Sunday, October 17, 2004
A really long boring post about municipal politics
St. Albert municipal politics, no less. More specifically, how I'm voting in tomorrow's election.
(This post will only make sense to people who already have some degree of familiarity with the candidates running. If you lack such familiarity, and for some reason wish to read this post anyway, I suggest you check out my St. Albert Election Recap first.)
I'll start with the choices for Councillor. There will be twenty-one choices on the ballot, of which I will be voting for six. Starting with some process of elimination is probably the easiest way to proceed.
The easiest elimination of all goes to Jerry Voss. Not that Mr. Voss would make a bad Councillor. In fact, he might make a great Councillor - I really know very little about him. But he's announced that he no longer wants the job, so I'll not be forcing it upon him.
Only slightly harder to reject are James Burrows, Michael Cooper, and Stanley Haroun, because none of the three answered the eleven simple questions I sent them at the beginning of the campaign. Mind you, Mr. Haroun's probably the only one who actually lost anything by not doing so, since Mr. Burrows and Mr. Cooper were pretty well off of my list from the get-go. Mr. Burrows has been mediocre as an alderman, breaking even the very modest promise that got him elected, a plebiscite on the West Road. A deservedly (and soundly) defeated candidate in the 1998 election who got in in 2001 almost exclusively on the strength of an endorsement from the shadowy and nefarious S.E.N.S.I.B.L.E. Choice lobby group, Mr. Burrows has been largely ineffective since taking office. Mr. Cooper, for his part, it a dogmatic twit. His "commentary" on federal issues has consisted entirely of spouting the platform of his favourite candidate, generally Stockwell Day. He has said nothing of substance in the municipal campaign, and richly deserves the defeat coming to him.
Also not responding to my questions were Brian Kendrick and Ben van de Walle, though they had better excuses: not having e-mail addresses, they never actually received them (Curtis Krenbrenk also lacks an e-mail address, but he was willing to respond to my questions in writing - more on him later). I was also unable to arrange a phone conversation with either. Mr. van de Walle is easy to reject, since his entire platform consisted of securing "an adequate supply of land for the next twenty years". Seriously. Every question he was asked somehow got connected to an adequate supply of land (which, fortunately, he refrained from describing as lebensraum). This wouldn't be quite so bad if St. Albert was not already in the midst of proceedings to - gasp! - secure an adequate supply of land for the next twenty years. Mr. van de Walle's major campaign tactic of standing by the Newman Theological College with a big banner waving at passing cars also did little to impress me. Mr. Kendrick was a little tougher to reject, and I considered voting for him for a time for his blunt manner head on approach to issues. Eventually, however, I concluded that what little I knew of his plans was bunk. Beyond that, he failed to answer many of the questions posed of him by the St. Albert Gazette.
Len Bracko did respond to my questions but, as with Mr. Burrows, his record on Council has been enough to convince me that he doesn't deserve my vote (and I voted for him last time). In a one-issue campaign, he was elected promising to build Ray Gibbon Drive instead of the West Road favoured by the rest of the candidates who were elected. He has proceeded to do precisely fuck all in to push this agenda. He is not identified with any substantive initiatives, and has allowed himself to be pushed around on most controversial ones. After voting for him provincially twice and municipally once, Len Bracko's not getting my vote this election.
Into the next category of rejects fall Neil Feser and Bob Lewis, both of whom offer answers that are meagre and superficial. They agree with the status quo in almost every regard, and when they don't they offer such specific solutions as "I think [transit] is an area that we could easily get more input from the public as to what they want to see happen and then act on it as soon as possible" (Feser) and "If a no vote [on the Recreation Centre plebiscite], we must find out why it was a no vote and respond to the wishes of the electorate" (Lewis). Sorry, guys, there are too many candidates for that kind of stuff to pass muster.
Kerry Kineshanko is in a class of his own, though probably not a good one. When S.E.N.S.I.B.L.E. Choice was selecting the candidates it wished to endorse in its agenda of getting the West Road built, it selected only five aldermanic candidates rather than add Mr. Kineshanko (or Bob Coulter, another pro-Road candidate) to its list, which probably tells you most of what you need to know about him. The hell of it is, I don't even disagree with much of what he says (beyond his support for the West Road), but he comes across as grasping and amibitious (he runs in pretty well every election available to him), adversarial and histrionic ("Those in favour of amending the [smoking] bylaw are against democracy and the health of St. Albertans and in favour of special interest groups"), and unprofessional (witness his website - or, for that matter, his business's website). I cannot endorse him.
