Municipal Election 2010

Open Thread: Hamilton Municipal Election

Election day is finally upon us. We want to hear what you think about it.

By RTH Staff
Published October 25, 2010

Election day for Hamilton has finally arrived. After 26 articles, 34 blog entries, eleven questions posed to candidates, and 641 responses from those candidates, we've done all we can.

Now it's up to you to take all the information on the candidates and the issues and cast your vote for the mayor and council you think can best take us through the next four years.

The comments for this article are an open thread to share your thoughts on election day. All we ask, as always, is that everyone keep their comments civil, respectful and constructive. No personal insults, no defamation, no trolling: let's demonstrate the decorum we expect from our elected representatives.

Also, don't forget to drop into the Ceilidh House tonight to celebrate (or commiserate) as you raise a glass with Raise the Hammer.

129 Comments

View Comments: Nested | Flat

Read Comments

[ - ]

By Fred Street (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 11:09:23

It's good to be humble, but "bog entries" sounds like scatological self-deprecation.

Thanks to RTH contributors and commentors. It's been an invigorating marathon.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By MattM (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 11:13:59

Mayor Fred and Norm Bulbrook for me. I admit that mayor is a tough decision and I was split between Fred and Bob for the past few weeks, but Bob's recent comments regarding light rail turned me off and confirmed my vote for Fred.

Ward 4 councilor wasn't an incredibly difficult decision for me. After the disaster that is "The Centre on Barton", there is no way I am throwing my support behind Sam. I believe he betrayed and lied to his constituents on that project and it disgusts me greatly, being a pedestrian and not a driver. Norm doesn't really grab my attention, that one is more of an "anybody but Sam" vote, although he does seem to have at least a partially progressive stance towards most questions posed to him.

Comment edited by MattM on 2010-10-25 10:15:07

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Pxtl (registered) - website | Posted October 25, 2010 at 11:19:57

@MattM

What, you're not fond of box-stores built as a streetwall but facing away from the sidewalk?

What are you, some kinna communist?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 11:35:34

First time in my life I'm voting for 2 incumbents. Fred and McHattie.

Should be a tight race between Fred and Bob.

If Bob wins, what's the over/under on pen tosses during the 4 year term? LOL

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By MattM (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 11:38:08

What, you're not fond of box-stores built as a streetwall but facing away from the sidewalk?

While I admit the featureless stucco walls and giant signs are certainly eye catching, there's something uncomforting about taking my life into my hands just to go to get groceries at Metro. I don't even dare go back to the Food Pavilion as it requires a carefully synchronized dash across 2 busy parking lots and a drive thru lane.

I wouldn't have held Sam so accountable for that massive screw up if he didn't tout it as a pedestrian friendly, urban design when it was still a proposal. That was just a straight up lie. There is not ONE building on the entire property that is street facing or without a parking lot guarded entryway.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By lawrence (registered) - website | Posted October 25, 2010 at 11:45:53

For me, Butani has my vote in hopes of a Calgary-like upset towards true change, and Paul Tetley for Ward 3. Paul has been very involved in this Ward and I believe he will represent us well at the council table and fight for the people and business in this area. He looks to engage us like I don't believe Morelli has. He can turn this beautiful ward around - help it achieve it's true potential. Butani | Tetley

This is why I believe Mahesh would make a great leader.

Comment edited by lawrence on 2010-10-25 10:46:38

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By CaptainKirk (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 11:52:02

Mine will be a last miniute decision between Fred and Butani.

Persoanlly, I think Butani just may do more good for the city by contiuning his downtown developments. Leaning towards Fred.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By lawrence (registered) - website | Posted October 25, 2010 at 11:57:27

Whatever the outcome Captain, it's great to hear Butani is getting some serious consideration. There are so many things I admire about him, including how is not affraid to speak the truth.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Jay Parlar (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 12:00:12

McHattie all the way in ward 1. He's a great guy, and deeply involved with the community associations in his riding. He's done excellent work in his time.

