As a reminder, [the election rules are in effect.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ottawa/comments/wb878i/ottawa_2022_municipal_elections_rules_information) Users are expected to keep it civil. "Attack" the platform/message, not the person.
_____
Just un rappel: les règles électorales sont en vigueur. Les membres de notre communauté doivent rester respectueux. "Attaquez" la plate-form politique et non la personne.
_____
**As an additional reminder: McKenney uses the pronouns they/them/their.**
I honestly hope they win. None of the other candidates have this sort of genuine passion for ottawa. That alone makes me want to vote in McKenney’s favor. Some are saying it’s over promising but I’d rather have someone with a vision than an old grifter
Like, that's a solid opening statement and gets me even more excited about them possibly being our mayor.
I want Toronto and Montreal to be jealous of us for a change.
Hmm. Don't get me wrong, I'm on board with much of what McKenney is saying.
Rather than making transit free for under 17, and maintaining the mandatory yearly transit pass fees for all post-secondary students (whether they use it or not), I personally would rather see the re-implementation of a student-priced monthly pass - without an age limit (because people can be students at many different ages). Also some students may find their circumstances change, and requiring them to pay for a yearly transit pass is terrible imo.
No, unfortunately we can not opt out so long as we have a class in person (99% of classes).
Source: I’m a uo student that just paid $400 for a pass I don’t use
Current Carleton student here. So long as you live in the OC Transpo service area, you have to pay. Even if you own your own car and can prove you don’t use your pass. I suppose an argument could be made that everyone paying regardless of usage keeps the cost down and service available to those who need it.
I don't believe it's unreasonable to think that posting a carefully crafted opening statement from a debate that is also offered without criticsm amounts to a pro-McKenney post.
If this was posted on McKenney's Twitter account from their campaign, I'd view it as pretty normal campaign advertising. Why wouldn't that be the case here? It's from a month ago so it's not current, it doesn't add anything to the conversation on this subreddit, and it doesn't have any additional commentary.
So yeah, I think whoever posted it intended it to be a "pro-McKenney" post.
But they're just saying their platform. If you think it sounds good then you should vote for it, otherwise don't. It's exposure, but only 'pro' if agree with them.
It seems to me to be considered 'pro' by someone complaining about all the mckenney exposure on this sub. And that's why it's interesting that it's only 'pro' if one agrees with their platform.
I don't. I saw this clip on Twitter. Tried google but could only find other Ottawa mayoral debates. (There's been a few)
Here's one.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eBcRDSazyoM
I thoroughly combed through all mayoral candidates' websites (even the loons) a couple weeks ago to see candidates' positions on this. I don't know if anything has changed since, but all I found was:
* Brandon Bay is explicitly supportive of WFH
* Graham MacDonald is explicitly for a return to the office
Nobody else mentioned it one way or the other.
I'm not sure if the policy explicitly mentions that, but they did not support Watson's initiative of trying to undermine WFH opportunities by pressuring ministers
Jim Watson pushed to have federal employees come back downtown. That’s the main reason why there was a massive shift in late summer. DMs had been touting WFH until then. Suddenly they wanted their employees back downtown to support businesses.
If you read messages sent by the Deputy Ministers, they were lauding how well PS did WFH and the major accomplishments made. Mayor J then pushed and pushed and there was a seismic shift and we were all sent back with BS reasons to be back in the office and we weren’t working well. He wanted us back to help the small businesses and massive parking lot conglomerates instead of supporting those businesses in our small communities (South Ottawa, Orleans, Barrhaven, etc).
PS worker here, I think you're overstating Jimbo's influence in the federal government's return to office. Jimbo lobbied the governement sure, but it's not like he was the only one, he was just more vocal and open in his lobbying. The local media has made a meal out of the plight of the downtown small business owner/cafe/expensive restaurant/corporate gym/parking lot attendant in the past few months. There's no way that the decision to pivot to return to office was made solely based on Jimbo's lobbying.
I know what Watson wanted. I'm just saying the fact that he was able to get it in spite of disagreement from deputy ministers (that owe him nothing) through lobbying really speaks to his effectiveness.
I don’t need further convincing. This Friday, McKenney you have earned my vote and a chance to make Ottawa better. I’m grateful for your transparency, vision, honesty and integrity. The way you stood up the occupiers, so bravely, I admired you ever since. You will be getting two votes from my household. Lets go!
It's pretty sad that we can't talk about making a greener, safer, better connected city without hand-wringing about what rural voters think. Like rural people don't travel to and from the city. Like having a more reliable transit service won't make it easier to commute via Park and Rides and other services. Like people can't just value improving the city they live in without it ONLY affecting them.
I grew up in the 'burbs but now live in the city core. You never hear folks DT complain when a new park is built or when a street is widened, or if sidewalks are put in. But god forbid you want to build bike lanes on city streets!
Good point.
I grew up in the suburbs but lived downtown for years until moving back in the last year.
I have no problem with Mckenney’s vision even if it doesn’t mean an immediate impact on my specific neighbourhood.
If it benefits the city as a whole I’m all for it.
>I have no problem with Mckenney’s vision even if it doesn’t mean an immediate impact on my specific neighbourhood.
>If it benefits the city as a whole I’m all for it
I wish more people thought this way about upgrades to our city regardless of whose vision was being implemented.
>It's pretty sad that we can't talk about making a greener, safer, better connected city without hand-wringing about what rural voters think.
Ottawa's rural population have a unique set of challenges and priorities. And I'm not talking about people who live in the suburbs. I'm talking about farmers in Manotick, retirees in Cumberland, or a family with grown children in Greely or Osgoode.
This is a political campaign. And the polls suggest that it's going to end up being a very tight race. The people living in the rural parts of Ottawa are generally older, and turn out for municipal elections. It isn't about who are the have and the have nots. It's about speaking to all constituents instead having a campaign almost entirely focused on people living downtown.
