I agree that there should be no barrier to entry to run for public office, reducing the amount of campaign donations by 3rd parties such as labour or business etc will help level the playing field.
However I think there should be some type of means test to measure the ability of the candidate to actually do the job of running a municipality. There are far too many personal agendas in play here, but zero mention of the skills available to understand the complexity of running what is effectively a multi million $ corporation that is a monopoly.
This is other peoples money that is at stake here, politicians keep forgetting that in the pursuit of social justice nirvana and pet projects. How many decades have we been waiting for Firehall #1 to be replaced? but ....no....not a priority....they cant even build a frigging bike lane on budget....I have never seen a council as unqualified as this current one. Generating a bonanza of new tax revenue through private sector development should mean zero tax increases and enough revenue to fulfill infrastructure improvements. But nope, community gardens (aka toilets for drug addicts) musical stairs etc etc are far more important
They are so consumed with issues that are simply pet projects and are drunk with the power that they would never attain in the real world.
There is an old saying about Professors and their inability to understand the real world...
'there are those people that can...and do....and there are those that teach'
I think the same could be applied to local politicians. Stu Young is about the only politician I can think of locally that is the exception....can anyone else come up with another name?