder why the Committee of the Whole votes one way ,only to be reversed at the subsequent Council meeting (when the votes show up?)”
Is that not democracy? or is it admin. power and direction? Well, oldies being re-elected is due to the votes they glean; someone else with a bright light needs to step up to the plate and do work and speak for the people. “Look at what they do, not what they say.”
QUOTED: “when 8 out of 10 voters in 2010 signaled they wanted a new system.”
You need to get your facts and percentages straight here! and understand exactly what the ballot was asking and what Dr. Rose’s panel suggested. And where you THINK the Mayor was given a mandate or even had one. You are coming across as an agitator for some fav. politician with their hat in the ring. As far as I’m concerned that issue should have gone to the larger public not to just 25 ppl meeting for 4 hrs on 4 Sat. oops, 24 ppl as one young person withdrew.
QUOTED: “It needs to be done in the first year of the new council that way any OMB challenges will be dealt with early.”
Any application to OMB, will halt the process at the gate and will cost the taxpayers thousands of dollars and last for months or yrs, and surely nothing will get done for the ppl. Check the history. Um you should know this if you have been in the county long enough and care now about the ppl’s issue of : “how can we afford to live in the county”.
QUOTED: “B.T.W. Brighton’s issues are staff related. Divide and Conquer is the name of the game there, and it starts and ends at the top.”
Well, that is a good strategy for manipulation by ____ (fill in the blank) and against democracy for the ppl. What makes you think that is not what is trying to or is happening here in PEC. You hit the nail on the head !!!
WOLF QUOTE:
“Its time the county got into the present and do away with antiquated procedures”
That is what has happened already, Shire Hall admin. has been given more power now than it ever has had. And how is that workin’ for the ppl. ?
I just know one thing whoever is mayor, better know how to run a meeting and how to keep the monkeys at bay and respectful in their cages. Antiquated procedures done away with: means what we have now > the zoo in Shire Hall with its “unwieldy group” (Mayor Mertens quote). This in itself is a strategic tactic of chaos to flush out the sides that can be coalesced for power and purpose. The ppl suffer.
I still want a written summary of the reasons why downsizing, where did the premise dictate from? Obviously, the newspapers create machinations of truth. Propaganda > paid for so now sense reading that confusion.
Follow the money, as money talks.
“Its time the county got into the present and do away with antiquated procedures”
I love it. 🙂
Good points Snowman. People have to get over the “my little township” syndrome. It died or should have with amalgamation. As long as Council attempts to recognize former townships when they are elected to run a County government they will continue to fail. One needs look no farther than a sitting councilor being acclaimed in a former tiny village like Bloomfield with no mandate from the broad electorate!
With all due respect Sanmc, there are all kinds of “coalitions” with a larger council. Ever wonder why the Committee of the Whole votes one way ,only to be reversed at the subsequent Council meeting (when the votes show up?)
8 “at large” will hold ppl more accountable.No more “Mr.Automaticaly re-elected” like Turpin Gayle Shortt and Macdonald and others in the past.
As for legal challenges to changing representation , not too likely when 8 out of 10 voters in 2010 signaled they wanted a new system. It needs to be done in the first year of the new council.that way any OMB challenges will be dealt with early.
B.T.W. Brighton’s issues are staff related. Divide and Conquer is the name of the game there, and it starts and ends at the top.
I want my vote to carry the same weight in selecting Councilors as some others in the County have. Everybody gets to elect 8 Countywide. That’s equal representation and democratic. As I have said before, protecting the turf of historical townships, villages and a town is outdated and creates the issues we have. It’s now one County, one government and one vote for each resident.
Well, someone group of ppl will not only threaten to go the OMB over changes, etc. but they WILL go on the legalities. We’ve been through this already. We need to find a new approach. Changing municipal political stuff if not as easy as some here make it out to be.
Again the newbies will be manipulated by all of this political wrangling. And the fight is waiting in the wings.
8 councilors isn’t the answer to getting things done. There will be MORE in fighting than ever. Just look at Brighton council of 6 and the mayor (7). Coalitions are set up and all hell breaks loose into a personal power struggle. 4 councilors running the show. How is that working for the ppl.
At least with more than 8 there’s less of a chance of this kind of manipulative power mongering, coalition to take place. Is that the reason why less councilors is better?
Follow the money.
I’m with Doris on the Council size issue.It’s simple really. E mail the candidates in your ward and mayoral candidates and tell them you will vote for them if the are in favour of 8 plus the Mayor/no more wards. Get them to commit to it in writing. One candidate for Council in Hallowell is on record as supporting smaller sized Council, (and he’s not 90 years old). He has my vote and if the rest of them don’t show their position as being in favour I will only vote for him.Good things will come from a small Council that we all elect.
Doris, as Mark says “Wish you got elected last time around” if you had you would have experienced exactly what went on and had an informed opinion. Mark is partially right, when he says it is not fair for Ameliasburgh ratepayers to vote for 3 people. If we voted for one, but elected 3 because of the number of people living here equality across PEC would be closer but still not acheived.