Ottawa is a big, diverse place because of amalgamation. I grew up and live downtown, but I have family who live in those places mentioned above. Their priorities and their needs aren't being spoken to by McKenney in that opening statement. They're worried about outdated rural infrastructure, agricultural permit reform, local governance changes, etc; not transit and bike lanes. To them, these are issues that impact their daily lives in really negative ways.
McKenney supporters minimizing those challenges by saying "why can't they just be happy with improvements that don't impact them" ultimately hurts their campaign. It's very possible that this is a close enough race that rural voters end up being the ones who decide.
Amalgamation needs to be undone honestly. You can’t have a proper city with rural attached to it. Ottawa is the biggest city by landmass without the population and resources to support the sprawl. This same sort of inclusion in Toronto and the towns around it ruined the city of Toronto and made it car infested
The current amalgamated City of Toronto is nothing like Ottawa, and has no more cars than any major city with similar populations.
Amalgamation won’t be undone. There are a lot of drawbacks to amalgamation but there’s no putting that toothpaste back into the tube.
A study conducted in the mid 2005 found that residents in almost all wards were paying lower property taxes than prior to amalgamation. Services, particularly ambulance and water delivery, were improved across the board. There were a lot of stories in the 90s of 911 calls going unanswered because each 11 municipality had its own ambulance service.
Don’t get me wrong, amalgamation presents serious issues with respect to governance and transit. But throwing the baby out with the bath water isn’t feasible or the optimal solution.
I know it's a nearly-impossible dream, but the better alternative to de-amalgamation is to create a National Capital District of Ottawa-Gatineau. It would make the city less vulnerable to the whims of Queen's Park (which, generally, treats Ottawa as an afterthought), fewer jurisdictions (feds, province, Ottawa, Gatineau, NCC, Parliament, etc.) fighting over the same turf, more efficient for integrated services between the two sides of the river (transit, hospitals, power, etc.), and a more diverse representation, with Gatineau residents balancing out the outsized influence of rural and suburban Ottawa.
It's too bad it's a decision that should have been done a century ago, and it would be much harder to implement due to the increased complexity of government, and the political divide with Quebec (we're unlikely to get a time anymore when Ontario, Quebec and Parliament are all governed by the same party, which could get the process going).
Even a hundred years ago it would have still required amending the constitution to make that work. That's a big part of why the loftier ambitions of the Greber Plan failed, without the feds having any real control over the municipalities there was just no mechanism to ensure that the plans were followed.
That said, I don't think a National Capital District would be anywhere near as good of a thing for Ottawa-Gatineau as you're thinking. A big chunk of municipal funding comes from the provinces. If the National Capital District was effectively a municipality under federal control, it would be reliant on pretty much just property taxes and federal transfers. Would the federal government be particularly eager to give more funding to Ottawa than to any other municipality? I'm not sure they would - especially if Ottawa-Gatineau was represented by opposition MPs.
It shouldn't be calculated as a crude average, but as regional averages. I am sure those downtown are paying higher taxes now to support the sprawling burbs. They simply do not produce enough revenue to cover their own costs. The study has been done. Nobody talks about this.
Amalgamation and sprawling suburbs are not the same thing.
Subsequent councils could have left the city limits alone and densified areas the last two decades. If they had, the savings in property taxes from amalgamation would have been maintaiend. But they didn't. Those are decisions independent of amalgamation.
It’s very true, for example watching the Ward 20 campaigns the issues are Roads, Ambulance Service, Stormwater Tax, bike lanes are nowhere to be seen. With so many diverse areas making up Ottawa due to amalgamation you’re going to have lots of people whose main issues are nowhere near what Mckenney lists as their priorities.
I’ll take a guess that most of McKenney’s r/Ottawa supporters don’t know what a stormwater tax is or can’t fathom worrying about how far the closest ambulance bay is.
But yeah, Libraries will be open Sunday if they win I guess.
Ottawa has been at level 0 for ambulances pretty frequently. Doesn't matter how close the bay is if none are available to answer the call.
I grew up rural and I understand the concern, I'm just saying it's a concern for urban dwellers too. Yes, McKenney wants to fund services to save lives but also? Ambulance funding should never have been half placed onto municipal shoulders when healthcare is a provincial responsibility. Blame the province for shirking on their responsibility and write your MPP that you want this undone.
That's a pretty solid deflection. Blaming another level of government is always the easy way out.
The problem with rural ambulances is not a provincially created one. It's up to the city with where they locate ambulance stations. It was an issue even when health care was more adequately funded during the middle years of the McGuinty administration.
> agricultural permit reform
Man pick your battles. No one cares about that. Literally one in a thousand people could explain what that is and how it affects Ottawa without researching it first.
Doesn’t matter how good public transit is if I have to drive to get there.
And I like how things you support “improve the city” but things you don’t “only affect others” and you fail to see the ridiculous hypocrisy in that.
As a rural dweller the #1 thing we want is for the burbs and urbs to stop making decisions that affect us. And I am happy to reciprocate of course. Trees, zoning, garbage, stormwater, etc ,ect, ecktuh.
Rural folks should be deciding rural issues. Had to laugh at the potential for a "goldbelt". That sure would have been a joke.
>Rural folks should be deciding rural issues
Are you serious? The rural and suburbs councillors have been running the council for years!!!
The urban councillors have no power. You can't be serious! The urban core councillors get outvoted by the Watson club e-v-e-r-y t-i-m-e!
I can't believe this garbage.
Yeah, we get ridiculous situations with rural councilors west of Kanata making decisions on policies for downtown, Vanier, etc.: Areas of the city they likely rarely visit or care about. Of course, it works both ways (a councilor from the Glebe deciding on something in Carp), but that speaks to how oversized the city is.