Mayor is tougher, but I'll probably go with Fred.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By CaptainKirk (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 12:02:51

@ lawrence - After listening to his CHML interview on youtube, i became an instant fan as have a coupkle of others that ended up listening to the samew interview and perusing his extensive website.

A visionary that Hamilton is blessed to have. I'm wrestling with the idea that the mayor's position may stifle his effectivesness at transforming Hamilton.

I think he can lead as a developer, but demonstrating successful downtown development, he can make it desirbale for tothers to follow suit.

An impressive guy for sure!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By lawrence (registered) - website | Posted October 25, 2010 at 12:20:46

I like that there are no downscores today. Today is not about disagreeing. It's above agreeing with cicic engagement. Agreeing on everyone for having a vote.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HeavyD (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 12:36:55

Very interesting takes so far. I'm going with Dianni and Ferguson. I think they provide an approach that is amenable to moving this great city forward.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By lawrence (registered) - website | Posted October 25, 2010 at 12:41:10

I didn't know that students could both vote in their home cities, and the ones they are attending school in.

You would think if this is the case, why can't we vote for the cities we work in as well? I spend 10 hours a day including bus/train commute a day in Burlington. I don't think I follow Burlington politics enough to warrant a vote at election time, but after reading the bit about students today, it made me wonder.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Borrelli (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 12:43:16

In Ward 2 I'll be voting for Mayor Fred and Matt Jelly, and am very comfortable recommending both to other Ward 2 residents.

Despite my recent disappointment over the Aerotropolis vote, I still think that Mayor Fred is the best option among the front runners (yes, as long as we're FPTP, I'll be a committed strategic voter). If there's one thing I value in a politician this era of reactionary politics, it's consistency, and not bending to momentary public whims. Fred has shown over the past four years that he's a thoughtful, respectful and committed politician with a vision for this city that's progressive while remaining realistic.

Matt Jelly has similarly demonstrated his bona fide commitment to Ward 2 over the past few years, and has been no slouch in creating opportunities to affect change when the City has abdicated its responsibility (see Bylaw Crawl). Among a list of candidates that is overwhelmingly old, white and male, I think anyone who breaks that mold is worth a vote, and I'm confident that Matt will bring new energy and ideas to City Hall on behalf of Ward 2 constituents, so that's why he has my vote.

And if you're still looking for resources on your Ward 2 candidates, our decision matrix has had a few edits made to it (requested by candidates) and is still posted at www.myboytheriotgirl.com/ward2

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mrjanitor (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 12:43:27

Mayor-Fred Eisenberger

I have always been very neutral towards Fred until the West Harbour debating began. He impressed me with his intelligence and principals and made me suddenly take notice. After watching him in council I now understand that he does have leadership skills, he just plays them softly, subtly and with respect to others.

Ward 9-Geraldine McMullen

Geraldine responded quickly to questions with well thought out answers. I don't agree with absolutely everything in her platform but her time in the Hamilton District Labour council demonstrates the ability to work in a diverse and sometime fractured group. I have also seen Geraldine make a presentation at the USW 1005 union hall, she kept 80 hairy assed, grumpy steel workers in line... a good foreshadowing for life in council chambers!

Comment edited by mrjanitor on 2010-10-25 11:44:42

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 12:46:29

Janitor, I haven't followed the outer wards too closely, but I'm wondering - is Geraldine running a good campaign? Do you think Clark has a fight on his hands like Morelli, or do folks out that way seem to be leaning towards Clark again?

Other than Morelli- Tetley I'm not aware of too many heated ward battles at this point.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mrjanitor (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 12:57:13

Jason,

I fear that Nancy Fiorentino and Geraldine will split an anti-Clark vote. Nancy and Geraldine are both running very good campaigns. I was happy... but also disappointed to see two very well qualified women both running in the ward. I would also be happy to see Nancy win the ward, she was a little slow out of the gate due to problems with her web site and e-mail but has been hitting the neighborhoods hard at the end.

Lower Stoney Creek has lots of Clark signs, upper Stoney Creek sign are split between Geraldine and Nancy. I'm thinking this could be a fairly close 3-way race.

