Municipal Politics

[archited]

C'mon... Nickel is a cement head!

 

[Platinum107]

One of my main issues with Mike Nickel is that, judging by the way he described downtown when he put a "travel advisory" on it (and other instances), he'll perpetuate, intentionally or not, the stereotype that people suffering from poverty, addiction and/or homelessness are criminals who need to be punished for hurting the image of the city and being an inconvenience. While the lines blur in some cases, I believe most of these people are victims of their circumstances in life and are trying their best to get by while not having the services they need like addiction support, housing, counselling and employment consistently available to them. One of the things this current city council has done that I'm really pleased with is getting more permanent supportive and affordable housing built in recent years and having open support for addiction services like safe injection sites (treating addiction not as a crime, rather an illness that can be treated).

My point with the paragraph above is that simply increasing police presence in areas like downtown only serves to temporarily improve appearance, while in the background it drives a wedge further in between the more and less fortunate and leads to more unrest and issues, requiring more police, making a toxic feedback loop for our city. If we want to see real long-lasting change while improving appearance, we need solutions which put an emphasis on aid and treatment rather than punishment, and whoever preaches that kind of message I'll support.

 

[archited]

^^^^ Hurry up and turn 18!!!

 

[Aaron_Lloyd]

...while in the background it drives a wedge further in between the more and less fortunate and leads to more unrest and issues...

I think this is a silly argument which I feel you might be parroting from people talking about other cities with different circumstances, look at a crime map of Edmonton and you'll quickly see it's more often not other poor people's quality of life which is most affected by high crime. It isn't residents of Laurier Heights or Windsor Park who are being victimized by crime. Something tells me it isn't the rich who are particularly worried about crime right now.

[Nickel will] perpetuate, intentionally or not, the stereotype that people suffering from poverty, addiction and/or homelessness are criminals who need to be punished for hurting the image of the city and being an inconvenience.

While we're talking about mayoral candidates perpetuating ideas I'm much more worried about electing someone who will further normalize the victimization of poor people by crime by arguing that it's something that we should simply need to learn to live with in a big city like ours brushing off people's concerns entirely. Thus leaving room to rationalize doing absolutely nothing to address this problem.

requiring more police, making a toxic feedback loop for our city. If we want to see real long-lasting change while improving appearance, we need solutions which put an emphasis on aid and treatment rather than punishment, and whoever preaches that kind of message I'll support.

Again I feel like you're getting this idea form people talking about other jurisdictions than here, I can only speak from my personal experience and what I've heard from others living centrally but there seems to be a real chronic issue with police response times in the core. While a variety of other supports are needed to tackle crime, I certainly don't disagree with that, many of them are in provincial hands and adding to the police force is something basic and easy that the city can do relatively quickly to address the problems we're facing.

C'mon... Nickel is a cement head!

No argument here, but apparently even a cement head can recognise this is a serious issue needing attention unlike some candidates.

 

[ChazYEG]

No argument here, but apparently even a cement head can recognise this is a serious issue needing attention unlike some candidates.

Again, acknowledging it and actually doing something are two monumentally different things.
If I had to guess, given Nickel's disdain (borderline hate) for downtown and all that it represents, is that he will do absolutely nothing for the safety and policing in the area and, if he even hire new cops, they'll be mostly dedicating their time to the suburban communities, where he has most of his support and which he defends like his life depended on it.

 

[Platinum107]

I think this is a silly argument which I feel you might be parroting from people talking about other cities with different circumstances, look at a crime map of Edmonton and you'll quickly see it's more often not other poor people's quality of life which is most affected by high crime. It isn't residents of Laurier Heights or Windsor Park who are being victimized by crime. Something tells me it isn't the rich who are particularly worried about crime right now.

1: What about it is silly? One of the main sources of crime and poverty in any city is economic inequality which Edmonton definitely has in the form of economic segregation of housing between "wealthy" neighborhoods and "poor" neighborhoods.
2: You're correct, people living in poverty-stricken areas experience higher levels of crime than those in wealthy areas. However, the income-level of the victims shouldn't dictate the response poverty and crime receives in the city as a whole. Just because wealthy people living in wealthy neighborhoods don't have to worry about crime nearly as much where they live doesn't mean it won't bite all Edmontonians somehow at some point.

Also, I looked at this crime map of Edmonton: https://crimemapping.edmontonpolice.ca/ . I'd suggest viewing the last 60 days and comparing neighborhoods like Central McDougal with Laurier Heights to view economic disparity in action.

