Are Terry and John Serious?
#1
Posted 18 November 2011 - 12:35 AM
Terry actually moved out of Central Saanich while he was still in council! He managed to live here for one year before taking his council paycheck and leaving to go live in Victoria, and now he's coming back for more cash?! Unreal.
And John Garrison lives in Duncan,, Duncan! and he thinks he has the least bit of business telling us how to run our community?? Isn't there a council in Duncan he could run for?
I am absolutely shocked that these two have the temerity to come out to our community and try to tell us how to run it. Local politics by locals thank you very much. Not ex locals, not people who swing by for delicious free range eggs, but real stakeholders, people who are here for the long haul. I really hope they don't end up on our council because they certainly do not represent the voice of Central Saanich.
Mark Saltzman
#2
Posted 18 November 2011 - 03:24 PM
Thank you
Terry
#3
Posted 18 November 2011 - 05:32 PM
#4
Posted 18 November 2011 - 05:47 PM
Not ridiculous if you have a regional viewpoint. Why is it so impossible for someone to actually care about an area even if they don't live there?
I agree. I might not run for council in Victoria or Saanich, being a resident of Langford... and maybe I would run for Langford council. But that doesn't mean I don't care (or I'm not allowed to care) what goes on in those two municipalities, seeing as they represent over 50% of the residents in the CRD.
#5
Posted 18 November 2011 - 05:59 PM
It's not at all about caring, it's about having a stake in the area.
If you want people who don't live in your community making decisions about taxes and about community policy, that's your prerogative, it just doesn't make any sense to me at all.
#6
Posted 18 November 2011 - 06:00 PM
#7
Posted 18 November 2011 - 06:03 PM
#8
Posted 18 November 2011 - 06:15 PM
#9
Posted 18 November 2011 - 06:31 PM
Really, how could it possibly not matter where they live and where they pay taxes?
Just because someone makes good decisions doesn't mean they should be put in charge of a community that they have no involvement in. It would be like applying for the job of CEO of a company without working there or having any personal stake in the company. Shareholders would never agree to that, and rightly so. How can anyone not see that having a personal stake in the community isn't just a nice addition to a candidates credentials but an absolutely crucial prerequisite?
#10
Posted 18 November 2011 - 07:14 PM
#11
Posted 18 November 2011 - 07:24 PM
#12
Posted 18 November 2011 - 07:32 PM
#13
Posted 18 November 2011 - 07:34 PM
I agree, the majority will decide. I just know that I am uncomfortable about a person voting on taxes that they won't be paying, for a community that they don't live in.
What about a local person who votes down every initiative, no matter how essential or desirable, because they don't want their taxes to go up - period!
#14
Posted 18 November 2011 - 11:21 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users