We then hit a pack of generally acceptable but unremarkable candidates: Christine Brown, Nolan Crouse, and Malcolm Parker. All three support the bulk of the work done by the incumbent Council - the West Road (even sans plebiscite), the smoking bylaw, the seeking of an injunction against the proposed Hunter Ridge development - and none of them offer any real suggestions of the previous Council's shortcomings (Mr. Crouse goes so far as to identify, as its greatest failing, that "its public image was not well-maintained"). If you like the status quo and are looking for a quiet three years in municipal politics, any of the three are acceptable, with Ms. Brown appearing to have a stronger grasp of most of the major issues than the other two.
The last candidate I outright reject - as painful as it is to do so - is Randy Duguay. Mr. Duguay has demonstrated a commitment to St. Albert, having volunteered countless hours on city commissions and with advocacy groups. He has a better understanding of the relevant issues than any other candidate who has not held public office, except maybe Matt Boiko. He has not hidden behind any vague platitudes or feel-good statements, having provided detailed answers to my questions (and he actually seemed enthusiastic to be doing so). I would be pleased to have him as one of my Councillors, except for one thing: I disagree with most of what he has to say. An early proponent of the West Road, he has not wavered in this assessment, he goes so far as to make the dubious assertion that "the previously outlined Ray Gibbon Drive proposal had. . . equivalent environmental issues as compared to the current alignment". He is, at best, lukewarm on public transit, which is a key priority of mine. So, sorry Mr. Duguay - if it's any comfort to you, elections consistently show that I'm out of step with what most St. Albertans believe.
This narrows things down to eight candidates for six positions. To narrow things down further, I'll now start at the other end: identifying candidates who clearly deserve my vote.
Near the top of this list would have to be Neil Korotash (and I didn't vote for him last time around). Besides his detailed (and, as a bonus, non-patronizing) responses to my questions, he has a record of responding whenever there is public confusion surrounding any issue before Council. His support for the West Road aside (and, even there, he is the only incumbent alderman to actually keep his promise of supporting a plebiscite on the matter), he generally shares my value set, especially around affordable housing and transit. Anyway, it's nice to see a young person in politics who doesn't fit the partisan ladder-climber template filled by Mr. Cooper in St. Albert and Jung-Suk Ryu in Edmonton. In designing a follow-up to a Council with which I was generally displeased, Mr. Korotash allows me to support a shred of continuity.
Next up on my list of candidates who are getting my vote is Bob Russell. Mr. Russell is a politician's politician of the old school, with his literature showing him exiting city hall in a three piece suit and his answers to my questions including the assertion that the current Council "couldn't organize a piss up in a brewery". He's a partisan Liberal, which would be a strike against him, except that he has shown the ability to work cooperatively in a non-partisan atmosphere. Defeated in 2001 after a distinguished career in municipal politics, Mr. Russell, now well into his seventies, elected to forego retirement from political life in favour of becoming active with the Big Lake Environmental Support Society to continue working for what he believes. He has been a thorn in the side of this Council at all stops, and has earned my vote now as he did last time.
Also on the list of people making a repeat appearance among my endorsements is Matt Boiko. While Mr. Boiko seems to have decided that the fight against the West Road is lost, he at least (unlike Paul Chalifoux) retains the integrity to hold to his previous position that the choice made by Council was the wrong one. Additionally, he is among the most supportive candidates on affordable housing and transit, aiming to increase ridership rather than cut the system to conform to existing reidership. He takes a reasonable line on the rec centre, supporting a No vote but pledging to get it built as currently planned in the event of a Yes vote and, like Mr. Russell, supports a libertarian-ish stance on the smoking bylaw, which appeals to me. His rather churlish and inaccurate assertion that "this council has done nothing positive or productive for the City of St. Albert" aside, Matt Boiko is again one of the best six candidates on the ballot.
Al Henry's something of an enigma (he's also a neighbour of mine, so I might be biased in his favour). While he has a Conservative Party sign up come every federal election, in his opposition to the West Road he finds himself among environmentalists and socialists, as he does in his support of an increased subsidy for public transit. He makes a lot of stunning and dubious accusations, especially surrounding the West Road, but every Council can use a maverick. He was my choice for the role in 2001, and he is again.
