City of Lethbridge Alderman – (One Position)

COFFMAN, Jeffrey: 37.36%, 3,304

SWITZER, Lea: 15.41%, 1,363

MCCREA, George R.: 11.48%, 1,015

BOORA, Bal: 10.68%, 944

TRATCH, Ken: 876, 9,91%

HYGGEN, Blaine Eddy: 8.72%, 771

GALLOWAY, Wade: 2.68%, 237

ADENIYI, Kay: 2.61%, 231

LAYTON, Kevin: 0.81%, 72

HOEG, Rod J.: 0.34%, 30

Voter Turnout 12.95%

8,849 Ballots Cast

Dianne Nemeth Returning Officer for the City of Lethbridge

Voting day for poli junkies like myself is always filled with a certain tense excitement. The outcome, although sometimes predictable, is never certain. Upsets happen and underdogs come in first.

We have ten candidates vying for one position. A position that is going to hard to fill. The comparisons that will be drawn are inevitable. Outside of that even, it is difficult to join a team already formed with a vision.

Looking at the race there are 4 serious contenders here: Jeffrey Coffman, Lea Switzer, Wade Galloway and George McCrea. Tratch and Hyggen come up quick there, but after the Cornerstone scandal it doesn’t look good for Tratch. Hyggen always does well, but not enough has been gained to push him ahead.

Coffman is the clear favourite – his 213 vote loss last election gives him an edge no one else can take. Switzer preformed well and was a strong candidate for many, though her limited time meant a limited public profile. Galloway and McCrea are new, so they will get some support. Lethbridge is thirsty for change, superficial as it is, and new council members are getting a great deal of support.

The biggest problem will be the turnout today. With a projected temperature at -30 degrees with the wind chill, many will be deterred from going out. There are only six polling stations this time around, click here for the complete list.

This is an important time; not just for Lethbridge, but for the world. Countries are turned upside down to earn a right that we enjoy so liberally here at home. Yes, it is your right not to vote but is it the right thing to do? To not even bother to go to the station and spoil a ballot. Submit a protest vote if you hate/don’t care about the system that much, but at least let your voice be counted.

The upheaval in Edmonton, and around the world proves at least one thing: democracy matters. It is the difference between living and dying for some people, and it is worth the fight.

Brave the cold today, go out and cast a ballot for that lone seat in our municipal government, for no other reason than because you can.

The forum was sparsely attended, which isn’t all that surprising as there had been two previous, well attended forums, and two meet and greets – giving voters ample opportunity to decide who they want to fill the seat. As well, the advance polls saw record turn-out, and hopefully no one is under the misguided impression that the record voter turn-out for advance polls indicates a record turn-out in general.

Coffman, Galloway, Tratch, McCrea, and Boora were the strongest by far. Switzer has clearly lost some of that mojo seen in the first debate held by SACPA as she stumbled over her answers and didn’t seem to say much despite how many words she used. Layton did well, but was unable to debate finer points on most issues. Coffman came out as the most knowledgeable. It is really too bad Galloway chose to run against Coffman or visa versa – they would make a great campaign team and together could do effect some real change here. Adeniyi was not in attendance due to a commitment conflict.

When the election results are in, what will be telling is who got out those advance votes. Judging by leads in the forums and from word about town Jeff Coffman, Ken Tratch, and Wade Galloway are strong contenders. Many are discounting Tratch but people like to recognize the name they are voting for, and Tratch does have community support.

Galloway has some buzz around him, and if last night’s forum is an indication, he knows of which he speaks. He stayed true to the issues and presented a knowledgeable view-point when he spoke. He also seemed to gain momentum with those in attendance. However, is it volume or quantity? If he can engage the youth to vote in the same way he engages his motley crew of skateboarders Lethbridge might just see an upset.

