Policy Development and ‘Old’ Website Content
I am thrilled with the number of people who are yearning to see more detailed policies from me. My favourite part of the last two elections has been the way the whole city comes together to take stock of how far we’ve come, and (hopefully) coalesce around where to go next. Candidate platforms shape that debate, but so does hearing from citizens, which all candidates are doing now. So, for now, it’s still BBQ and parade season.
In time, I’ll reveal policy and a detailed platform based on my vision, values and accomplishments. However, for the genuine policy nerds out there: if you’re passionate about a particular specific policy area, I’d love for you to share your views with me at electdon@doniveson.ca. I’m always seeking out new opinions and arguments to challenge my own thinking and force me to consider other perspectives. Richard Anderson over at Northlands often says, ‘none of us is as smart as all of us’ which I quite like — so the more feedback the better.
Meanwhile, I’m currently drafting another post like the well-received “Talus Done, Lucy, Climate Change and More: Twitter Questions Meriting Longer Answers” so feel free to ask questions in the comments sections here, on Twitter or Facebook, and I may address them in the next post.
Some people have wondered about all the ‘old’ content on this website (archived in categories on the right side). These posts represent my full and unabridged thinking and my record on the most controversial and complex issues Council has grappled with, from the arena to the airport, and from neighbourhood street and sidewalk reconstruction to smarter planning.
After I was elected in 2007, I decided to continue using the blog I started during that election to communicate with my constituents. It has allowed me to show my work on certain issues and to discuss my reasoning for certain votes. It has also given me an opportunity for long-form public debate in the comments section from time to time. For me, this site is an important act of transparency and accessibility—even down to including the critical comments.
To be up front, comments are moderated. We generally approve all comments, even the critical ones, but will reject anything that is defamatory, racist, sexist, homophobic or otherwise hateful (we’ve only ever rejected three out nearly 1000 comments made). As of this election, we’re also respectfully declining to post comments from other candidates (in all races) if we feel they are blatantly campaigning in the comments section—there are plenty of public forums for that sort of thing.
And, as it has always said at the bottom of the page, “No tax dollars were harmed in the making of this site.”
Happy summer reading!
4 thoughts on “Policy Development and ‘Old’ Website Content”
Comments are closed.
I like what Olds is doing with internet access for its citizens. Libraries are a service that ensures free and open access to information for book-reading citizens. Given the corporate threats to open access to the internet, I consider an open access service provided by the City for all citizens at cost as the 21st century equivalent of our superb library.
With respect to urban sprawl, I’d like to see a strong statement from ANY of the mayoral candidates that unabated urban sprawl is not financially viable over the long-term.
The fact of the matter is that it leads to real inefficiencies in the provision and maintenance of all manner of services; transit, infrastructure, policing, and firefighting, to name just an obvious few. IF we’re going to insist on running governments like businesses (a proposition I reject, by the way: businesses don’t have to incorporate long-term planning the way governments “should”), it seems to me that sound business practice would be to eliminate or reduce operational inefficiencies.
I appreciate that such a statement might be rejected by many developers, who after all seem to finance most civic electoral campaigns, but I think they might be mollified if there was an incentive program for designing and building appropriate in-fill housing and commercial spaces.
I also think that taxing all those surface parking lots in the central core in accordance with the real “potential” value of that land would do much to encourage in-fill development
I would like to draw everyone’s attention to the following links, which highlight the issues that led to the “bankruptcy” of Detroit, compared to the relative success of Pittsburgh. http://dc.streetsblog.org/2013/07/22/how-sprawl-got-detroit-into-this-mess/ and http://dc.streetsblog.org/2013/07/22/how-sprawl-got-detroit-into-this-mess/
I think these examples are instructive, and useful to consider in the development of public policies and processes to regulate urban sprawl.
This is not a major policy issue, but it is something important to me, my family, and friends.
When I ride my bicycle, many motorists yell at me…: a lot of “get off the road”, but recently I’ve also been told “you’re not supposed to take up the middle of the lane”, which is incorrect. (I live in Old Strathcona: I usually avoid 82nd/Whyte because it can get scary, but these rude comments from motorists are actually more common when on less-busy avenues like 83rd.)
While on the long-term-grand-scale I support the increased bike lanes of The Bicycle Transportation Plan, in the short-term, I feel our city could benefit from further campaigns (perhaps road-side signage) toward increasing public understanding of the already existing policies governing bicycles on city streets. I just want us all the feel safe with and confident in the persons with whom we share the road, without having to yell at each other.
Take Care.
Perhaps a continuing crackdown on the little punks exploiting the 50 centimeter rule to ride BMX bikes up and down Whyte avenue sidewalks at very high speeds! Thank You.