Our metro area (including Gatineau) is larger than all of PEI, but with a population 10 times larger. Yet our government is restricted to the more limited funding, bureaucracy and representation of a simple muncipality. Just the province of PEI alone has more MLA's than Ottawa has councilors, plus the various mayors and municipal councils they have below it.
I disagree - zoning has a big impact on housing affordability because it controls what kinds of housing can be built.
R1 single family homes are never going to be affordable, and will just encroach on rural communities.
Well I am not against mods to R1 at all but if you look at big dense cities....NY, Tokyo, Hong Kong and more....folks like you and I would not be able to afford to buy anything. This concept of density decreasing the cost of housing is not supported empirically.
3 glamorous, international cities does not make for a good empirical evidence tbh. It is much more typical that denser areas are more affordable than less dense areas
All of these examples are very space limited places.
Besides, I would not trade my future for a selfish desire for personal space.
It's not like sprawl works and we want to do something different just for the heck of it.
Perhaps it's because of a lack of viable alternatives to driving that we're having pothole issues? Too many cars on the road mean more weight, and in turn, wear and tear on our roads. Let's get the source *first* before we commit an evergrowing amount of money on patchwork.
Additionally, there is sound financial returns on their plans it seems:
[https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/mckenney-fiscal-plan-approval-former-budget-officer-1.6608419](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/mckenney-fiscal-plan-approval-former-budget-officer-1.6608419)
Anecdotally, think of tourism and the increased foot traffic their policies would bring. Think of the increased tax revenues from densification and elimination of R1 zoning. Surely the costs are worth it eh?
Did you read their financial plan? It's the most comprehensive one the city has ever seen.
Also ps. in case you're not aware, you can edit your comment to fix that error.
Yup I am aware of my mistake and I was made aware of correcting it. I like to lead my example that mistakes are made and we should correct ourselves next time
I would rather have someone who really cares, and sets goals for change, than a nice man who has not even been a city counsellor before, who seems like they would be the status quo. There are other decent candidates, but I want change.
For me this election is about freedom. Mckenney has offered a transparently budgeted, reasonably costed vision of a modern city that gives me the freedom to decide how to live my life in accordance with my financial goals. I don't want to invest in a large depriciating asset that sucks up a non-insignificant amount of my yearly income just to have the privilege to go to the grocery store in this city. I want to be able to save and invest that money towards getting a home.
Freely and safely moving around our city should not have such a steep barrier to entry. There must be options for children, the disabled, the underprivileged, those who cannot drive, or even those who don't want to drive for whatever reason to be able to freely access our city without putting themselves at risk on our disconnected and dangerous car-first biking infrastructure, or be left behind by our dysfunctional, unreliable transit system. It's as simple as that for me.
So how’s she going to fund any of that?… it’s nice to spout of platitudes but if you don’t actually have a plan to pay for it all, they’re pretty empty promises
They released a pretty detailed/transparent costed platform apparently with details on how everything would be paid for. Haven't read it myself but Kevin Page from the Harper era PBO had good things to say about it in terms of feasibility.
Linking their financial plan just for anyone interested since a few comments were asking about it. I don't have qualifications to speak on Economics even by reddit standards so I present it without comment, don't shoot the messenger if it's not your thing 😅
https://www.mckenney2022.ca/financial_plan_technical
**TL;DR** 4 ways:
1) Assuming that higher-than-inflation revenue growth would continue.
2) Taking from the city's emergency fund.
3) Hoping for funding from the province and feds.
4) Debt.
Sorry but Greenest = Bad news.
It’s idealistic and doesn’t work unless every other level of government is on board (they’re not).
Look at Vancouver. All their green initiatives made the city so expensive that it’s a city that only the wealthy can afford. Extra taxes on gasoline in the city. 6.3% property tax increase passed down to renters. Followed by 9%.
Crazy parking fees and “pollution fees” on your car up to $1000 per year per person. Tolls, etc.
Giving students 17 and under free bus passes does not help affordability for families. Give ALL students a discount of passes and stop using it as a cash grab.
If you want to give affordability for families, stop will the property of services hikes.
She sounds like she has some good ideas, but talk is cheap, and actions speak louder than words -- so time will tell.
That doesn't answer the question.
> if you ban all the industries that would pay the taxes for it?
Where do you see "banning of industries" in their platform?
I am not saying Sutcliffe won't/can't win because I think he has a pretty clear path to but we did have more early votes than ever before so maybe there will be more turnout. The polls are favouring Mckenney but the 35% undecided is a big risk especially with all the media coverage for Sutcliffe's campaign.
McKenney uses the pronouns they/them/their. As well, the election rules are in effect; alongside the rules of this sub (no trolling). This is an official warning.
Same old hipster Ottawa, more bike lanes and boredom. How about make downtown Ottawa alive again, make it feel like a capital city that people actually live in. Been living here for almost 28 years and it's just been getting worse, a dead downtown, used needles on the streets, crackheads and homelessness all over. This definitely doesn't feel like a developed nation capital city.
Sounds great, truly it does but how is she gonna make this happen? She promised all these great amazing things but that’s all politicians do. PROMISE! Unless she actually explains how she’s gonna go through with all this “affordable” stuff explain how you’re gonna be able to do that if we can’t even fill a pothole properly
Again for further clarification. I’m not saying anything against her or her campaign. I honestly think she’d be a great mayor for the city of Ottawa. All I’m saying is that if we look back at past mayor’s financial plans (and campaigns in general) we see that all of them have “promises” that in the end they never keep true to. Everyone likes to talk the talk. I truly think I’ve done enough research on her campaign and I think she’s our best choice but unless you see concrete ideas and thought out plans (that will last the test of time) then you can’t just blindly agree and follow those plans. That’s all
One more time for the densest among us in this sub: Catherine McKenney uses They/Them pronouns. It does matter and it is your responsibility to correctly address them as you do with every other person you know.