Coffman is the obvious favourite here, coming in just 230 votes shy of winning the 8th seat in the general election. The question here is still what prevented him from capturing those votes? He managed to beat out 4 incumbents with his vote share, but three surpassed him (though in the case of Wickersham – not by much). He is intelligent, articulate, and last night showed he isn’t afraid to let every word count. While most candidates tried to cram all their thoughts into one answer, Coffman spoke with measured grace. I truthfully cannot say the same for some others.

The general introductions were good, people seemed relatively at ease and despite some stumbles everyone presented their platforms well. The question period had the lows and highs though. Some candidates – Galloway, Coffman and Tratch, were able to answer clearly and articulately, even if the questions wasn’t presented as such.

My biggest issue was with the media panel who seemed to be unprepared and disconnected from issues. I heard one question from one media member that made sense and wasn’t based on personal opinion. The rest were non-sensical at best, and pandering to a candidate at worst.

Not to call out the media brethren, but I always seem to expect more than what precedence has provided. It would be nice to see people up there who understood the issues – maybe the city council beat reporter instead of the news editor, just a thought.

Truthfully, there isn’t a whole lot to report on. The questions were predictable and hammered the same points that have been brought forward time and time again. The platforms were re-hashed and the performances by the candidates were expected.

To sum it up, the process of gearing up for this forum likely did not justify the outcome for most.

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT

JANUARY 22, 2011

Lethbridge, AB – On January 22, 2011, 635 residents voted at the second day of Advance Voting for the By-Election.  That means a total of 1,436 residents have now voted, an increase of 55% from the first two days of Advance Voting at the 2010 Municipal Election.

All eligible voters in the City of Lethbridge have the option to vote in advance, regardless of whether or not they are in the City on By-Election Day.  The Advance Voting Station will is located at City Hall, 910 – 4^th Avenue South, Culver City Room, 1^st Floor (wheelchair accessible) and will take place on Friday, January 28, 2011.

NEWS RELEASE

JANUARY 19, 2011

Municipal election advance vote opens Friday, January 21, 2011

Lethbridge, AB – Residents will have their first opportunity to vote at the Advance Voting Station on Friday, January 21^st between 10 a.m. and 8 p.m.

All eligible voters in the City of Lethbridge have the option to vote in advance, regardless of whether or not they are in the City on By-Election Day.  The Advance Voting Station will be located at City Hall at  910 – 4^th Avenue South in Culver City Room ( First Floor and wheelchair accessible and will take place on:

For More information Contact:
Dianne Nemeth, Returning Officer

Telephone:  403-320-3821

Email:  election@lethbridge.ca

Currently, the Alberta elections act does not allow e-voting, which should come as no surprise. Alberta has an interesting past of testing out new voting methods  - such as the less than inspiring results of the Alberta Liberal Party leadership convention telephone vote system (or UMV for all you cool kids out there).

That being said, and as the above linked to article points out, it was not the technology that failed the voters, but the structure  of the voting system itself. Which leads me to my next point – is Lethbridge ready for an internet voting system?

In a small city, one without wards, a simple ballot system where one checks off eight boxes for council and one for mayor, makes it fairly self-explanatory. Would they be able to put a system in place that mimics this or would technological error get the better of the system? Another issue is the City of Lethbridge’s apparent lack technological investment. Case in point – it’s not the worst website I have ever seen, but it could do with a little modernity.

I am almost always in favour of using technology to ease a burden, and in a city where voter turnout hovers at 30% despite a long list of candidates, anything to make it easier makes me happy.

So, why not? If the City can afford a secure on-line voting format that allows people to vote from home, work, their mobile device, then sure, right? I mean, it’s not like anyone has to expend any effort that way. People could just vote in groups, en masse. Parent could make sure their young adult children vote the “right” way, and a spouse could just click for both partners. It happens anyway, it is not like we really expect people to think for themselves.

Now, I know I am taking a rather pointed view here, and could possibly be extending the circumstances a little far, but these are things to consider when we look at changing the way we vote. I am personally a big fan of my private little voting station. I like knowing that no one really knows who I voted for, and the speculation could go on and on.