This leaves three candidates vying for my remaining two votes: Frances Badrock, Lorie Garritty, and Curtis Krenbrenk. Ms. Badrock and Mr. Krenbrenk are cut from generally the same cloth - passionate rather than rational, opponents of the West Road, and not all together up to speed on many of the issues facing Council. Mr. Krenbrenk edges out Ms. Badrock because of his inclusive vision, demonstrable open-mindedness, and willing to take issues head on - he says on the Smoking Bylaw that "the compromise is separate rooms with ventilation and air quality standards", while Ms. Badrock says only "if the citizens of St. Albert ask for this issue to be revisited, then Council must revisit it". Mr. Krenbrenk probably isn't qualified to be a Councillor at the present time, but I'm willing to let him grow into it.
The choice, then, comes down to this: Ms. Badrock or Mr. Garritty. I really like most of what Mr. Garritty says, as well as the balanced approach he takes to recognizing the incumbent Council's achievements and acknowledging its shortcomings. Alone among supporters of the West Road, he even admits that continually building new roads is no way to solve the city's transportation problems in the long-term, and that transit will have to figure large in future plans. The thing is, he supports to West Road, and Ms. Badrock doesn't. After thirty years, this election is likely to finally confirm the West Road as the solution to the city's transportation woes, which it isn't and never will be. The electorate has this final chance to stop it. I'm going to do my best to take it. Ms. Badrock it is.
For Mayor, Paul Chalifoux and Lynda Moffatt are easily dismissed as transparent seekers of power, willing to attempt to rewrite their own personal histories and to abandon integrity in the hopes of appealing to the largest number of voters they can. Mr. Chalifoux, defeated as mayor in 2001 over the West Road, now says that he supports the current alignment - not in a "the decision has been made, let's accept it and move on" sort of a way, but in a "this is the best alignment" sort of a way. Additionally, he's as much as said that he'd give away the farm in negotiations with Sturgeon County. Ms. Moffatt is criticizing the incumbent Council for its approach to negotiations with Sturgeon, when she voted on the prevailing side of almost all relevant votes. She's also one of the four alderman to have been elected on a promise of a road plebiscite, only to abandon it within months. There's little enough integrity in politics as it is, I'll not aggravate the problem by voting for one of these bozos.
John Smith, while a very appealing candidate in many ways with his kilt and Scottish thrift, must also be rejected. His answers to my questions simply lack the depth required of somebody hoping to be mayor. He'd likely have had my vote if he was seeking an aldermanic seat, along the same lines as Krenbrenk, but he's just not qualified for the top job.
Richard Plain's the incumbent, and actually looked like he might get my vote at first. Sure, he's pompous, arrogant, condascending, and abrasive, but a future blog entry will see me making the case for Pierre Trudeau as the greatest Canadian, so these things obviously don't bother me. Like Mr. Korotash, he attempted to keep his promise of a plebiscite on the West Road. I accept his version of things over Mr. Chalifoux's on negotiations with Sturgeon County, and trust him to stand up for the interests of St. Albert. While I haven't much cared for his voting record on Council, by nomination day I'd resigned myself to holding my nose and supporting his re-election.
Then Dave Burkhart came along, espousing pretty well all of what I believe. He would put top priority on stopping the West Road. He wants to see transit expanded radically. He supports slowing the city's growth, while acknowledging that zero growth isn't a realistic option. While he supports the present smoking bylaw, he also champions freedom of choice in most instances. While some of his more grandiose plans, especially around transit, will likely run up against the cold reality of available funds, I'm a believer in electing people with huge plans in the hopes that they'll achieve ten percent of them. Beyond that, I happen to know that he doesn't even want the job, and is running solely out of a sense of duty. It pains me to see opponents of the West Road looking at Mr. Chalifoux, who ran against it last time, when a better option is available.
So there's my Council: Dave Burkhart for mayor, and Frances Badrock, Matt Boiko, Al Henry, Neil Korotash, Curtis Krenbrenk, and Bob Russell as Councillors.
My prediction as to what I'll actually get: Paul Chalifoux for Mayor (with Richard Plain running a close second and nobody else even close), with Matt Boiko, Len Bracko, Nolan Crouse, Randy Duguay, Lorie Garritty, and Neil Korotash on Council (with Christine Brown and Bob Russell nipping at their heels, James Burrows and Michael Cooper not too far back, and nobody else even close). Sigh.
