Remedies for a Record Number of Council Candidates
- allardkg
- Oct 17
- 3 min read
Voters have expressed frustration with the number of candidates in this election. I share their frustration. How does a person wade through 39 council candidates, never mind the 6 for mayor and the numerous school board candidates? The sheer number is overwhelming. A lot of people have given up even trying which leaves a lot of good candidates in the dust.
How do we address the huge number of candidates? Here are some options.
Filing Fees
Medicine Hat has no filing fees, only a requirement to collect 25 signatures. Some people have suggested we start charging a filing fee.
Running for office is expensive enough; a filing fee means that it may eliminate those of modest means.
To charge a filing fee will mean adminstration costs.
Those of us who don't have much know how to conserve money, we are unable to spend money we don’t have. We know how to improvise, to make things work without spending a lot of money. I think it is pretty safe to say that most of the current candidates can afford a filing fee. I cannot see a filing fee as helping much.
Wards
Drawbacks
Having wards would mean more administrative costs.
Having wards can pit different parts of the city against each other.
Benefits
People would know which council member(s) would represent them.
There would be fewer candidates per ward, it would be easier to learn about the candidates.
I wrote this article over 4 years ago Ward System or at Large
Term Limits
I think 2-3 terms is enough for Council Members. If they cannot accomplish what they wanted to in 2-3 terms then they can pass the torch to somone else who can continue their vision. If their vision is without merit then they need to move over for someone else with fresh ideas.
Long serving council members don't ask as many questions. New members ask questions and not always satisfied with "this how we've always done it".
Right now we have two candidates that would be eliminated with the 3 term limit A two term limit would eliminate two more. It would not have much of an effect on this election.
I do agree with the following adage
Politicians Are Like Diapers They Should Be Changed Frequently And For The Same Reason
Full Time Council Members
This alone would eliminate a lot of candidates including the ones who are in it for their own personal advancement - let’s be honest - being on council gains you entry to a lot of doors. You have access to major players that many other people do not get. That benefit is certainly attractive to business owners.
Council members would have more time to respond to residents. They could even be required to have a certain number of office hours per week.
Council members would have more time to read material and attend more committee meetings so they are not playing catch up at the horseshoe.
Council members would have more time to have regular town halls to address resident concerns before they get out of hand.
Council members would have more time to meet with investors.
Council members would have more time to promote our city.
Council members would have more time to report to the residents when they attend conferences. Right now we get no reports on what they did, what they learned, who they spoke with...
Council members would have a better work/life balance instead of trying to shoehorn their council duties in with their day job and family obligations. Councillor Hirsch cited the demands of his day job in his announcment to not run for re-election.
Council and committee meetings could be held during the day which means paying less overtime for staff that must stay late. Nobody makes good decisions at 11pm. It also might help attract workers if they know they will not have to stay until 11pm on a regular basis and then be expected to be at work the next morning. When our Senior Administration has to stay until 11pm it means they have either put in a 14-½ hr day or they stayed out of the office until later in the day.
Comments