I also like knowing that an 18-year-old, long sheltered under a parents wing can exercise some sort of democratic freedom in that little tri-fold.

I do like the idea of voting being brought to the voters, and that physical challenges no longer provides an obstacle. I like that it would be a cheaper delivery and that it would eliminate the barriers students, seniors, the disabled, and the house bound face.

Lastly, I like that it uses a powerful democratic machine for something fundamentally democratic.

The list of pros and cons is long, and I am clearly still waffling, but most of all, I like that we are having this conversation. It calls attention to more than just the logistics of voting, but also the value of voting. Something we seem to have lost sight of.

The crowd was, the put it nicely, uninspired. I saw little of the excitement, fever, and passion that were exhibited in the 2010 general election. The candidates released good talking points, and outlined their platforms well, but the crowd had heard it all before. With only one newcomer present, George McCrea, there was not a whole lot new to listen to.

Now, in fairness I was in head-down-type-out mode last night so there may have been some physical nuances I missed, but the overall tone had a “wait and see” air to it.

The break between campaigns helped some candidates though, like Kevin Layton and Lea Switzer who improved their confidence and their platform points. Switzer came out last night a-swinging, with a very aggressive attitude towards the other candidates and their platforms. As they say in the reality TV, she clearly isn’t here to make friends.

Jeffrey Coffman and Ken Tratch also came out strong, right up there with Switzer and given that these three have the strongest experience behind them, it will be interesting to see their campaigns. Layton surprised many with his (for the most part) greatly improved and much more articulate talking points, and he has clearly broadened out his platform.

Overall, the evening bodes for a predictable by-election voter outcome. Although the room was full, there was no busting at the seams as seen in the 2010 election forums. The crowd was attentive and asked intelligible questions, though there was no one direction they seemed to be interested in leading this blogger to think this will be a multi-issue by-election and very much dependent on who can get out the vote, not just get the votes.

However, all this being said, there are still quite a few forums to go.

So far, I see all but Wade Galloway are here, but we expected that, didn’t we?

7:00 pm – Start with the forum, and remarks from the library.

7:04 pm – Intro of Candidates. Moderated by Bob Campbell.

Format is: opening statement for 2 minutes, followed by pre-selected questions with three rebuttal cards per candidate, followed by 10 minute coffee break (mmm, coffee…). Question from the audience is after the break, 1 minute per question.

7:05 – Lea Switzer: “The time has come for us to pull together and stop pulling apart.” “This is my Lethbridge”. Does not support a ward system, city reserve should not be used for tax relief, pay as you go, unfiltered info, no more former aldermen on council, improve info sharing, keeping tax increase to inflation, issues important to “you” are important to “me”, must be able to trust me, not an arm chair philosopher or letter writer – a doer. Not looking for a mission, and have not been voted out of office, past experience. “Lethbridge is the gem of southern AB, family centred, smart, active…”

7: 08 – Rod Hoeg: “play it by ear”, Fast learner, now used to talking about people, doesn’t have experience, but is a fast learner. “Not born with the gift of gab, but a thinker and a doer.” Available 24/7. Here for the people. “Go against the administration if they’re not getting things done.”

7:10 – George McCrea: “I’m the newbie”, promise to work hard as in the last three years, lots of snow jokes, not a yes man, “spend long hours researching”, accountability by council and all employees of Lethbridge. Legal and moral accountability, must be seen to be honest, fair and hard working. “Not just protecting one’s political backside.” Be responsible, budget like we budget at home. Protect seniors, ensure their retirement fears are allied, found savings passed to tax payers. Does not believe in deferral tax system.

7:13 – Kay Adeniyi: Ran for mayor in 2010 election, a lot of people that came across had a scared look and recommend that Kay “work through the process.” Elected in student councils in High River and George Brown council in Toronto. Looking for change, and “shake the city hall up a bit” “Dedicated myself on events I run annually in Lethbridge that bring people to Lethbridge.” Platform on housing, public transit, post-graduate job incentives, bring change and a different perspective.”