Vote today, y'all.
|
St. Albert municipal politics, no less. More specifically, how I'm voting in tomorrow's election.
(This post will only make sense to people who already have some degree of familiarity with the candidates running. If you lack such familiarity, and for some reason wish to read this post anyway, I suggest you check out my St. Albert Election Recap first.)
I'll start with the choices for Councillor. There will be twenty-one choices on the ballot, of which I will be voting for six. Starting with some process of elimination is probably the easiest way to proceed.
The easiest elimination of all goes to Jerry Voss. Not that Mr. Voss would make a bad Councillor. In fact, he might make a great Councillor - I really know very little about him. But he's announced that he no longer wants the job, so I'll not be forcing it upon him.
Only slightly harder to reject are James Burrows, Michael Cooper, and Stanley Haroun, because none of the three answered the eleven simple questions I sent them at the beginning of the campaign. Mind you, Mr. Haroun's probably the only one who actually lost anything by not doing so, since Mr. Burrows and Mr. Cooper were pretty well off of my list from the get-go. Mr. Burrows has been mediocre as an alderman, breaking even the very modest promise that got him elected, a plebiscite on the West Road. A deservedly (and soundly) defeated candidate in the 1998 election who got in in 2001 almost exclusively on the strength of an endorsement from the shadowy and nefarious S.E.N.S.I.B.L.E. Choice lobby group, Mr. Burrows has been largely ineffective since taking office. Mr. Cooper, for his part, it a dogmatic twit. His "commentary" on federal issues has consisted entirely of spouting the platform of his favourite candidate, generally Stockwell Day. He has said nothing of substance in the municipal campaign, and richly deserves the defeat coming to him.
Also not responding to my questions were Brian Kendrick and Ben van de Walle, though they had better excuses: not having e-mail addresses, they never actually received them (Curtis Krenbrenk also lacks an e-mail address, but he was willing to respond to my questions in writing - more on him later). I was also unable to arrange a phone conversation with either. Mr. van de Walle is easy to reject, since his entire platform consisted of securing "an adequate supply of land for the next twenty years". Seriously. Every question he was asked somehow got connected to an adequate supply of land (which, fortunately, he refrained from describing as lebensraum). This wouldn't be quite so bad if St. Albert was not already in the midst of proceedings to - gasp! - secure an adequate supply of land for the next twenty years. Mr. van de Walle's major campaign tactic of standing by the Newman Theological College with a big banner waving at passing cars also did little to impress me. Mr. Kendrick was a little tougher to reject, and I considered voting for him for a time for his blunt manner head on approach to issues. Eventually, however, I concluded that what little I knew of his plans was bunk. Beyond that, he failed to answer many of the questions posed of him by the St. Albert Gazette.
Len Bracko did respond to my questions but, as with Mr. Burrows, his record on Council has been enough to convince me that he doesn't deserve my vote (and I voted for him last time). In a one-issue campaign, he was elected promising to build Ray Gibbon Drive instead of the West Road favoured by the rest of the candidates who were elected. He has proceeded to do precisely fuck all in to push this agenda. He is not identified with any substantive initiatives, and has allowed himself to be pushed around on most controversial ones. After voting for him provincially twice and municipally once, Len Bracko's not getting my vote this election.
Into the next category of rejects fall Neil Feser and Bob Lewis, both of whom offer answers that are meagre and superficial. They agree with the status quo in almost every regard, and when they don't they offer such specific solutions as "I think [transit] is an area that we could easily get more input from the public as to what they want to see happen and then act on it as soon as possible" (Feser) and "If a no vote [on the Recreation Centre plebiscite], we must find out why it was a no vote and respond to the wishes of the electorate" (Lewis). Sorry, guys, there are too many candidates for that kind of stuff to pass muster.
Kerry Kineshanko is in a class of his own, though probably not a good one. When S.E.N.S.I.B.L.E. Choice was selecting the candidates it wished to endorse in its agenda of getting the West Road built, it selected only five aldermanic candidates rather than add Mr. Kineshanko (or Bob Coulter, another pro-Road candidate) to its list, which probably tells you most of what you need to know about him. The hell of it is, I don't even disagree with much of what he says (beyond his support for the West Road), but he comes across as grasping and amibitious (he runs in pretty well every election available to him), adversarial and histrionic ("Those in favour of amending the [smoking] bylaw are against democracy and the health of St. Albertans and in favour of special interest groups"), and unprofessional (witness his website - or, for that matter, his business's website). I cannot endorse him.