LOTS of DiIanni signs, as expected.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By lawrence (registered) - website | Posted October 25, 2010 at 13:03:52

Love this line MrJanitor

she kept 80 hairy assed, grumpy steel workers in line... a good foreshadowing for life in council chambers!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By hmag (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 13:06:49


Last minute election links -

http://www.new.hmag.ca/?p=1410

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By lawrence (registered) - website | Posted October 25, 2010 at 13:09:30

Thanks for sharing that, hmag.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mikeyj (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 13:31:07

Ward 2: After much deliberation, at the end mostly between the nearly identically platformed Jelly and Martinus, I'm going with the latter. It was the Cable 14 debate that finally pushed me over to Geleynse's side. Although Jelly also did perform well, Martinus seemed more capable of the balancing act that is: voicing his platform, being engaging, and remaining diplomatic enough not to alienate opposing views.

I think Ward 2 was very fortunate to have the quality of candidates we did this year... especially considering the number. I wish some of those prospects were spread out across other races, specifically the mayoral race.

Mayor: Fred'ing it. Hamilton has quantitatively improved under his leadership, however ill perceived it's been, and I just can't see that momentum carrying forward under any other candidate.

That said, I would like to have seen some more desirable challengers, the Cable 14 debate in particular was an absolute embarrassment.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 13:35:01

Whenever McHattie retires I'd love to see Jelly or Martinus (whoever loses today) run in Ward 1.

It is a shame to have them both run in Ward 2. I fear that their combined vote will be incredible, but that someone else will slide up the middle due to vote splitting.
I mean, if Jelly had kept the beard at least there would be some discernible difference between them.

Comment edited by jason on 2010-10-25 12:36:43

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By TnT (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 13:42:35

Been a Ward 3 resident for most of my life and have had Morelli as the alderman. My own personal dealings with him have been far from satisfactory. He uses bully tactics and picks on tennants in the area while sucking up to older ethnic home owners. I don't know much about Tetley and I'm sad to say he will probably get many votes on the "not Bernie" platform.

Its a shame that some like McGrimmond doesn't have wider appeal.

Voting Tetley-Eisenberger

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Ted Mitchell (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 13:46:49

I'm a bit surprised at the support for Fred here. I admire his support for West harbour, but I'm suspicious that this is a Chretien type ploy of having a finely tuned political nose rather than any kind of firm policy principles.

Fred's behaviour in the ABC fiasco was unimpressive and extremely non-committal, in the face of what I would call Evil. Many of the councilors were far more principled, and not just the 'progressive' ones.

So Bob gets my vote. The LRT thing is easily buried, as no sane man would choose developing the A line over the B line once ridership data is out. I just saw the huge articulated A line bus turning on to Highway 6 with 1 (one) passenger aboard!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By allantaylor97 (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 13:48:24

I'm just walking out the door and I still haven't decided who to vote for. Man its tough this time. The first tough one I've ever faced and I've been voting in Burlington, Stoney Creek and Hamilton municipal elections for 35 years. In the end its a case of a strategic vote or a vote on principal for a losing candidate in the mayors race. I have Tetley for ward 3 but the mayors race comes down to the big 3 being Never, never and do I really have to.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By -Hammer- (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:01:37

I voted for Fred - Say what you will of him, except for the stadium debacle (in which he admirably stood his ground) he has been nothing but a boon to this city.

Ward 2 - Martinus Geleynse - For one, it will be good to get some young blood in there. Second, his candor during the debate was exceptional. Last, it was close between him and Jelly for me, but Jelly has been known to be a bit of a firebrand and he wants nothing to do with a new stadium, whereas location seems to be Geleynse's issue. That and he seems to even have a degree of business sense.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By westandonguard (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:02:03

Butani for Mayor, Jelly for Ward 2. That will send a message.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mrgrande (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:06:04

I'll be voting Jelly for Ward 2 for many of the reasons already mentioned here.