7:16 – Ken Tratch: “setting all emotions aside, this is about electing one alderman.” “Experience does matter, and I have the experience that allows me to step into the job day one after the election.” “I am not your status quo individual.” Looks for new ideas, change, progress… Has respect of majority of present members on council. City council must become more engaged with a collaborative dialogue on all matters. “I have demonstrated in the past that I take my role seriously.”

7:18 – Bal Boora – “Are you getting your money worth at city hall?” New mayor and council has mandate to govern for three years. The question is who will best mix with present council. “You’re always wondering, are we getting our monies worth?” How do we compare to similar sized cities. You deserve the simple answers. “I will work with the city council to report to you in simple english how hard will does your money work.” Brings up fluoride debate, and the issue of it in the city water. Proven experience in community, money management, etc..

7:21 – Blaine Hyggen: Thanks all for coming out. “As a business man and father, I know the value of a dollar.” Look at high taxes, the arts, transit, family recreation, infrastructure. Plan on having town halls for all citizens. (for rest of the speech see the 2010 election).

7:24 – Kevin Layton: “I need a job, I do! The most important job in the city right now is filling a vacant seat on council” Experience in accounting, in radio, in print and other media, in politics. “I know what this city needs” I ask for your support if you like, if you’re unsure of me, “if you hate my guts so I can prove you wrong.”

7:26 – Jeff Coffman: Makes first runner up joke. Property tax deferral program, create a ward system, investigate alt. energy programs for city and residential. Looking for experience, served on council in the mid 1990s. “We asked questions, we challenged, we fought… we worked in a dynamic that moved the city forward.” Has the knowledge – works as a instructor at the U of L in muni. gov’t. Accountable to family and friends. Its about listening and learning.

7: 28 – Question period

1. Bicycle paths important?

Switzer: We have an excellent path system, but they’re not connected. Paths serve a number of purposes. There are infrastructure costs of residential areas that are common to other cities. Other cities have an automatic inclusion of bike paths. Should be incorporated in all future plans – issue of year round maintenance would be interesting discussion point.

2. Third bridge, or more westside development and better public transit?

Hoeg: Been living on the westside since 1983  - have always wanted another bridge. Less of a slope and could put bicycle trail on there too. Break up congestion on Whoop-Up. Should be more industrial on the westside, though too.

Tratch: Not a rebuttal so much as more information – a third bridge for the city today, we’d have to go it alone. Increase n taxes of at least 13%. Change attitude and vehicle.

Adeniyi: Third bridge too expensive at the moment, but maybe it is something we can look at in the future. Increase ridership on the buses, and increase commercial infrastructure on the westside – we wouldn’t have density on Whoop Up.

Hyggen: Hot topic out in the community when knocking on the westside. We will need an additional bridge one day from the west to the south. We don’t need it right now if we can improve the westside.

Boora: Third bridge will add sizeable amount to the taxes. Think to the future for new development.

Hoeg: Just wanted to add onto that – “maybe I’m mistaken but the I thought the gov’t would put in a big amount of money into the bridge, sure it won’t be a problem to get the gov’t back into subsidize.”

3. Watershed important for Lethbridge, how do you feel about the clear cut logging on the area?

McCrea: Yes, I consider it important and the Q has lots of. 1998 dec. to take a large area for clear cut logging, the gov’t decision is the type of logging has been on the books for ever, the opposition position is the logging is a detriment to the environment and the watershed. Would not be in favour of the slash and burn method. (Very knowledgable)

Coffman: Impact to Leth is financially significant. The water affected makes its way to Lethbridge and we have to pull it out for water we drink, that increases costs for the water treatment plant. Important to understand relationship btw past and our drinking water.

Switzer: The issue of the damage to the ecosystem is important, and important to anyone downstream of us that uses the old man river. Need to determine fact from fiction and get together with those affected. Need to see what is happening from what might happen.