We then hit a pack of generally acceptable but unremarkable candidates: Christine Brown, Nolan Crouse, and Malcolm Parker. All three support the bulk of the work done by the incumbent Council - the West Road (even sans plebiscite), the smoking bylaw, the seeking of an injunction against the proposed Hunter Ridge development - and none of them offer any real suggestions of the previous Council's shortcomings (Mr. Crouse goes so far as to identify, as its greatest failing, that "its public image was not well-maintained"). If you like the status quo and are looking for a quiet three years in municipal politics, any of the three are acceptable, with Ms. Brown appearing to have a stronger grasp of most of the major issues than the other two.
The last candidate I outright reject - as painful as it is to do so - is Randy Duguay. Mr. Duguay has demonstrated a commitment to St. Albert, having volunteered countless hours on city commissions and with advocacy groups. He has a better understanding of the relevant issues than any other candidate who has not held public office, except maybe Matt Boiko. He has not hidden behind any vague platitudes or feel-good statements, having provided detailed answers to my questions (and he actually seemed enthusiastic to be doing so). I would be pleased to have him as one of my Councillors, except for one thing: I disagree with most of what he has to say. An early proponent of the West Road, he has not wavered in this assessment, he goes so far as to make the dubious assertion that "the previously outlined Ray Gibbon Drive proposal had. . . equivalent environmental issues as compared to the current alignment". He is, at best, lukewarm on public transit, which is a key priority of mine. So, sorry Mr. Duguay - if it's any comfort to you, elections consistently show that I'm out of step with what most St. Albertans believe.
This narrows things down to eight candidates for six positions. To narrow things down further, I'll now start at the other end: identifying candidates who clearly deserve my vote.
Near the top of this list would have to be Neil Korotash (and I didn't vote for him last time around). Besides his detailed (and, as a bonus, non-patronizing) responses to my questions, he has a record of responding whenever there is public confusion surrounding any issue before Council. His support for the West Road aside (and, even there, he is the only incumbent alderman to actually keep his promise of supporting a plebiscite on the matter), he generally shares my value set, especially around affordable housing and transit. Anyway, it's nice to see a young person in politics who doesn't fit the partisan ladder-climber template filled by Mr. Cooper in St. Albert and Jung-Suk Ryu in Edmonton. In designing a follow-up to a Council with which I was generally displeased, Mr. Korotash allows me to support a shred of continuity.
Next up on my list of candidates who are getting my vote is Bob Russell. Mr. Russell is a politician's politician of the old school, with his literature showing him exiting city hall in a three piece suit and his answers to my questions including the assertion that the current Council "couldn't organize a piss up in a brewery". He's a partisan Liberal, which would be a strike against him, except that he has shown the ability to work cooperatively in a non-partisan atmosphere. Defeated in 2001 after a distinguished career in municipal politics, Mr. Russell, now well into his seventies, elected to forego retirement from political life in favour of becoming active with the Big Lake Environmental Support Society to continue working for what he believes. He has been a thorn in the side of this Council at all stops, and has earned my vote now as he did last time.
Also on the list of people making a repeat appearance among my endorsements is Matt Boiko. While Mr. Boiko seems to have decided that the fight against the West Road is lost, he at least (unlike Paul Chalifoux) retains the integrity to hold to his previous position that the choice made by Council was the wrong one. Additionally, he is among the most supportive candidates on affordable housing and transit, aiming to increase ridership rather than cut the system to conform to existing reidership. He takes a reasonable line on the rec centre, supporting a No vote but pledging to get it built as currently planned in the event of a Yes vote and, like Mr. Russell, supports a libertarian-ish stance on the smoking bylaw, which appeals to me. His rather churlish and inaccurate assertion that "this council has done nothing positive or productive for the City of St. Albert" aside, Matt Boiko is again one of the best six candidates on the ballot.
Al Henry's something of an enigma (he's also a neighbour of mine, so I might be biased in his favour). While he has a Conservative Party sign up come every federal election, in his opposition to the West Road he finds himself among environmentalists and socialists, as he does in his support of an increased subsidy for public transit. He makes a lot of stunning and dubious accusations, especially surrounding the West Road, but every Council can use a maverick. He was my choice for the role in 2001, and he is again.
