93 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

Image courtesy of www.paulforvictoria.ca

Paul Brown, governance issues consultant, is seeking election as Mayor of Victoria in 2011.

Paul Brown has lived in the City of Victoria for 22 years. He and his wife Jill share a passion for family, friends, gardening and soccer, as well as the sights, sounds and downtown shopping opportunities within easy walking distance of their home near Christ Church Cathedral.

Paul has also played an active role in our community, volunteering for over 15 years with Big Brothers and Sisters of Victoria.

In his professional life, Paul is a partner in a consulting firm that provides advice on governance issues to governments in B.C., Alberta, Yukon and the State of Washington. This role gives him a unique perspective on making government work smarter and with greater transparency. - www.paulforvictoria.ca

Political affiliations: not available
Campaign website: www.paulforvictoria.ca
Resident of: City of Victoria

[Jacques Cadé]

Brown is identified in the B.C. edition of today's Globe and Mail as the principal challenger to Dean Fortin:

Mr. Fortin’s main challenger is Paul Brown, a consultant who wants to champion open government. Mr. Brown’s last foray into Victoria civic politics was a failed bid for a council seat in a by-election last year.

Mr. Brown says he got into that race because he was “irritated” over city hall’s plans to replace an 87-year-old swing bridge – imaginatively known as the Blue Bridge. Mr. Brown placed sixth in the by-election, and Mr. Fortin won the referendum, held at the same time, on the bridge replacement plan.

Mr. Brown is now running for mayor with a slate of candidates under the banner of “Open Victoria.”

“You can call us a political party but we don’t have political leanings,” Mr. Brown said in an interview. “The one thing that binds us is a desire to see more openness at city hall.”

His campaign has an ‘end the gravy train’ flavour to it, like Toronto mayor Rob Ford’s pitch to voters, accusing city hall of overspending on salaries for both politicians and staff while deliberately keeping taxpayers in the dark about where their money goes.

"Swing bridge"?

http://www.theglobea...article2196203/

[Hotel Mike]

"Swing bridge"?

I noticed that too. Justine has lived in Victoria long enough to know the difference.

[Bob Fugger]

I noticed that too. Justine has lived in Victoria long enough to know the difference.

She's a local writer? Wow, could have fooled me. She looks like she's patched together the TC puff pieces that have been written over the years.

[Mike K.]

The following was submitted to us by OV.

FORTIN’S ECONOMIC PLAN IS ‘ALL SHOW, NO GO’ SAYS BROWN
City’s major employers snubbed--plan depends on success of business in other municipalities

October 20, 2011

VICTORIA – The mayor’s new economic development plan for the City, to be announced today at City Hall at 1pm, is mostly a lot of platitudes and ‘same old, same old,’ says mayoral candidate Paul Brown. And without the money needed to fund the implementation, is destined for the same shelf as two earlier so-called economic development plans for Victoria.

“If the Mayor was serious about a new direction for economic development in the City, he would have launched it at budget time in 2012, so he could demonstrate a financial commitment to the plan,” says Brown. “As it is, the implementation of this plan remains unfunded, and probably for good reason.”

“How can you launch an economic development strategy when the City isn’t even sure it can continue to fund and provide the most basic of City services such as buildings, sewers and roads?” asks Brown. “This is like every other planning document we’ve seen under this Mayor -- destined for the bookshelf. Where are we going to find the $625,000 budget for the economic development office it calls for, and the $1.5 million needed for the whole effort, considering where the City’s finances presently stand?”

“Furthermore, as I read the plan, there is too much focus on industry sectors that, for the most part, operate outside the City’s boundaries,” says Brown. “For example, the plan calls for extended development of the post-secondary education sector and the high-tech sector, neither of which have a significant footprint in the City of Victoria at the moment.”

The plan also appears to downplay two of the city’s current major employers: the provincial government and the tourism industry. The provincial government is described as a declining industry sector, despite the fact that it is still the city’s biggest commercial property tenant, while tourism is dismissed as a mature industry with little expansion potential.

“Why does the plan put so much emphasis on sectors in which we don’t have a competitive advantage, and ignores or downplays those where we clearly do?” asks Brown.

“Let’s be honest, our neighbours are competing with the City for new business and industry. And they already have some advantages over us, particularly land availability and lower taxes. Why would we want to hand them even more ammunition?”

“The Mayor asked a carefully selected group of people to come up with this. Where was the wider public opinion sought and considered?”

[Ms. B. Havin]

"...there is too much focus on industry sectors that, for the most part, operate outside the City’s boundaries,” says Brown. “For example, the plan calls for extended development of the post-secondary education sector and the high-tech sector, neither of which have a significant footprint in the City of Victoria at the moment.”

Hear, hear.