Hoeg: Worried about global warming and the change to the water level.

McCrea: Need to establish which method of clear cutting we are talking about. There are 4 methods. We do not know at this moment what type of clear cutting will be down. Wish to attain as much info as I could and make an informed decision.

Tratch: Recognition of oldman watershed is foundation of all planning. Need to work with partners and the U of L water institute to determine effect.

Boora: Worked 30 years with water. Water is life and is scarce. “Unless you create an outcry and write to the minister and the premier, it is a done deal.”

4. Should city address issue of affordable housing and its availability?

Adeniyi: City isn’t responsible on its own to build affordable homes, need to lobby prov. gov’t to build affordable homes. Need to lobby to generate money to build affordable homes in Lethbridge.

Layton: Served for 3 yrs on the Lethbridge housing authority board  - the no. 1 issue is the perception of bias. The truth is there is nothing is available. Need to let home owners educated so they know they can be subsidized for low income housing.

5. Favour helping fund new exhibition park centre?

Tratch: A moot question – those following the CIP see that the city is partnering for upgrades and reconstruction to the exhibition park – 50% of the funding. Spending more money to re-locate would be a big mistake at this time. The city isn’t using money of its own, this is grant money – this is a bonafide project and meets the conditions of the grant.

Boora: I understand the exhibition assoc. is a regional identity, not a city identity. Had a history of perceiving prov. and fed. money. Depending on if prov. and fed. $$ is available.

6. Do you believe in urban sprawl or more housing developments downtown?

Boora: Dilemma faced by all cities, not just Lethbridge. So long as people want a single home with a backyard there will be pressure to grow. Should grow existing westside – put commercial core and residence built up on top.

Adeniyi: Have full details on how we should see Lethbridge grow. Propose multi use development – use one floor for retail and the top for residential. Have it everywhere in Lethbridge – but build the core.

7. Tax differed policy for seniors to stay in their home longer?

Hyggen: “Yes, I would be in favour of helping seniors to stay in their houses as long as possible.” We should continually help our seniors, and not just on deferring taxes.

Layton: should use Toronto program (run by the gov’t) – if you are a senior and need upgrades to your home to help out, they get it. If they need help to be more mobile, lets give it to them.

Coffman: initiated this issue in the Oct. election. Not s new program – going on in the states – 25 states have started it. See the city of Brampton for excellent precedent.

Switzer: Interesting process, Oshawa and Ottawa are using it. Dependent on fixed low-income seniors and disabled people. The increase in tax is put against the equity in your home, the maximum in Ottawa is 40% against the value of that home… (ran out of time).

8. Remove fluoride in water?

Layton: Yes. As far as fluoride, no.

Hyggen: Reading a lot regarding this lately, and how harmful it actually is, even at the current levels we have in our city water.

(this seems to be a hot topic for this crowd)

9. Should we penalize people for excess garbage?

Coffman: should have curb side pick-up for recyclable. Penalizing people doesn’t change the way people work. Having curb side pick-up encourages people to recycle, alternate pick-up for recycling and waste. Divert waste from the landfill is the ultimate goal. Reward people with curb side.

Layton: For those that do not drive, recycling is an issue. Need curbside – in Ottawa it is alternating pick-up.

Hoeg: Don’t think people should be penalized, should be reward for recycling. Put a deduction on their garbage if they recycle.

8:02 – COFFEE BREAK!

Gossip: Rajko Dodic is here. I should ask him who is voting for.

Update: I chickened out from asking Dodic.

8:12 – and we’re back.

Questions from the audience.

1. To Switzer – Would you be prepared to do to inform the city about the potenital dangers of fracking?

Switzer: Gasland – didn’t see it but know about it second hand. Process of pushing gas through layers of soil and rock and make it effervesce – creates pollution and destroys water table. Concern of the reserve. Fracking wells outside the airport around Lethbridge. Reality is the water quality becomes useable.