This leaves three candidates vying for my remaining two votes: Frances Badrock, Lorie Garritty, and Curtis Krenbrenk. Ms. Badrock and Mr. Krenbrenk are cut from generally the same cloth - passionate rather than rational, opponents of the West Road, and not all together up to speed on many of the issues facing Council. Mr. Krenbrenk edges out Ms. Badrock because of his inclusive vision, demonstrable open-mindedness, and willing to take issues head on - he says on the Smoking Bylaw that "the compromise is separate rooms with ventilation and air quality standards", while Ms. Badrock says only "if the citizens of St. Albert ask for this issue to be revisited, then Council must revisit it". Mr. Krenbrenk probably isn't qualified to be a Councillor at the present time, but I'm willing to let him grow into it.
The choice, then, comes down to this: Ms. Badrock or Mr. Garritty. I really like most of what Mr. Garritty says, as well as the balanced approach he takes to recognizing the incumbent Council's achievements and acknowledging its shortcomings. Alone among supporters of the West Road, he even admits that continually building new roads is no way to solve the city's transportation problems in the long-term, and that transit will have to figure large in future plans. The thing is, he supports to West Road, and Ms. Badrock doesn't. After thirty years, this election is likely to finally confirm the West Road as the solution to the city's transportation woes, which it isn't and never will be. The electorate has this final chance to stop it. I'm going to do my best to take it. Ms. Badrock it is.
For Mayor, Paul Chalifoux and Lynda Moffatt are easily dismissed as transparent seekers of power, willing to attempt to rewrite their own personal histories and to abandon integrity in the hopes of appealing to the largest number of voters they can. Mr. Chalifoux, defeated as mayor in 2001 over the West Road, now says that he supports the current alignment - not in a "the decision has been made, let's accept it and move on" sort of a way, but in a "this is the best alignment" sort of a way. Additionally, he's as much as said that he'd give away the farm in negotiations with Sturgeon County. Ms. Moffatt is criticizing the incumbent Council for its approach to negotiations with Sturgeon, when she voted on the prevailing side of almost all relevant votes. She's also one of the four alderman to have been elected on a promise of a road plebiscite, only to abandon it within months. There's little enough integrity in politics as it is, I'll not aggravate the problem by voting for one of these bozos.
John Smith, while a very appealing candidate in many ways with his kilt and Scottish thrift, must also be rejected. His answers to my questions simply lack the depth required of somebody hoping to be mayor. He'd likely have had my vote if he was seeking an aldermanic seat, along the same lines as Krenbrenk, but he's just not qualified for the top job.
Richard Plain's the incumbent, and actually looked like he might get my vote at first. Sure, he's pompous, arrogant, condascending, and abrasive, but a future blog entry will see me making the case for Pierre Trudeau as the greatest Canadian, so these things obviously don't bother me. Like Mr. Korotash, he attempted to keep his promise of a plebiscite on the West Road. I accept his version of things over Mr. Chalifoux's on negotiations with Sturgeon County, and trust him to stand up for the interests of St. Albert. While I haven't much cared for his voting record on Council, by nomination day I'd resigned myself to holding my nose and supporting his re-election.
Then Dave Burkhart came along, espousing pretty well all of what I believe. He would put top priority on stopping the West Road. He wants to see transit expanded radically. He supports slowing the city's growth, while acknowledging that zero growth isn't a realistic option. While he supports the present smoking bylaw, he also champions freedom of choice in most instances. While some of his more grandiose plans, especially around transit, will likely run up against the cold reality of available funds, I'm a believer in electing people with huge plans in the hopes that they'll achieve ten percent of them. Beyond that, I happen to know that he doesn't even want the job, and is running solely out of a sense of duty. It pains me to see opponents of the West Road looking at Mr. Chalifoux, who ran against it last time, when a better option is available.
So there's my Council: Dave Burkhart for mayor, and Frances Badrock, Matt Boiko, Al Henry, Neil Korotash, Curtis Krenbrenk, and Bob Russell as Councillors.
My prediction as to what I'll actually get: Paul Chalifoux for Mayor (with Richard Plain running a close second and nobody else even close), with Matt Boiko, Len Bracko, Nolan Crouse, Randy Duguay, Lorie Garritty, and Neil Korotash on Council (with Christine Brown and Bob Russell nipping at their heels, James Burrows and Michael Cooper not too far back, and nobody else even close). Sigh.
Vote today, y'all.