As for the rest of you that say you are part of the 80% who voted to downsize Council give your head a shake. No one and I repeat NO ONE voted for that, you actually voted to give Council permission to LOOK at downsizing itself. It did that. Like it or not.
Protecting their jobs, shame on you all. Who in their right mind would volunteer to work for a wage just above the poverty level (2009 figure $18,421) except to feed their family, to be constantly belittled by missinformed bosses and the press. If that happened in any other workplace you would have some sort of recourse. I have no problem hiring a Council that comes to Shire Hall every morning, works a full day on my behalf, and gets paid a liveable rate (with benefits). Then if I don’t like what they are doing I would feel much better about complaining and turfing them.
Think back as to what the County was like before this Council. We are much better off now and headed in the right direction.
You are right Doris. Wish you had got elected last go around. The politicians can’t see the forest for the trees in the way. It’s so simple. We have a one tier County government. The days of protecting small former township interests are over and should have been over upon amalgamation. The decisions each councilor make are just as important to me as a Picton ratepayer as the 2 that are elected here. I would like to have a say in everyone who is at the horseshoe. A voter in Ameliasburgh gets to vote for 3 councilors while an Athol voter gets one. That is not equal representation. It’s a County government and all of our votes should carry the same importance and weight. 8 Councilors elected County wide. The mayoral candidate that puts that on their agenda will have my vote.
it only makes sense that all the county vote for the councillors and the councillors should just run for the council of PEC and not of a certain township.
The same as the mayor.
If the candidates for mayor can run for the whole County then anyone who wants to run for council can just run for a councillor of PEC.
Its time the county got into the present and do away with antiquated procedures. The way it is now people are running in wards they do not live in so why this individual ward system.
The present council turned the the wishes of the people because some of the members were afraid they would lose their job. Are they working for the County or for their individual wants.
Come on people of prince Edward lets clean up the mess at shire Hall
Well, the top 8 candidates choosing the township they want to represent, is an interesting idea. What do you do if 2 or more want the same one? If this is solvable I do like it. As we have seen, if council does not work together, nothing gets done and money is wasted. I would like to see my favorite 8 councilors in place regardless of where they choose to represent. As Gary has said, the voting coalitions, their election strategies, and their agendas are not right. Otherwise, you should only be elected to the township that you reside in. One voters opinion.
There are real reasons why candidates choose to run in different wards than where they live. The most obvious is they fear they cannot get elected where they live so they choose a ward that increases their chances of getting to the Shire Hall trough. Smart some would say and the electorate should be able to see through it. Secondly the reason is to build political alliances and coalitions. We saw this last election when the sitting Athol councilor chose to run in Picton ward and was elected. His friend then ran in Athol and was elected. They then created a coalition and voted almost identically on every issue. Check the voting record.All the more reason why County voters should be electing the top 8 councilors by a County wide vote. Most crucial issues affect all County residents and each persons vote reflecting representation should carry the same weight. Presently as just an example and a hypothetical a voter in Ameliasburgh can send 3 reps that support Wind Factories while a voter in North Marysburgh can send 1. There lies the problem. Under the present system there is not equal representation at the horseshoe.
Doris; Why do you think people run in different wards other than where they live? We have two running in Picton who live elsewhere. If that is the case and it is legal it just provides even more ammunition that we should be electing the top 8 candidates County wide. Opponents can’t use the argument that we need local representation from those old historic townships, villages and towns. If they can run in any ward they like why can”t they represent any ward that we like. Let’s make all of our votes carry the same weight. Every voter selects the top eight. Or is that too democratic.
Doris, I agree, we should be able to elect from where ever in the county. It sounds like you are talking about “Fair Vote” system. Where your vote actually counts. (Proportional Representation)
There is a presentation tonight Tues. Sep.16, 2014 at Picton Library 7 pm on that topic.
The real reasons for reducing size of council have never been clearly and fully disclosed for all to read officially from Shire Hall. Seems only learn of all via newspapers and that’s crapp. Tell us how that would affect the grants and payments to communities for recreation, town halls, fair boards, etc. There is a smoke screen filtering the real reason. imo.
Send the official reasons within our tax bills, let me have a copy in my hand that is going to last for more than a 10 min. conversation at Shire Hall.
Darn I’m getting tiffed. lol
Follow the money!
Lest we forget!
The Admin. in Shire Hall IS running the show. Factoring, non-factoring in their conclusions, forgetting to bring pertinent papers / remembering certain facts of a situation and not others > omission. Council gets divided, and assumptions prevail decision OR indecision. ack.
And newbies will fall under the plow sheer of indecision for the most part, some oldies are counting on it. imo.
This turns my stomach.
Do you think any change in council is really going to make a difference? I like to think so but … reality is . . .
As far as one commonality, this system is based on personal power, greed. Pee on the little ppl. get their money in anyway possible ei. like talk of paying water fees: for drawing from your own well, and using water from lakes / streams. Truly.
At least one common principle is: showing up for a 7:00 pm meeting and one tried to change that. LOL
Follow the money! Who stands to gain!
Well that’s an interesting line up.