Boora: This process is called hydrolic fracking – used all over N.A. Read an article by local prof. in th eLethbrdge herald and says it is used all over the world.

Switzer: Just b/c it is used all over the world doesn’t make it safe.

2.  To Coffman: What point will this no longer be a smaller community if we keep encouraging people to come here? What is the limit of this expansion plan?

Coffman: Not certain of limit by economic Lethbridge, demonstrates a couple of issues though. More people who come to the city, we assume they will be home owners – the system doesn’t work the way the hypotheticals are supposed to. This is about long term planning and service planning. Need smart growth and encourage more development.

Tratch: Econ. Develop is funded by City of Lethbridge – done some great things. Need to develop more long term planning for what EDL is marketing for.

McCrea: 130 000 – number bandied about by EDL.

3. (From Tom Cain from Greensence) To Tratch: What happened to community input for the development plan.

Tratch: Implementation strategy needs public input, consultative process with whole community is very important, something I feel strongly about.

Switzer: Consultative process is part of the problem. Need effect process, effect debate. Need info from public before plans are made. Clear there is a disconnent – a direct result of people on council not communicating. “Council is servant of public, admin is servant of council.”

4. (From Blake Babki, FYI) To Tratch: Why did you never question the practise of loaning tax money and paying it back at a lower rate? How will this experience help us?

Tratch: Not wholey prepared for this one, I didn’t ask the Q b/c I didn’t know it was a real issue in the community. Need to listen to the community better so we understand the concerns. “I believe we need to re-examine the pay as you go policy and the way we use the money by borrowing that money and charging interest.”

Boora: When you have the money and you lend it to yourself, and charge interest, that I don’t understand. If we have the money in reserve, why are we paying interest on that and charging interest to our tax payers I don’t understand.

McCrea – came into existence in 1991 – the intent was is you have surplus money then bank it. Some point you can build that $10 million leisure centre for nothing b/c the money was already there. Pay as you go program needs to be looked at and revised.

5. To Coffman. What efforts will it be to bring in the distrct as partners with Exhibition Park?

Coffman: As it stands right now, the exhibition park is needed to be shared better. Need to open dialouge with the county and it should be an ongoing process.

Layton: Later in the week, will be showed a spot near with airport that it could be moved too. Would hate to see heritage building moved, but needs to be fixed or rebuilt. Whatever is the more economical – numbers will have to be crunched.

Tratch: Exhibition Park and the city is already partnering to renovate. The park board is a separate entity and they make decisions on their own. Need to invite partners to help with the costs. Convo’s with the county – they often complain they just don’t have the dollars.

6. City of Lethbridge has removed Enviro. manager twice – only contact on there hasn’t worked for a year. To Coffman – do you support enviro council or manager for the city of Lethbridge?

Coffman: Yes and yes to an environment advisory council and a manager.

Boora: We need someone to lead the city here.

Tratch: “Firmly” support a council and manager here in the city.  We see the effects of the enviro. on our world – look at the current climate conditions.

McCrea: What I would like to see is take a look at the town of Cochrane is doing, develop something that would fit Lethbridge. Good place to start.

7. To Switzer: What should the city do to encourgae downtown re-development?

Switzer: Do need to encourage more downtown residential, mid and high end. A multi level/development building concept. Considerable expansion with current infrastructure projects – developments vital to bring people to core. In support of bringing middle and high residential capacity.

Adeniyi: Important to have a vibrant downtown core. We need more people living downtown. More multi-use development. Better public transportation.

Layton: This was an issue three year ago – happened to be living downtown. We need to remember that not everyone is mobile for high rises.

Hygeen: Impressed from what we have – need to protect our heritage more and keep what we have. Unfortunately, we have decided to move and destroy and get rid of the heritage that we had.

8. (Former council members in the 1980′s) To Tratch: High taxation – supports internal city hall staffing. What is your plan?

