32 replies to this topic

[martini]

...just a heads up. I've changed the title of this thread to "vote today" from "vote tomorrow."

Thank you! I was just going to ask as I forgot I couldn't edit my own title.

[hoi polloi]

i think trustees often get re elected based on familiar names and limited research into candidates. city counsel seats garner more interest, typically. i hope that the predictable 5-4 split in voting will be broken up a little this go 'round, altho with the popular pitre on this slate, i can see the four running mates having a lot of clout should they all win a seat. it may be a 7-2 running joke split then...

i had hoped for a fresh injection with the gradual, positive changes to service delivery VPEC has offered . the notion that this four who co-opted the term 'putting students first' are the only choices for fiscal responsibility is short sighted, imo. i won't go as far as saying 'fear mongering'. might think it tho.

my choices are certainly not for groups of people, but rather for individuals who have impressed me. i hope for a mixed board who can work together. yes, i am living in lalaland.

[hoi polloi]

Thank you for asking that question.
The school fees debacle has really turned me off. It's cost our district at least $50,000 in legal fees.
I understand the ideology, but it's flawed in reality.
He's been and done a great many things over the years, but I believe his time is past.

may i ask where the 50K figure came from?

[Jessica Van der Veen]

It looks like Jessica just made an error above when she was sharing the reason she was voting for individuals.

Yes Mike Hayes!!!! He is the only Michael I would vote for. What a decent, human, thoughtful guy -- with outstanding expertise as well. Mike Hayes!! I wrote Horsman because he is running with Bev Horsman and he made a joke the other night at the all candidates and said, "Vote Hayes/Horsman for school trustee."

[martini]

may i ask where the 50K figure came from?

I have to go back and find it again.
But then I found this:

http://thetyee.ca/Ne...8/23/JohnYoung/

The first victory was over his own Victoria school board, district 61, when he won a court ruling in 1997 that said district schools can't charge fees for any course a student needs for graduation. The board, then chaired by current provincial New Democratic Party leader Carole James, spent $250,000 to fight him before eventually backing down, money Young says could have been better spent educating kids.

[martini]

Thanks hoi polloi for catching that.

The original fight with the district was $250,000.
Then there was the provincial one
And he's going back to court.

I'm going to have to go back and dig where I originally got my numbers. I see I was letting him off too easy.

[hoi polloi]

yes, please do check the numbers. that is well off what i have heard, and would appreciate the source. thank you.

[martini]

i think trustees often get re elected based on familiar names and limited research into candidates. city counsel seats garner more interest, typically. i hope that the predictable 5-4 split in voting will be broken up a little this go 'round, altho with the popular pitre on this slate, i can see the four running mates having a lot of clout should they all win a seat. it may be a 7-2 running joke split then...

i had hoped for a fresh injection with the gradual, positive changes to service delivery VPEC has offered . the notion that this four who co-opted the term 'putting students first' are the only choices for fiscal responsibility is short sighted, imo. i won't go as far as saying 'fear mongering'. might think it tho.

my choices are certainly not for groups of people, but rather for individuals who have impressed me. i hope for a mixed board who can work together. yes, i am living in lalaland.

I apologize for not responding to your post prior to the election results.
Regardless my response would have been the same. Vote for who you feel will do the best job and what your gut tells you.
Obviously the voters made the deciding votes.
It was a good night, a successful night.

[hoi polloi]

i agree, absolutely. it will be interesting to see what the turnout looks like. i watched the vancouver returns, but alas victoria had no coverage.

[martini]

i agree, absolutely. it will be interesting to see what the turnout looks like. i watched the vancouver returns, but alas victoria had no coverage.

Coverage was pathetic.
Anyway
Here we go:
Elaine Leonard
Tom Ferris
Jim Holland
Dave Pitre
Peg Orcherton
Catherine Alpha
Bev Horsman
Micheal McEvoy
John Young

[hoi polloi]

oh yes, i had those results, thanks. i was referring to voter turnout results, not the trustee digits. for myself, a successful night for trustees would have been something besides the status quo of 5:4 vote splits, but i can understand your delight since most of your slate got in. congratulations to them.

[Jessica Van der Veen]

Its funny - I've been thinking about the distinction between a negative campaign and a campaign based on untruths, rumour, inuendo -- you know, sort of a McCain, Atwater kind of a campaign.

I feel OK about campaigners being vigorously critical of each other over things that are verifiable -- a matter of public record, or incidents with multiple public witnesses. I wrote some pretty vigorous criticisms of McEvoy, Walsh, Holland and Pitre. But they were all on stuff they really did or failed to do.

People should know about policies or even omissions that have negatively affected our children in the past -- they are predictive of future behaviour. For example -- look at how quiet the BCSTA has been as these massive cuts have been imposed on public education. It is a fair question to ask the BCSTA, "Where have you guys been for the last 8 years?"

I really see a distinction between critical and vigorous debate on actions or policy differences and campaigns based on lies and/or rumours or casting aspersions on a personality. Those make me very uncomfortable and unhappy.

I'll tell you one thing: if any of these candidates ever says anything about another candidate or slate of candidates again, I will phone personally to check out the verity of their statements and ask for proof before I believe a word of it. So that's a great lesson to learn.

[martini]

Its funny - I've been thinking about the distinction between a negative campaign and a campaign based on untruths, rumour, inuendo -- you know, sort of a McCain, Atwater kind of a campaign.

I feel OK about campaigners being vigorously critical of each other over things that are verifiable -- a matter of public record, or incidents with multiple public witnesses. I wrote some pretty vigorous criticisms of McEvoy, Walsh, Holland and Pitre. But they were all on stuff they really did or failed to do.

People should know about policies or even omissions that have negatively affected our children in the past -- they are predictive of future behaviour. For example -- look at how quiet the BCSTA has been as these massive cuts have been imposed on public education. It is a fair question to ask the BCSTA, "Where have you guys been for the last 8 years?"

I really see a distinction between critical and vigorous debate on actions or policy differences and campaigns based on lies and/or rumours or casting aspersions on a personality. Those make me very uncomfortable and unhappy.

I'll tell you one thing: if any of these candidates ever says anything about another candidate or slate of candidates again, I will phone personally to check out the verity of their statements and ask for proof before I believe a word of it. So that's a great lesson to learn.

The election is over Jessica. I'm not sure what the point is in going on about this.
Pitre has never sat as a trustee, so I don't know what criticism you need to continue to bombard him with.
Your insistence of picking on these particular four makes me think this is more personal than it should be.

As far as anything they have said, all four were always respectful in my presence. There was never slagging or name calling. And that's more than I can say for others during this election.

The only one going on about rumours and lies seems to be you, and I've grown weary of listening to it.