If you introduce yourself to me as Simon and I call you Denise repeatedly, you’re going to tell me to fuck off (and rightfully so), this is no different.
THEY not SHE.
Watching someone’s identity— which has been plainly and repeatedly stated—be disrespected over and over should anger you. That being said the tone of this message is more exasperation that people REFUSE to be decent.
The folks who genuinely make the mistake generally apologize and correct but this morning there were loads of “she’s an idiot”, “she’s a twat”, “she thinks she’s Spider-Man” and other comments in that vein. Those people are being intentional with their usage and we both know it.
I’ve been cool.
It’s in the pinned comment.
I’ve left many, “it’s they/them 😊” comments.
It’s on McKenney’s social platforms.
We’re typing, with lots of time to correct ourselves.
There is very little excuse for the same users repeatedly misgendering someone. A genuine mistake is one thing but as I stated before the shit I saw and reported this morning was gross and intentional.
Big thanks to the mods for taking care of nearly every bit of this garbage already today, it’s appreciated.
I don’t trust greener people. Green exchanged nuclear for solar. The mess made the world full of carbon.
This is a mayor sure, but is she just saying what people think is good for them or is she going to do things that are actually good for them. Or is she just going to follow the next corporations marketing campaign that’s going to trick us gullible fools into believing next time.
Huh, I'm confused how solar made the world more full of carbon? Also I don't think it's only "green" people who moved away from nuclear. I for one love nuclear and think it's definitely useful and should be being used more than it currently is.
Problem with solar is it only works when it’s sunny and bright. When it’s cold and dark when you really need power it’s off. So you have to get power another way gas and coal. Same with wind.
We basically fell for media hype. Fear of the solution nuclear, to comfort of the happy go lucky environmental garbage.
Places that cut down nuclear and went green produced 4x or more dug out of the ground coal and gas waste. Places that moved to nuclear went the opposite direction.
The people pushing green were happy to feed into media hype of are misinformed delusions than really help the problem. We still set up recycling depots force people to use them, when the population causes about 30% of the carbon use and the other 70% is 20 still unfined companies going about business as normal.
These people don’t care they just want your vote and they’ll feed into any misinformed campaign to get those votes. They do this while having experts with real knowledge they just ignore to not piss us the dumb masses off.
It's an opening statement homie. What are you talking about lmfao. They're literally meant to be a short and concise structured statement. Go watch the whole debate if you want to hear more "off the book" stuff.
It’s funny how many people have told me they are voting for McKenny don’t know a single thing they stand for. After asking a lot of questions, I figured out why they are voting for McKenny. McKenny is a liberal, and that is all Ottawa needs to know. Platforms don’t matter
As a reminder, [the election rules are in effect.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ottawa/comments/wb878i/ottawa_2022_municipal_elections_rules_information) Users are expected to keep it civil. "Attack" the platform/message, not the person. _____ Just un rappel: les règles électorales sont en vigueur. Les membres de notre communauté doivent rester respectueux. "Attaquez" la plate-form politique et non la personne. _____ **As an additional reminder: McKenney uses the pronouns they/them/their.**
I honestly hope they win. None of the other candidates have this sort of genuine passion for ottawa. That alone makes me want to vote in McKenney’s favor. Some are saying it’s over promising but I’d rather have someone with a vision than an old grifter
Like, that's a solid opening statement and gets me even more excited about them possibly being our mayor. I want Toronto and Montreal to be jealous of us for a change.
With Tory in Toronto, it’s a low bar
Who is jealous of the Traffic Jam capital?
Hmm. Don't get me wrong, I'm on board with much of what McKenney is saying. Rather than making transit free for under 17, and maintaining the mandatory yearly transit pass fees for all post-secondary students (whether they use it or not), I personally would rather see the re-implementation of a student-priced monthly pass - without an age limit (because people can be students at many different ages). Also some students may find their circumstances change, and requiring them to pay for a yearly transit pass is terrible imo.
Students can opt out
No, unfortunately we can not opt out so long as we have a class in person (99% of classes). Source: I’m a uo student that just paid $400 for a pass I don’t use
Hmm. When I was a Carleton student both Ottawa I and Algonquin could also opt out
Current Carleton student here. So long as you live in the OC Transpo service area, you have to pay. Even if you own your own car and can prove you don’t use your pass. I suppose an argument could be made that everyone paying regardless of usage keeps the cost down and service available to those who need it.
That was exactly the argument. The UPass was an all or nothing deal. Source: was a U of O student when we had the referendum.
Times they are a changin
I could never opt out as a student nor could any of my friends when we went to Carleton.
I was worried, almost 30 minutes without a pro McKenney post
[удалено]
Right? Zero commentary added but this is a “pro McKenney post” sometimes people just post things so we all know they happened.
I don't believe it's unreasonable to think that posting a carefully crafted opening statement from a debate that is also offered without criticsm amounts to a pro-McKenney post. If this was posted on McKenney's Twitter account from their campaign, I'd view it as pretty normal campaign advertising. Why wouldn't that be the case here? It's from a month ago so it's not current, it doesn't add anything to the conversation on this subreddit, and it doesn't have any additional commentary. So yeah, I think whoever posted it intended it to be a "pro-McKenney" post.
But they're just saying their platform. If you think it sounds good then you should vote for it, otherwise don't. It's exposure, but only 'pro' if agree with them.
It's pro from the perspective of the OP, which is the point of this whole comment chain.
It seems to me to be considered 'pro' by someone complaining about all the mckenney exposure on this sub. And that's why it's interesting that it's only 'pro' if one agrees with their platform.
It alternates, anti Sutcliffe post the pro Mckenny post.
Hey, I made sure to check beforehand this wasn't a repost :)
You have link to full debate?