Every time I see those "Tectoria" ads on downtown parking ticket vending machines, I roll my eyes. Viatec is in Saanich, and for all that it trumps the supposed nearly-$2billion tech industry "in Victoria," it's not really in "in Victoria," when you get down to political brass tacks.

It bothers me that fudging the boundaries is part of the game (in the entire region), with people claiming a stake in whatever municipality suits them as the need arises, but by the same token abandoning municipalities as needed.

Divided we stand, divided we ...er, ...something like that... er, ...never mind...

[aaroninvictoria]

"...there is too much focus on industry sectors that, for the most part, operate outside the City’s boundaries,” says Brown. “For example, the plan calls for extended development of the post-secondary education sector and the high-tech sector, neither of which have a significant footprint in the City of Victoria at the moment.”

Hear, hear.

Every time I see those "Tectoria" ads on downtown parking ticket vending machines, I roll my eyes. Viatec is in Saanich, and for all that it trumps the supposed nearly-$2billion tech industry "in Victoria," it's not really in "in Victoria," when you get down to political brass tacks.

It bothers me that fudging the boundaries is part of the game (in the entire region), with people claiming a stake in whatever municipality suits them as the need arises, but by the same token abandoning municipalities as needed.

Divided we stand, divided we ...er, ...something like that... er, ...never mind...

I hear that! I am planning a World Cafe for topics relating to the election and "What is a Municipal Issue? Vs. What is a Regional Issue?" Is going to be one of the conversations that will be going on...

[skeptic]

Why doesn't Open Victoria just come right out with it and call themselves "Amalgamate Victoria?"

[rjag]

"Amalgamate Victoria?"

Thats the best thing you've written recently!!!

[smasuch]

The following was submitted to us by OV.

FORTIN’S ECONOMIC PLAN IS ‘ALL SHOW, NO GO’ SAYS BROWN
City’s major employers snubbed--plan depends on success of business in other municipalities

October 20, 2011

VICTORIA – The mayor’s new economic development plan for the City, to be announced today at City Hall at 1pm, is mostly a lot of platitudes and ‘same old, same old,’ says mayoral candidate Paul Brown. And without the money needed to fund the implementation, is destined for the same shelf as two earlier so-called economic development plans for Victoria.

“If the Mayor was serious about a new direction for economic development in the City, he would have launched it at budget time in 2012, so he could demonstrate a financial commitment to the plan,” says Brown. “As it is, the implementation of this plan remains unfunded, and probably for good reason.”

The use of rhetorical questions here to just raise suspicion really bothers me. I can understand not agreeing with somebody else's plan for Victoria, but if Paul Brown wants to be mayor he should state his own ideas alongside his critique of others. The budget-time thing really makes no sense here, since it is 2011 now; isn't it better to talk about the plan before it gets set into a budget rather than doing it right away?

I'd also like to see data that backs up his implication that tourism and government business are the ways to build the Victoria economy. Even if the other options mentioned are smaller now, isn't the point to grow them and make them bigger?

I want to see specific statements from Open Victoria about what they'll do right, not just generalities about what other people are doing wrong. Those are easy to say.

[Schnook]

I'd also like to see data that backs up his implication that tourism and government business are the ways to build the Victoria economy. Even if the other options mentioned are smaller now, isn't the point to grow them and make them bigger?

Amalgamation among topics at Victoria all-candidates meeting Tuesday (CFAX, 2-Nov)

Once again, nobody addresses the ogre in the room. The revenue just isn't coming in anymore, conference and hotel numbers notwithstanding. I hear very sad anecdotes from friends in the tourist precinct. A lot of stores are getting ready to close. You see it in the malls as well. Small business in Victoria is sick and getting worse due to macro factors beyond local control. The fact that Victoria is a government town works in its favor to the extent that it means more stable employment around government offices, but the present levle of government is itself unsustainable. We are entering a long, arduous period of cutbacks and downsizing.

The costs of amalgamation never seem to come up, either. It's the same every time: you've gotta have a new fire HQ, if they get a new HQ then the police need a new HQ and training center. (Current facilities are woefully inadequate for a large department.) Then comes a new HQ for the school board. And on, and on, and on. BUT THE MONEY AIN'T GONNA BE THERE. American municipalities are already hitting the wall, with pension shortfalls, salary cuts, massive layoffs of civic employees and teachers. The whole system is slowly grinding to a halt.

One of the major and most deeply scummy unspoken reasons for Victorian candidates to push amalgamation now parallels that of the EU: to offload debt on the neighbors. There should be no need to explain that situation to the informed folks on this board. As with the US contagion, it's just a matter of time before we get hit. The American economy is collapsing. They are our major trading partner. It's going to have a big impact on us.

I would love to see candidates propose dissolution of the CRD and VIHA. I strongly suspect internal parallels with the situation that is being brought to light at BC Hydro. It would be informative to see detailed audits of those organizations.

Gripe, grouse.