For mayor, I'm still undecided between Mahesh, Bob, and Fred. Bob lost my vote with the deamalgamation talk, but regained it when he voted against the AEGD. I like Butani's platform, but he doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell of winning. And Fred's done lots of great things for the city in his past four years... I'll probably end up voting for Fred.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Malex (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:08:07

My wife and I will be voting Mayor Fred and Paul Tetley...here's to some positive change in Ward 3!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Meredith (registered) - website | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:11:41

I voted for Fred for mayor and Martinus for Ward 2

Martinus has more of certain kinds of experience than Jelly on the business and education side of things, and if we want to be serious about developing small businesses and exploring downtown campuses in Ward 2, that's important. Jelly has other strengths that would work very much to Ward 2's advantage on council with them, but I don't think he represents my priorities as much. For effective, recent public involvement though, he takes the prize.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:13:05

I thought about Bob for a few minutes on AEGD, but I ended up going with Fred because I know where he stands on everything. Bob seems to change his mind a little too much for my liking. Too many unanswered questions from him.

Ted - Fred was probably already getting my vote, but his pro-Hamilton stance for the WH simply added to what I already like about him. I wouldn't recommend that anyone make a vote based on a single issue. Although I suspect some people will.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By creeker_in_the_loo (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:13:38

@Lawrence - The policy of being able to vote in both home and school cities only applies if you are living in the city you go to school in. Basically, a student would maintain two residences - the permanent one (typically the parents' household) and the temporary residence near the school. If you lived where you worked Mon-Fri and somewhere else on weekends, I think you would be able to vote in both locations.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Greg (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:14:46

Tetley all the way in Ward 3; Morelli needs to go.

And let Fred keep his job as mayor; I think he's the best of the Big Three

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Ancopa (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:15:22

Eisenberger / Geleynse for me. Choosing mayor was easy, but there was some real depth to the ward 2 candidates. It was nice to have such selection this year!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By CaptainKirk (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:16:21

Voted for Fred and keeping fingers crossed Mr Butani will remain a visible community leader for a long time to come whether it be in the private or public sector!

Now if Mr Butani can restore the Royal Connaught, I'd be in La La land! ;)

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By wardlord (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:16:59


sending out support and votes for JELLY and EISENBERGER today -

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mrgrande (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:27:16

This student voting thing has me wondering... If someone has two homes within the same city, can they vote twice?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By oldcoote (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:36:38

McHattie ... easy choice for me. A truly involved and engaged representative.

Mayor was tough, but the stadium debate pushed me to support Fred. I love his vision, but question his leadership.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Andrea (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:44:30

It seems like the majority of folks posting vote in Ward 2.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Borrelli (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:47:36

@ mrgrande RE: Student voting

From the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing website: http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page7044.aspx

Students

A student may vote in the municipality where he or she is temporarily residing while attending school as well as at his or her permanent home in a different municipality, provided that he or she does not intend to change his or her permanent home.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By lawrence (registered) - website | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:48:17

creeker_in_the_loo, if I was to live there makes sense. Although time spent there you would think could alomst stand for something. If I spend more time in Hamilton than Burlington, most of it is sleeping. :) Would rather work closer to home anyway.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By breeze (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 14:55:44

Fred/Martinus

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Pxtl (registered) - website | Posted October 25, 2010 at 15:02:48

@Andrea

Folks in Ward 1 have very little to say. Of course we're voting for McHattie.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By JonD (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 15:05:55

I had a tough time choosing between Jelly and Geleynse and in the end went with Jelly. He's intelligent and proven that he loves his Ward... and if Bob ends up winning I think Jelly will keep him in his place. I agree with Jason that the Jelly and Geleynse platforms were pretty much identical and I for one was really hoping that one of them would withdraw and back the other. I too think they'll split the youth vote and allow one of the others to come up. Too bad but Ward 2 has a great future with all the young candidates this election has brought out. Go Democracy!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By kathleen.flohr (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 15:06:06

i am also a jelly/eisenberger supporter. i have been impressed with matt's commitment to the city during this campaign. i didn't see very many other candidates out picking up trash...