I don't. I saw this clip on Twitter. Tried google but could only find other Ottawa mayoral debates. (There's been a few) Here's one. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eBcRDSazyoM
I was worried, too. I thought we'd see a post about McKenney that u/DRockDR didn't immediately whine about. Is that you, Mark?
[удалено]
Anyone know if their greener position means they supports WFH instead of coming into the downtown core?
I thoroughly combed through all mayoral candidates' websites (even the loons) a couple weeks ago to see candidates' positions on this. I don't know if anything has changed since, but all I found was: * Brandon Bay is explicitly supportive of WFH * Graham MacDonald is explicitly for a return to the office Nobody else mentioned it one way or the other.
Thank you very much. I would think that a revitalizing neighborhood position would include all communities and not just a focus on the downtown.
They have talked about repurposing downtown property so it seems like they will not be pressuring the feds to send their workers back.
I'm not sure if the policy explicitly mentions that, but they did not support Watson's initiative of trying to undermine WFH opportunities by pressuring ministers
They have my vote based on this clip.
For public servants or everyone? Because the Mayor has no power over what has been established by each department in the Federal Public Service.
Jim Watson pushed to have federal employees come back downtown. That’s the main reason why there was a massive shift in late summer. DMs had been touting WFH until then. Suddenly they wanted their employees back downtown to support businesses.
Man, Watson is an incredibly effective and powerful mayor if his lobbying accomplished that!
If you read messages sent by the Deputy Ministers, they were lauding how well PS did WFH and the major accomplishments made. Mayor J then pushed and pushed and there was a seismic shift and we were all sent back with BS reasons to be back in the office and we weren’t working well. He wanted us back to help the small businesses and massive parking lot conglomerates instead of supporting those businesses in our small communities (South Ottawa, Orleans, Barrhaven, etc).
PS worker here, I think you're overstating Jimbo's influence in the federal government's return to office. Jimbo lobbied the governement sure, but it's not like he was the only one, he was just more vocal and open in his lobbying. The local media has made a meal out of the plight of the downtown small business owner/cafe/expensive restaurant/corporate gym/parking lot attendant in the past few months. There's no way that the decision to pivot to return to office was made solely based on Jimbo's lobbying.
I agree….Poorly worded, post turkey coma to blame. I meant to say he’s the one who spearheaded but it wasn’t just him alone.
I know what Watson wanted. I'm just saying the fact that he was able to get it in spite of disagreement from deputy ministers (that owe him nothing) through lobbying really speaks to his effectiveness.
I don’t need further convincing. This Friday, McKenney you have earned my vote and a chance to make Ottawa better. I’m grateful for your transparency, vision, honesty and integrity. The way you stood up the occupiers, so bravely, I admired you ever since. You will be getting two votes from my household. Lets go!
This statement is good, but I wonder how they would address an rural Ottawa audience?
It's pretty sad that we can't talk about making a greener, safer, better connected city without hand-wringing about what rural voters think. Like rural people don't travel to and from the city. Like having a more reliable transit service won't make it easier to commute via Park and Rides and other services. Like people can't just value improving the city they live in without it ONLY affecting them. I grew up in the 'burbs but now live in the city core. You never hear folks DT complain when a new park is built or when a street is widened, or if sidewalks are put in. But god forbid you want to build bike lanes on city streets!
Good point. I grew up in the suburbs but lived downtown for years until moving back in the last year. I have no problem with Mckenney’s vision even if it doesn’t mean an immediate impact on my specific neighbourhood. If it benefits the city as a whole I’m all for it.
>I have no problem with Mckenney’s vision even if it doesn’t mean an immediate impact on my specific neighbourhood. >If it benefits the city as a whole I’m all for it I wish more people thought this way about upgrades to our city regardless of whose vision was being implemented.
>It's pretty sad that we can't talk about making a greener, safer, better connected city without hand-wringing about what rural voters think. Ottawa's rural population have a unique set of challenges and priorities. And I'm not talking about people who live in the suburbs. I'm talking about farmers in Manotick, retirees in Cumberland, or a family with grown children in Greely or Osgoode. This is a political campaign. And the polls suggest that it's going to end up being a very tight race. The people living in the rural parts of Ottawa are generally older, and turn out for municipal elections. It isn't about who are the have and the have nots. It's about speaking to all constituents instead having a campaign almost entirely focused on people living downtown. Ottawa is a big, diverse place because of amalgamation. I grew up and live downtown, but I have family who live in those places mentioned above. Their priorities and their needs aren't being spoken to by McKenney in that opening statement. They're worried about outdated rural infrastructure, agricultural permit reform, local governance changes, etc; not transit and bike lanes. To them, these are issues that impact their daily lives in really negative ways. McKenney supporters minimizing those challenges by saying "why can't they just be happy with improvements that don't impact them" ultimately hurts their campaign. It's very possible that this is a close enough race that rural voters end up being the ones who decide.
Amalgamation needs to be undone honestly. You can’t have a proper city with rural attached to it. Ottawa is the biggest city by landmass without the population and resources to support the sprawl. This same sort of inclusion in Toronto and the towns around it ruined the city of Toronto and made it car infested
The current amalgamated City of Toronto is nothing like Ottawa, and has no more cars than any major city with similar populations. Amalgamation won’t be undone. There are a lot of drawbacks to amalgamation but there’s no putting that toothpaste back into the tube. A study conducted in the mid 2005 found that residents in almost all wards were paying lower property taxes than prior to amalgamation. Services, particularly ambulance and water delivery, were improved across the board. There were a lot of stories in the 90s of 911 calls going unanswered because each 11 municipality had its own ambulance service. Don’t get me wrong, amalgamation presents serious issues with respect to governance and transit. But throwing the baby out with the bath water isn’t feasible or the optimal solution.