While we're talking about mayoral candidates perpetuating ideas I'm much more worried about electing someone who will further normalize the victimization of poor people by crime by arguing that it's something that we should simply need to learn to live with in a big city like ours brushing off people's concerns entirely. Thus leaving room to rationalize doing nothing to improve anything.

Which mayoral candidate is perpetuating this idea? All the front runners of this election (besides Mike Nickel) have made addressing crime, poverty and addiction main tenets of their platform. They aren't brushing off people's concerns and want to do something, just with an approach that involves more compassion and understanding of the situation than punishment.

Again I feel like you're getting this idea form people talking about other jurisdictions than here, I can only speak from my personal experience and what I've heard from others living centrally but there seems to be a real chronic issue with police response times in the core. While a variety of other supports are needed to tackle crime, I certainly don't disagree with that, many of them are in provincial hands and adding to the police force is something basic and easy that the city can do relatively quickly to address the problems we're facing.

I don't disagree that the police are a big tool the city has to deal with crime, and that their response is important when it counts, but an over-reliance on that tool to deal with most if not all forms of social disorder is where the issue comes in (also the reason why response times are slower in areas with more levels of poverty and therefore more crime). You're absolutely right in saying that it's "basic and easy" to confront these issues in a blunt-force way like only increasing police presence, and the kind of results we get from that are of a similar caliber.

I don't even want to get started on the provincial government issue. I couldn't be more disappointed if I tried with the lack of understanding and compassion for these problems present in their decision making.

 

[IanO]

SMART CONSTRUCTION
The Problem

While construction and road maintenance is necessary and a positive indicator that our city is continuing to grow and evolve, it creates a very real challenge for Edmontonians and business owners. Today as you travel around our city so many of our pathways are interrupted with some sort of closure or detour.

These closures and detours are made even more tricky because there is no clear communication of the benefit of the construction: what’s happening and how is it making our city better?

Smart Construction

While construction and road maintenance is necessary and a positive indicator that our city is continuing to grow and evolve, it creates a very real challenge for Edmontonians and business owners.

www.cheryllwatson.ca

 

[TAS]

Here's highlights of Watson's plan

"As Mayor, I will commit to reducing the day-to-day community impact of our construction projects and prioritizing the local benefits through a Smart Construction policy.

Construction projects impacting major roadways, sidewalks and bike lanes will have:

Accelerated timelines and management – 6 day a week construction and extended work hours when possible

Minimized construction zones that limit the area that is blocked off or closed

Smart detour planning with effective wayfinding to ensure the least impact on traffic flow and pedestrian pathways

Signage that clearly communicates the benefit of the work, how much it costs and the committed timeline for completion

Service level commitments to residents and business owners that promise no more than a 30 day impact to entrances and customer access.

Construction impact grants made available to businesses that experience a reduction in their revenues due to construction impact beyond 30 days

Incentivize procurement of materials and supplies from local manufacturers in order to:

Reduce the environmental impact of overseas shipping

Contribute to the Edmonton economy and create jobs

Allow for a social lens and focus on employing Edmontonians from marginalized communities

Smarter construction is another way to build A City That Works - now and for the future.

 

[TAS]

Although municipal politics are typically not associated with party politics, the NDP orange machine definitely appears to have an unofficial slate of candidates it is putting its weight and resources behind.

Some good progressive candidates that might negatively be impacted by it include Ashley Salvador in Ward Metis (who I really hope wins). In another ward, Kristin Goa was actually asked not to run in favor of the seemingly NDP preferred Michael Janz.

Redirect Notice

 

[northlands]

I quite like Ashley Salvador as well. She's been busting her butt on her campaign the whole way and is someone who truly cares about EDM, IMO. Wish I still lived in her riding!

 

[thommyjo]

Ashley is awesome. If you live in her ward, please vote for her!

In terms of Nickel comments, what will help our downtown feel safer is more people. Nickel won't bring that. Also, nickel has served 3 terms and if mayor, will have no more power than he has for 12 years. So will anything change? Unlikely. Has he proven to be a consensus builder or someone who gets stuff done? Not at all. Most councilors despise him. Would him becoming mayor change anything in edmonton? I doubt it. Most councilors will work against his desires and he'll only increase division and fighting at council. He's polarizing and populist. Not what we need in our city government. Please, please reconsider

 

[Tommy2342]

I quite like Ashley Salvador as well. She's been busting her butt on her campaign the whole way and is someone who truly cares about EDM, IMO. Wish I still lived in her riding!

Ashley can't win IMO. Cori likely will quite easily win Ward Metis, as she's more progressive and has A LOT more support coming her way.