[tedward]

Political affiliations: not available

This needs to be amended. Mr. Brown is a member of Open Victoria.

[Bob Fugger]

This needs to be amended. Mr. Brown is a member of Open Victoria.

No it doesn't. Open Victoria is an apolitical slate of candidates, not a registered political party. I think political affiliations refers to membership or endorsement by a political party - and I don't think any members of the Open Victoria slate are card carrying members of nor are they endorsed by any party.

[Bingo]

No it doesn't. Open Victoria is an apolitical slate of candidates, not a registered political party. I think political affiliations refers to membership or endorsement by a political party - and I don't think any members of the Open Victoria slate are card carrying members of nor are they endorsed by any party.

With most of the present council members of the NDP, would it be safe to say that it is unlikely that members of Open Victoria would belong to the NDP?

[LJ]

re "Amalgamation among topics at Victoria all candidates meeting"

You will note that it is NOT among the topics at any other municipalities meetings.

Victoria, and some Victorians, are the only people who think amalgamation would be a good idea.

Without even a faint polite acknowledgement from any other muni, this issue is dead in the water.

[J Douglas]

It's all very well to exclaim financial responsibility, for good value for the taxpayer dollar, and for living within our means. But really, these are little more than cliches- no one is going to argue the opposite. Maintaining the quality of life we have in Victoria means spending money, there is no getting around this. We will pay one way or the other, whether through tax dollars, or through payments to private companies.

Mr Brown has argued against some recent major investment ideas, but the alternatives to no spending, or little spending, means a continuation of present trends with no creative input. No mass transit? then people will drive more, congestion will increase, the downtown will be less desirable a place to do business, or to just be. Suburban sprawl will increase, the tax base in Victoria will shrink. No new bridge? Fine, it will no doubt hold up for a while yet, and then it will be our kids problem. Or- maybe not. By that time perhaps few will be interested in going downtown, as transportation options will be abysmal- mega traffic with no place to park; narrow streets not designed for such volumes.

It is easy to claim a more enlightened path when in opposition, as there is no responsibility attached. That may come later, if elected, and that is when polititicians often find excuses to alter course.

[Rob Randall]

Brown, a financial analyst, said Fortin's administration raised property taxes seven per cent last year yet reduced the parks and recreation budget by 20 per cent [...] Fortin said the only explanation he could come up with is that $4 million in library funding that used to be listed under parks and recreation was shifted to general expenditures.

http://www.timescolo...3605/story.html

Fortin's explanation seems plausible. I think the onus is on Brown to prove that cut. If it turns out Fortin is right and the cut was actually just shifting the funds to a more sensible place, my estimation of Brown will go way down and I would understand why Fortin would refuse to shake his hand.

[Barrett r Blackwood]

I wonder if J. Douglas missunderstood or if it was me?
I have been to all but one of the "all candidate" meetings and have heard Paul Brown say the same thing each time -that all of the municipalities need to participate in the cost of these mega projects.
That the regional district as a whole needs to speak with one voice when talking to the province and the feds about projects such as mass transit.
To proceed otherwise is not good for Victoria, and its tax payers.

[Barrett r Blackwood]

I have lived and worked in the Westshore from time to time and have always wondered why the E&N land isnt used to bring mass people back n forth. Seems like a no brainer to me. We have a confederation agreement with the feds on that one and should never stop hounding them to pay up n make good.
Any kind of LRT project down Douglas at this time will damage an already hard hit tourist industry in Victoria with huge disruptions.

[Ms. B. Havin]

http://www.timescolo...3605/story.html

Fortin's explanation seems plausible. I think the onus is on Brown to prove that cut. If it turns out Fortin is right and the cut was actually just shifting the funds to a more sensible place, my estimation of Brown will go way down and I would understand why Fortin would refuse to shake his hand.

Wait, are you saying this is ok:

Fortin said the only explanation he could come up with...

So, it's ok that Fortin doesn't know where the city's money is spent or how it's allocated, but it's not ok for Brown to go by what the stats say (namely, that there was a drop in funding at P&R)?

Are incumbents suddenly held to a lower standard than challengers? If Brown is wrong - and remember that Fortin has a multi-million-dollar staff at his disposal, including a nearly $150K annual salary spin doctor (Katie Josephson) and a $220K annual salary city manager (Gail Stephens), who could within hours provide him with the right facts - why doesn't Fortin say "we shifted library funding out of parks and recreation to general services," instead of saying that this is an "explanation" he (Fortin) "could come up with"? When he puts it like that, it doesn't sound like he knows for sure, and it instead also sounds like mighty strong weasel-speak. Can't he get his staff to tell him? Either the shift explains the 20% drop or it doesn't. Which is it?

...Oh, but wait. I see that the article you reference was written by Bill Cleverley, who (imo) is not likely to pursue a story with assiduity.