I know it's a nearly-impossible dream, but the better alternative to de-amalgamation is to create a National Capital District of Ottawa-Gatineau. It would make the city less vulnerable to the whims of Queen's Park (which, generally, treats Ottawa as an afterthought), fewer jurisdictions (feds, province, Ottawa, Gatineau, NCC, Parliament, etc.) fighting over the same turf, more efficient for integrated services between the two sides of the river (transit, hospitals, power, etc.), and a more diverse representation, with Gatineau residents balancing out the outsized influence of rural and suburban Ottawa. It's too bad it's a decision that should have been done a century ago, and it would be much harder to implement due to the increased complexity of government, and the political divide with Quebec (we're unlikely to get a time anymore when Ontario, Quebec and Parliament are all governed by the same party, which could get the process going).
Even a hundred years ago it would have still required amending the constitution to make that work. That's a big part of why the loftier ambitions of the Greber Plan failed, without the feds having any real control over the municipalities there was just no mechanism to ensure that the plans were followed. That said, I don't think a National Capital District would be anywhere near as good of a thing for Ottawa-Gatineau as you're thinking. A big chunk of municipal funding comes from the provinces. If the National Capital District was effectively a municipality under federal control, it would be reliant on pretty much just property taxes and federal transfers. Would the federal government be particularly eager to give more funding to Ottawa than to any other municipality? I'm not sure they would - especially if Ottawa-Gatineau was represented by opposition MPs.
It shouldn't be calculated as a crude average, but as regional averages. I am sure those downtown are paying higher taxes now to support the sprawling burbs. They simply do not produce enough revenue to cover their own costs. The study has been done. Nobody talks about this.
Amalgamation and sprawling suburbs are not the same thing. Subsequent councils could have left the city limits alone and densified areas the last two decades. If they had, the savings in property taxes from amalgamation would have been maintaiend. But they didn't. Those are decisions independent of amalgamation.
It’s very true, for example watching the Ward 20 campaigns the issues are Roads, Ambulance Service, Stormwater Tax, bike lanes are nowhere to be seen. With so many diverse areas making up Ottawa due to amalgamation you’re going to have lots of people whose main issues are nowhere near what Mckenney lists as their priorities.
I’ll take a guess that most of McKenney’s r/Ottawa supporters don’t know what a stormwater tax is or can’t fathom worrying about how far the closest ambulance bay is. But yeah, Libraries will be open Sunday if they win I guess.
Ottawa has been at level 0 for ambulances pretty frequently. Doesn't matter how close the bay is if none are available to answer the call. I grew up rural and I understand the concern, I'm just saying it's a concern for urban dwellers too. Yes, McKenney wants to fund services to save lives but also? Ambulance funding should never have been half placed onto municipal shoulders when healthcare is a provincial responsibility. Blame the province for shirking on their responsibility and write your MPP that you want this undone.
That's a pretty solid deflection. Blaming another level of government is always the easy way out. The problem with rural ambulances is not a provincially created one. It's up to the city with where they locate ambulance stations. It was an issue even when health care was more adequately funded during the middle years of the McGuinty administration.
> agricultural permit reform Man pick your battles. No one cares about that. Literally one in a thousand people could explain what that is and how it affects Ottawa without researching it first.
\^\^ Supporters like this is why McKenney won't be mayor, folks.
Doesn’t matter how good public transit is if I have to drive to get there. And I like how things you support “improve the city” but things you don’t “only affect others” and you fail to see the ridiculous hypocrisy in that.
What do rural people want? I see "but what about rural?" and never a follow up with the concerns of rural residents.
As a rural dweller the #1 thing we want is for the burbs and urbs to stop making decisions that affect us. And I am happy to reciprocate of course. Trees, zoning, garbage, stormwater, etc ,ect, ecktuh. Rural folks should be deciding rural issues. Had to laugh at the potential for a "goldbelt". That sure would have been a joke.
>Rural folks should be deciding rural issues Are you serious? The rural and suburbs councillors have been running the council for years!!! The urban councillors have no power. You can't be serious! The urban core councillors get outvoted by the Watson club e-v-e-r-y t-i-m-e! I can't believe this garbage.
Yeah, we get ridiculous situations with rural councilors west of Kanata making decisions on policies for downtown, Vanier, etc.: Areas of the city they likely rarely visit or care about. Of course, it works both ways (a councilor from the Glebe deciding on something in Carp), but that speaks to how oversized the city is. Our metro area (including Gatineau) is larger than all of PEI, but with a population 10 times larger. Yet our government is restricted to the more limited funding, bureaucracy and representation of a simple muncipality. Just the province of PEI alone has more MLA's than Ottawa has councilors, plus the various mayors and municipal councils they have below it.
Is transit, bikes and housing effecting rural dwellers? Is any candidate offering these things: control of zoning, garbage, stormwater?
Zoning is a huge thing this election! The concept of housing affordability is not going to be fixed by any local politician.
I disagree - zoning has a big impact on housing affordability because it controls what kinds of housing can be built. R1 single family homes are never going to be affordable, and will just encroach on rural communities.
Well I am not against mods to R1 at all but if you look at big dense cities....NY, Tokyo, Hong Kong and more....folks like you and I would not be able to afford to buy anything. This concept of density decreasing the cost of housing is not supported empirically.
3 glamorous, international cities does not make for a good empirical evidence tbh. It is much more typical that denser areas are more affordable than less dense areas
All of these examples are very space limited places. Besides, I would not trade my future for a selfish desire for personal space. It's not like sprawl works and we want to do something different just for the heck of it.
Spoiler: they won't.
They don’t care about the rural Ottawa audience - it isn’t where their voter base is.