 

[Aaron_Lloyd]

1: What about it is silly? One of the main sources of crime and poverty in any city is economic inequality which Edmonton definitely has in the form of economic segregation of housing between "wealthy" neighborhoods and "poor" neighborhoods.
2: You're correct, people living in poverty-stricken areas experience higher levels of crime than those in wealthy areas. However, the income-level of the victims shouldn't dictate the response poverty and crime receives in the city as a whole. Just because wealthy people living in wealthy neighborhoods don't have to worry about crime nearly as much where they live doesn't mean it won't bite all Edmontonians somehow at some point.

I think it's very silly when people try to frame tackling crime as some sort of inherent attack on poorer people. Built into your line of thinking is the harmful assumption that simply being less fortunate makes you commit crime which is of course absurd, there are tons of less fortunate who don't commit crime obviously (or are quite often victims of crime as I pointed out) and as well plenty of criminals who aren't necessarily less fortunate and are simply taking advantage of others.

Crime isn't a rich vs. poor issue as you keep trying to make it. In my experience the well-to-do are overall more apathetic than anything to crime in the city as it doesn't really affect them. If anything they enable this do nothing attitude towards crime because they don't want the cost of the solutions causing their taxes to rise.

Which mayoral candidate is perpetuating this idea? All the front runners of this election (besides Mike Nickel) have made addressing crime, poverty and addiction main tenets of their platform. They aren't brushing off people's concerns and want to do something, just with an approach that involves more compassion and understanding of the situation than punishment.

Sohi only makes one mention of crime on his site right now and it's buried in a blog post. I really don't think if he's elected that he'll be centring community safety in the same way the guy who has this issue at the top of his policies webpage will. I think the issue could very well be swept under the rug if Sohi is elected, just as it's been swept under the rug under Iveson lately.

I don't disagree that the police are a big tool the city has to deal with crime, and that their response is important when it counts, but an over-reliance on that tool to deal with most if not all forms of social disorder is where the issue comes in (also the reason why response times are slower in areas with more levels of poverty and therefore more crime). You're absolutely right in saying that it's "basic and easy" to confront these issues in a blunt-force way like only increasing police presence, and the kind of results we get from that are of a similar caliber.

I really don't understand where the idea that Edmonton has an over reliance on policing leading to poor outcomes comes from? What exactly are you pointing to here in EPS actions or policies as evidence of this being the case? I realise it's très en vogue in some circles right now to poopoo the police in favour of vague conceptions of alternatives, but there's been from what I've seen little evidence that those alternatives being proposed actually work at all, where as the evidence for greater police numbers is fairly clear.

Again, acknowledging it and actually doing something are two monumentally different things.
If I had to guess, given Nickel's disdain (borderline hate) for downtown and all that it represents, is that he will do absolutely nothing for the safety and policing in the area and, if he even hire new cops, they'll be mostly dedicating their time to the suburban communities, where he has most of his support and which he defends like his life depended on it.

So I've seen plenty of evidence for Nickel's cement headedness, I don't think I've seen any evidence that he isn't sincere in his views though (as silly as they often can be). I've never really gotten the impression that he's being duplicitous, though maybe I just haven't followed his career closely enough? Is there anything you can point to of him being two faced like that?

So will anything change? Unlikely. Has he proven to be a consensus builder or someone who gets stuff done? Not at all. Most councilors despise him. Would him becoming mayor change anything in edmonton? I doubt it. Most councilors will work against his desires and he'll only increase division and fighting at council. He's polarizing and populist. Not what we need in our city government. Please, please reconsider

If anything I'd hope you're right that he wouldn't have too much control, but I think electing him would send a strong message about how people are feeling and that crime and safety can't just continue to be ignored as an issue in the city as it has been lately.

 

[ChazYEG]

So I've seen plenty of evidence for Nickel's cement headedness, I don't think I've seen any evidence that he isn't sincere in his views though (as silly as they often can be). I've never really gotten the impression that he's being duplicitous, though maybe I just haven't followed his career closely enough? Is there anything you can point to of him being two faced like that?

It's not being double faced. He has a very blatant disregard for downtown (for reasons I don't claim to understand), and there's plenty of evidence of that.

Tie that to the fact that he's far from being a consensus builder, or a leader for that matter, being the most confrontational, nay-sayer and disrespectful member of the council, today, and we have a mayor that's probably going to be ineffective in solving downtown's crime problem (he just doesn't care enough).

 

[TAS]

Ashley can't win IMO. Cori likely will quite easily win Ward Metis, as she's more progressive and has A LOT more support coming her way.

Cori is a quality candidate propped up by the ndp. I watched the debate for Ward Metis - Salvador was a standout and the class of the field. It would be a real win for Edmonton to have a council with her on it.