Should elected officials and municipal employees live where they serve?
#1
Posted 14 July 2011 - 12:59 PM
So what do you think? Should a Victoria city council member be living in say Oak Bay? Vice versa?
Do you think that decisions about a city should be made by someone not living in that city?
What about other services, like policy and fire?. Should they be required to live and be a part of the cities that the serve?
#2
Posted 14 July 2011 - 01:24 PM
Minister of health should have a medical background
Minister of transportation should have a some sort of civil engineering/transportation background
Minister of finance should have a degree in finance
etc..
Too many well connected friends elected then appointed to powerful positions go and screw stuff up.
Victoria current weather by neighbourhood: Victoria school-based weather station network
Victoria webcams: Big Wave Dave Webcams
#3
Posted 14 July 2011 - 01:46 PM
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.
#4
Posted 14 July 2011 - 02:04 PM
Same can be said for police and fire services. How much safer would a community be having the individuals that protect it actually a part of he community as well.
If someone wants to be politically involved, that's fine, but would they not by nature feel more connected to their own municipality and community? Also, since they are not getting involved in there own municipality and community, are they bringing a agenda when they serve another?
#5
Posted 14 July 2011 - 02:08 PM
I think the opposite would be more offensive.This is a good question. City employees make decisions that impact tax payers in the municipality in which they work, yet if they are not residents themselves those tax implications are not of their personal financial concern.
EG:
The city Engineer's street got repaved when there are so many others in worse shape.
Director of planning recommends rejection of development that would block their view.
Even the appearance of this sort of project prioritizing would be tough to defend.
#6
Posted 14 July 2011 - 02:48 PM
But do you not fear the same thing from a counsil member from Saanich or Oak Bay on council oncouncil in Victoria, pulling the same type of tricks (please insert any cities here of your choosing, I am not playing any type of favorites here).
#7
Posted 14 July 2011 - 02:55 PM
I think the opposite would be more offensive.
EG:
The city Engineer's street got repaved when there are so many others in worse shape.
Director of planning recommends rejection of development that would block their view.
Even the appearance of this sort of project prioritizing would be tough to defend.
In this day and age where everything is easily researched by anyone with an Internet connection, even one allegation of a City employee engaging in favouritism based on where they live or whom they know would be outed sooner or later, probably to the detriment of the employee's career. A developer would certainly employ any means necessary to out an employee objecting to a development proposal based on where they live, etc.
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.
#8
Posted 14 July 2011 - 03:16 PM
In this day and age where everything is easily researched by anyone with an Internet connection, even one allegation of a City employee engaging in favouritism based on where they live or whom they know would be outed sooner or later, probably to the detriment of the employee's career.
Favouritism, cronyism and nepotism are what get you places these days. I think if you were outed as showing favouritism in one job, you're probably not going to have an issue getting another.
Victoria current weather by neighbourhood: Victoria school-based weather station network
Victoria webcams: Big Wave Dave Webcams
#9
Posted 14 July 2011 - 03:17 PM
Of course I would be happy to have a more regional perspective if we amalgamated some of the fiefdoms.
#10
Posted 14 July 2011 - 03:20 PM
Isn't in a perfect world the fear of voter reprisal the prevention to that?. Note I said dream world, since in reality voter apathy would make that a difficult truth.
And in a dream world voters would tend to prefer local candidates to those from other jurisdictions, and prefer a legislative branch that hired locals.
I guess if voters want someone who lives in Edmonton to be mayor of Victoria, thats their prerogative, isn't it? If its an issue presumably their opponents will exploit it.
#11
Posted 14 July 2011 - 03:25 PM
A developer would certainly employ any means necessary to out an employee objecting to a development proposal based on where they live, etc.
Unless that employee is Pam Madoff, in which case no developer has enough time to keep track of that many objections.
#12
Posted 14 July 2011 - 03:26 PM
...Marianne Alto should not be allowed to serve in Victoria because she...cannot vote for the office she is in...Of course I would be happy to have a more regional perspective if we amalgamated some of the fiefdoms.
Agreed.
#13
Posted 14 July 2011 - 03:34 PM
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.
#14
Posted 14 July 2011 - 03:47 PM
I guess if voters want someone who lives in Edmonton to be mayor of Victoria, thats their prerogative, isn't it? If its an issue presumably their opponents will exploit it.
Which would be part of the point of why I started this thread. I am curious to what perspective is on this. If individuals feel it is alright, then why, and if they don't then why they think it is happening.
This is a dialogue that I have not seen brought up as an issue and do not understand why. Everyone seems against amalgamation, but still feel free to go into others back yards and decide issues for them.
#15
Posted 14 July 2011 - 03:58 PM
Everyone seems against amalgamation, but still feel free to go into others back yards and decide issues for them.
That's the quote of the week right there.
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.
#16
Posted 14 July 2011 - 04:02 PM
In the by-election, it was certainly well-publicized that Alto was not from Victoria (and discussed on this forum quite a bit). However, her party affiliation trumped all other concerns because the NDP run one slate, whereas non-NDP run many. If the non-NDP in this town want to win, then it seems to me that they have to organize a bit and decide to back a single slate rather than all running willy-nilly.
#17
Posted 14 July 2011 - 04:27 PM
If your running under a party banner, you should be running a party platform. Local politics seems to not be about party lines so much as independent agenda, which is why you get the "willie-nilly"ness in my opinion.
#18
Posted 14 July 2011 - 04:40 PM
#19
Posted 14 July 2011 - 05:29 PM
Everyone seems against amalgamation...
I'm not against amalgamation.
#20
Posted 14 July 2011 - 05:52 PM
Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users