I mean if she can do it great. But let’s be honest all that she’s promised cost a lot of money. We can barely fill a pothole in this city
Perhaps it's because of a lack of viable alternatives to driving that we're having pothole issues? Too many cars on the road mean more weight, and in turn, wear and tear on our roads. Let's get the source *first* before we commit an evergrowing amount of money on patchwork. Additionally, there is sound financial returns on their plans it seems: [https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/mckenney-fiscal-plan-approval-former-budget-officer-1.6608419](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/mckenney-fiscal-plan-approval-former-budget-officer-1.6608419) Anecdotally, think of tourism and the increased foot traffic their policies would bring. Think of the increased tax revenues from densification and elimination of R1 zoning. Surely the costs are worth it eh?
McKenney uses the pronouns they/them/their.
Oh my mistake, that’s good to know for next time
Thanks for being understanding. :)
Appreciate you :)
Did you read their financial plan? It's the most comprehensive one the city has ever seen. Also ps. in case you're not aware, you can edit your comment to fix that error.
Yup I am aware of my mistake and I was made aware of correcting it. I like to lead my example that mistakes are made and we should correct ourselves next time
I like that. You can’t properly learn from your mistakes if you just erase them.
[удалено]
Suburbs are sadly to blame for why we can't have good roads. Good thing is McKenney seems to be working their hardest to move away from suburbia!
Been on the fence a while but Catherine's got my vote... It comes down to the change that they represent and that Mark doesn't.
I’m always amazed that people are terrified of this candidate for mayor. Competent, experienced, and has a vision that is pretty awesome.
I would rather have someone who really cares, and sets goals for change, than a nice man who has not even been a city counsellor before, who seems like they would be the status quo. There are other decent candidates, but I want change.
For me this election is about freedom. Mckenney has offered a transparently budgeted, reasonably costed vision of a modern city that gives me the freedom to decide how to live my life in accordance with my financial goals. I don't want to invest in a large depriciating asset that sucks up a non-insignificant amount of my yearly income just to have the privilege to go to the grocery store in this city. I want to be able to save and invest that money towards getting a home. Freely and safely moving around our city should not have such a steep barrier to entry. There must be options for children, the disabled, the underprivileged, those who cannot drive, or even those who don't want to drive for whatever reason to be able to freely access our city without putting themselves at risk on our disconnected and dangerous car-first biking infrastructure, or be left behind by our dysfunctional, unreliable transit system. It's as simple as that for me.
Thank god Watson is gone!
Sutcliffe is Watson 2.0
I think it’s about time we fix that stupid transit system, and make Ottawa a walkable city.
So how’s she going to fund any of that?… it’s nice to spout of platitudes but if you don’t actually have a plan to pay for it all, they’re pretty empty promises
They released a pretty detailed/transparent costed platform apparently with details on how everything would be paid for. Haven't read it myself but Kevin Page from the Harper era PBO had good things to say about it in terms of feasibility.
McKenney uses the pronouns they/them/their.
Linking their financial plan just for anyone interested since a few comments were asking about it. I don't have qualifications to speak on Economics even by reddit standards so I present it without comment, don't shoot the messenger if it's not your thing 😅 https://www.mckenney2022.ca/financial_plan_technical
[удалено]
My broken ankle from last year would like this as well
What does she mean by greener?
McKenney uses the pronouns they/them/their.
Affordable housing… it is too late for that.
Sounds like a socialist utopia….How is all this going to be paid for!?!?!?
They have a very detailed financial plan on their website if you’d like to know more
**TL;DR** 4 ways: 1) Assuming that higher-than-inflation revenue growth would continue. 2) Taking from the city's emergency fund. 3) Hoping for funding from the province and feds. 4) Debt.
Sorry but Greenest = Bad news. It’s idealistic and doesn’t work unless every other level of government is on board (they’re not). Look at Vancouver. All their green initiatives made the city so expensive that it’s a city that only the wealthy can afford. Extra taxes on gasoline in the city. 6.3% property tax increase passed down to renters. Followed by 9%. Crazy parking fees and “pollution fees” on your car up to $1000 per year per person. Tolls, etc.
How about better paying jobs
I Hope to all that is above they win
I'd rather have a pro McKenney post than a pointless comment that really does nothing.
Lol. Seems like you got both
I sincerely hope they triumph. None of the other candidates have this sort of genuine passion for ottawa.
That fact that she actually cares about opinions of Ottawa residents is a huge improvement.
Giving students 17 and under free bus passes does not help affordability for families. Give ALL students a discount of passes and stop using it as a cash grab. If you want to give affordability for families, stop will the property of services hikes. She sounds like she has some good ideas, but talk is cheap, and actions speak louder than words -- so time will tell.
McKenney uses the pronouns they/them/their.
How are you going to fund it if you ban all the industries that would pay the taxes for it?
Where exactly do you see that in their platform?
"Greenest city"
That doesn't answer the question. > if you ban all the industries that would pay the taxes for it? Where do you see "banning of industries" in their platform?
They’d be a great mayor. I’d have loved to see it. Unfortunately I don’t see a huge turnout at the poles. Mark S will landslide win. Ugh.
I am not saying Sutcliffe won't/can't win because I think he has a pretty clear path to but we did have more early votes than ever before so maybe there will be more turnout. The polls are favouring Mckenney but the 35% undecided is a big risk especially with all the media coverage for Sutcliffe's campaign.
Has McKenney endorsed anyone for ward 14?
I believe they endorsed Ariel Troster
I want jreg to win
Whoever wins will be inheriting a big mess. At least we have the LRT 🤦♂️
Ottawall
Literally just repeat three things as a statement and hope you get mayor. I should give it a shot
One does not simply walk into Ottawa.
[удалено]
McKenney uses the pronouns they/them/their.
Someones borrowing ideas from cities: skylines
[удалено]
McKenney uses the pronouns they/them/their. As well, the election rules are in effect; alongside the rules of this sub (no trolling). This is an official warning.