Someone running for Mayor who has no council experience.
Boyd was the reeve of Ameliasburgh before amalgamation .
Unfortunately the present council hired the CAO for another couple of years. Sort of ties the hands of the new council.
Maybe Phil St Jean should have run in Bloomfield and the Turpin would not have gotten an acclamation
Well I hope we do not pay out thousands anymore for consultants who come up with the fruit of the loom logos for us and our NEW???? brand “THe County” which as been the brand for over 70 years.
Lots of luck everyone
I wish the council size had been reduced and all the county could vote for all the councillors, maybe then we could have gotten 8 good councillors out of that mix.
Rate payers look out for another long ride of spending.
Gary: “It would be difficult to be in synch with the principles of all the electorate as that is varied”
At the micro level yes. But there would be many common principles out of that.
Well that was sly. My guess would be that you are voting for experience over non experience.
I know who I’m NOT voting for. lol
The preceding advertisement was approved by the Goddard election committee. Lol
I agree a change needs to happen, fresh blood needs to come into the picture and I agree with snowman…………. myself I am going with Goddard, I think he deserves a chance, he’s the only one that’s got the guts to put his platform out in front of everyone. Common sense has to rule or we wind up like we are now!
It would be difficult to be in synch with the principles of all the electorate as that is varied.
Gary: “So who has a platform of progress and change??”
The adjunct questions to the above: “what principles will each candidate follow when making tough decisions on our behalf? Are those principles in synch with those of the electorate?”
Gary your talking about oldies re-surfacing as former oldie councilors throw their hats into the ring ….
Also, Ameliasburgh has an oldie tossing his hat in … from decades ago.
Folks must be stirred up some kind of awful-like.
There was NO mandate to reduce council or to change any boundaries. And there is STILL NO mandate. Have you forgotten already how blatant the process was? I haven’t and many others haven’t.
This last method is a dead deal. The option has failed and will go in the file with the rest of the failed options from the past. Time for a new approach, if at all. To make this a campaign issue is silly and illogical. If that’s all they got to go on, then we are in real trouble.
Who is behind all this reducing of council anyway? Look closely at who stands to gain? Higher echelons of gov’t. in a ruthless way to rape the people of their democratic rights and powers to decide for themselves as we’ve witnessed lately. I’m very skeptical about this push and shove. And the sideways abusive tactic that has been used regarding this issue.
We need to find out the real reasons and what are the consequences to lifestyle. Money and sh*tt on the little people is the world theme these days. I can’t help but think PEC is in danger of getting caught up in it innocently by, you name it. There are not many cities, towns that have a clear and healthy sense of community that unfolds in our town halls and community centres in PEC. Are we willing to risk it on an impulse. I’m not and neither should you.
The media will sway the truth first by confusion and contradiction, then by omission. Please, for the sake of the goodness, of the county, don’t believe every word you read in any newspaper and we might have a hair of chance of getting to the bottom of it and getting this right for all of us.
I agree for change with some long time councilors that have been there so long they think they own it, and act like it too. It’s a powerfully ominous situation.
It will be interesting cause we may get our wish.
It is unfortunate that council was not reduced to 8 and a mayor. Mistakes were made with original amalgamation by keeping old township, village and town boundaries. By doing so the “what about my township” mentality remained. This is a one tier County government. It needs to be County focused. We need and deserve the best council elected County wide. Electing reps in former townships is preventing us from moving forward. It is also representatively disproportionate. It is so simple. Choose the best 8 persons and mayor County wide with no territorial obligations other than the betterment of the County. And everyone’s vote carries the same weight unlike this present bizarre mess.
It is not a list of candidates that excite. One oldie has been acclaimed in Bloomfield. Yes wee little Bloomfield get their very own councillor. A former oldie councillor has thrown his hat into the ring in Picton even though he doesn’t live there. Hull and Hobson are the exception in providing alternatives. Hallowell’s oldie will most likely sit or rest at the horseshoe for the upteenth time. Sophiasburgh will return at least one of the present councillors. North Marysburgh will return another oldie from days gone by. The Mayor is either experience or no experience. It’s packed full of anticipation. Lol
Well, to change the “old guard” within the whole of the county, we do not have the power in this political system. Now if it were Proportional Representation it might be different. Change > mayor and there’s no real power there. I see by the choices listed we will continue to have leadership by the administration and even greater say than before.
Some ‘oldies’ WILL get back in, I’m sorry to say. Some are not even running, that’s our loss of experience. (Can we blame them? no respect in chambers).
The new electorate will be very interesting! I’m waiting to see if the mayor elect has a backbone to call “out of order, move on” and reign in, the disrespectful pigs in the mud at the zoo. And if, he can actually run a meeting, in spite of the behind the scenes bullying tactics of some politicians!! Of course I don’t mean PEC.
Get ready for a ride on the big hill > our taxes and town halls …….
So who has a platform of progress and change??
Agree snowman, time to change the lineup,and culture at the horseshoe.
I am voting for progress and change. The “Old Guard” needs to go. Now. The Councillors who have sat there for the last 15,20, even 40 years? wow!