Tratch: Not sure why we have high staff numbers, do know we have to do something about this. City Alderman and manager recognize that it is an issue – need a status quo budget. Will be pressures on employee benefits and salaries. Could see a 2% increase in taxes that we will need to keep staff budgets and raises, and benefits up to par.

Switzer: In these economic times, when companies and individuals are pulling in the city is growing and growing – it is not sustainable. Need to be more efficient and develop more stream lined process’. Doesn’t make sense to me the pressure and growth the personal is going in.

Layton: Streamlining is a top notch idea, b/c we don’t see where our money is going and to make sure it is being used properly. Things have got to change from the top down to the bottom.

Huggen: Times have changed over 20 years – one of my business I went from 12 to 4. If there are other companies with hiring freezes, why is the city doing more and more hiring.

9. To Bal Boora: Can you elaborate on your platform of water fluoridation?

Boora: in 1974 we implemented this policy by plebiscite. For the sake of my children, I looked into fluoridation and now I have seen the benefits have been overstated and now many people are suffering. I think we need more debate on this policy before we continue it.

Hoeg: Calgary is going through the same issue – and I think fluoride is good for you. Lower the amount and do studies and see what happens from there.

Switzer: I’ve been following this debate in Calgary – this debate has been ongoing in the Calgary Herald. The rhetoric on both sides is trying to attack each other’s science. Comments on the positive effects of fluoride for children’s teeth – take something out of the water that has no proven ill effects. Caught btw two sides.

10. To McCrea: If there came up a question that required scientific input – how would you feel about dealing with scientific backgrounds?

McCrea: “Always been a seeker of information.” Attempt to get info from all sources on both sides of the issue. Would relay on science to inform my opinion on issues.

11. To Tratch: You endorse a great deal of spending for council, are we looking forward to the same treatment?

Tratch: Has the 2011 to 2020 CIP program and the money spent in front of them. Turns the Q around to the question person about who and what would he vote on. Came from funding other than the pay as you go, from the prov. and the fed. gov’t. Things that the muni tax payers haven’t paid for. Explains the MSI (Muni. school tax) – some back and forth on tax issues.

12. To McCrea: Environmental management group – would you support paying $200 000.00 for the group OVER a $600 000.00 sports clock for the Enmax centre?

McCrea: provided that it was put forward in a budget plan, with goals… looking to stand back for a year and see what other communities are doing and see what resources they have and we have.

Hoeg: “I would like to see what the public wants for any major expenditure.”

Hyggen: “Looking at people the city has hired, the $200 000.00 seems not too much given the extra people the city has hired without really needing them.”

Well, that is it for the first public forum folks. Good discussion, and great questions. Thoughts coming after a period of rest for these prehensile digits of mine.

As with every questionnaire, some candidates were unable to respond in time. We apologize for that inconvenience, but we have tried our best to set it up so it was a blind submission, to encourage thoughtful and personal responses.

The site was designed so that candidates could log in on their own, thus eliminating a potential middle man disaster and minimize chance of accusation of tampering.

Elect Lethbridge, and Lethbridge Accountability thank all candidates who took the time to respond, and we are all looking forward to the comments that will likely ensue.

Adenyi (who did not suit up for this nomination round) and Hyggen have an early start with the coverage given by the Herald in this morning’s paper, but Coffman’s 9th place position, and Wade Galloway’s controversial background puts them in good positions to capitalize on name recognition.

Though there will be no shortage of contenders in that competition. Lea Switzer, Bal Boora, and Ken Tratch (who, just to be clear, did sit on council previously but DID NOT win a seat in the 2010 council election and this is not being “re-elected”) are no strangers to the political game and both Kevin Layton and  Blaine Hyggen have run in previous council elections. McCrea, a newcomer alongside Galloway, is new to the municipal election game but a very active member of the community.

Despite rumours circulated by himself, Chris Spearman did not put his name forward, much to the disappointment of many I presume.