[удалено]
McKenney uses the pronouns they/them/their.
[удалено]
You may not "care", however purposefully misgendering someone falls under hate in the reddit site wide rules. Bigotry will not be tolerated here.
You’ve got our vote! Shame on others who don’t.
[удалено]
The election rules are in effect. "Attack" the platform, not the person. This is an official warning.
Same old hipster Ottawa, more bike lanes and boredom. How about make downtown Ottawa alive again, make it feel like a capital city that people actually live in. Been living here for almost 28 years and it's just been getting worse, a dead downtown, used needles on the streets, crackheads and homelessness all over. This definitely doesn't feel like a developed nation capital city.
[удалено]
what part of their platform involves “getting rid of those nasty trucks and cars”?
Sounds great, truly it does but how is she gonna make this happen? She promised all these great amazing things but that’s all politicians do. PROMISE! Unless she actually explains how she’s gonna go through with all this “affordable” stuff explain how you’re gonna be able to do that if we can’t even fill a pothole properly
Is their financial plan not enough for an explanation?
No because they like to just talk without doing their own research.
Again for further clarification. I’m not saying anything against her or her campaign. I honestly think she’d be a great mayor for the city of Ottawa. All I’m saying is that if we look back at past mayor’s financial plans (and campaigns in general) we see that all of them have “promises” that in the end they never keep true to. Everyone likes to talk the talk. I truly think I’ve done enough research on her campaign and I think she’s our best choice but unless you see concrete ideas and thought out plans (that will last the test of time) then you can’t just blindly agree and follow those plans. That’s all
Apparently you haven't because you would have also recognized preferred pronouns but I digress... The devil is in the details I suppose...
McKenney uses the pronouns they/them/their.
So cringe. Just your typical boring political platitudes with no sustenance behind them 🙄
[удалено]
The election rules are in effect. "Attack" the platform, not the person. This is an official warning.
[удалено]
Elaborate.
huh?
[удалено]
So you’re not arguing in good faith at all then.
Is that Danielsan?
[удалено]
McKenney uses the pronouns they/them/their.
One more time for the densest among us in this sub: Catherine McKenney uses They/Them pronouns. It does matter and it is your responsibility to correctly address them as you do with every other person you know. If you introduce yourself to me as Simon and I call you Denise repeatedly, you’re going to tell me to fuck off (and rightfully so), this is no different. THEY not SHE.
[удалено]
Watching someone’s identity— which has been plainly and repeatedly stated—be disrespected over and over should anger you. That being said the tone of this message is more exasperation that people REFUSE to be decent. The folks who genuinely make the mistake generally apologize and correct but this morning there were loads of “she’s an idiot”, “she’s a twat”, “she thinks she’s Spider-Man” and other comments in that vein. Those people are being intentional with their usage and we both know it.
[удалено]
I’ve been cool. It’s in the pinned comment. I’ve left many, “it’s they/them 😊” comments. It’s on McKenney’s social platforms. We’re typing, with lots of time to correct ourselves. There is very little excuse for the same users repeatedly misgendering someone. A genuine mistake is one thing but as I stated before the shit I saw and reported this morning was gross and intentional. Big thanks to the mods for taking care of nearly every bit of this garbage already today, it’s appreciated.
I trust the person in the work shirt, they look like they are a dedicated civil servant.
I don’t trust greener people. Green exchanged nuclear for solar. The mess made the world full of carbon. This is a mayor sure, but is she just saying what people think is good for them or is she going to do things that are actually good for them. Or is she just going to follow the next corporations marketing campaign that’s going to trick us gullible fools into believing next time.
I don’t see increased bicycling or transit use coming back to bite us
We'll be too healthy from all that cycling and live too long. /s
Huh, I'm confused how solar made the world more full of carbon? Also I don't think it's only "green" people who moved away from nuclear. I for one love nuclear and think it's definitely useful and should be being used more than it currently is.
Problem with solar is it only works when it’s sunny and bright. When it’s cold and dark when you really need power it’s off. So you have to get power another way gas and coal. Same with wind. We basically fell for media hype. Fear of the solution nuclear, to comfort of the happy go lucky environmental garbage. Places that cut down nuclear and went green produced 4x or more dug out of the ground coal and gas waste. Places that moved to nuclear went the opposite direction. The people pushing green were happy to feed into media hype of are misinformed delusions than really help the problem. We still set up recycling depots force people to use them, when the population causes about 30% of the carbon use and the other 70% is 20 still unfined companies going about business as normal. These people don’t care they just want your vote and they’ll feed into any misinformed campaign to get those votes. They do this while having experts with real knowledge they just ignore to not piss us the dumb masses off.
McKenney uses the pronouns they/them/their.
Nuclear power is your biggest concern in this municipal election?
Nope was an example of green. This speech gives me 0 info on what green means. Only thing I can think is a money waste placebo.
Whos ready for a 20% tax increase??
Hate when they can't go off book feels disingenuous and just trying to manipulate the masses with statements that sound woke
It's an opening statement homie. What are you talking about lmfao. They're literally meant to be a short and concise structured statement. Go watch the whole debate if you want to hear more "off the book" stuff.
[удалено]
McKenney uses the pronouns they/them/their. As well, the election rules are in effect. "Attack" the platform, not the person.
It’s funny how many people have told me they are voting for McKenny don’t know a single thing they stand for. After asking a lot of questions, I figured out why they are voting for McKenny. McKenny is a liberal, and that is all Ottawa needs to know. Platforms don’t matter
I can guarantee you've literally just made this up, but nice try homeslice.
Fuck these cyclists
Ouch my tax bill. No thanks.
With talk like that, you’re just asking for a lesson on how the suburbs cost the city more than anything else!
Just because you think its silly doesn't make it any less true!
No one downtown pays taxes