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By AnneMariePavlov (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 15:18:59

I agree that Matt Jelly is a firebrand, but he is also a house on fire. He has done so much unpaid work for us in Ward 2 already! He is a tireless and very visible activist, going above and beyond what any citizen should have to resort to doing, with his clipboard cop bylaw enforcement projects and his guerrilla journalism. He is an artist, and understands better than most how important the arts are for the revitalization of our downtown. He has youthful, fresh energy and he wants nothing to do with the stadium, which I have to say that I totally love.

It took me a while to decide to go with Eisenberger, but Bob lost me with his deamalgamation talk and his A line LRT talk. I sometimes wonder where his head is at. He almost had me when he was one of the 2 dissenting voices to Aerotropolis. But I have to go with the slow, steady more professional Fred.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Undustrial (registered) - website | Posted October 25, 2010 at 15:24:05

Fries and a burger with a side order of Jelly, please.

I choose Fred over Bob because Bratina is a wild-card in the worst way. I choose Jelly, however, because he's a wild-card in the best way.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Fred/Jelly (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 15:35:00

Like many, it was between Jelly and Martinus for me for quite a while. Jelly won out for me because of his everyman appeal. I feel he will never forget who he is working for and will continue to give a voice to those who need it. In a ward where 41.4% of citizens live below the poverty line, this is key.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 15:50:00

well, based on this thread Eisenberger should win about 97% of the votes tonight. LOL. Take this online community and put it up against the CHML community and viola - you've got a neck and neck race. This bodes well for the future.

Comment edited by jason on 2010-10-25 14:52:57

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By allantaylor97 (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 15:58:01

No kidding. If every there was a media source with a bias todays blog entries make it official. No chance Fred Eisenberger gets anywhere close to the results he's getting here. LOL

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 16:03:28

Commenters posting their voting selection doesn't make RTH biased.

If anything, it shows the age and preferred method of gathering info of many RTH readers. It's a shame the Spec disabled commenting today.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Inhocmark (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 16:09:08

Thanks guys, it has been real tough getting all the required information together to make a truly informed choice today. RTH has been helpful. I may not agree with every post on here or all the writers, but you do provide a vital service to the city.

My wife and I will celebrate our approaching first anniversary in the City by doing our part to shape the direction for the next 4 years.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Fred/McHattie (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 16:11:19

I'm voting Fred and McHattie.

The Bratina/Vranich connection kept me from voting for Bob, and 3 years of DiIanni was more than enough. Fred hasn't been perfect but I have been very proud of him in the past year while dealing with the stadium issue. I don't support the AEGD so I'm hoping he can be persuaded away from that viewpoint.

In fairness to the rest, I have spent some time listening to the debates and reading the platforms of the other candidates. While I like some of them enough to consider them for a council seat, I don't think any of them has what it takes to be Mayor.

As for McHattie, he's done a lot of great work for the Ward and for the City. He's the reason I don't support term limits. I'd hate for a less-worthy individual to get his seat just because he's served two terms.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Jonathan Dalton (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 16:13:26

Fred for mayor, Jelly for Ward 2. I'm rooting for McHattie and Tetley for wards 1 and 3.

I actually had a dream the other night that Tony Greco won, but I'm sure the ward 1 race is the only sure thing.

I'll be between the Jelly party at This Ain't Hollywood and the RTH one at Hess. If I get all 4 of my picks, I'm buying everyone here a round.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By John Neary (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 16:16:04

turbo:

No kidding. If every there was a media source with a bias todays blog entries make it official.

jason:

Commenters posting their voting selection doesn't make RTH biased.

There are two different notions of "bias" at play here. From a statistical perspective, RTH commenters are a biased sample of the overall population with respect to their political affiliation. Whether or not this difference in political affiliation between RTH commenters and the general population reflects an inherent political bias (as I believe turbo would argue) or a greater understanding of the evidence (as I believe Jason would argue) is open for debate.

Speaking of biased political affiliation: is there anyone out there who wouldn't take Jelly AND Martinus (and perhaps some of our other Ward 2 hopefuls) over any of the incumbent councillors who is running for re-election (other than McHattie?) Ward 2 has indeed had a spectacular group of candidates. I am not philosophically predisposed to supporting term limits, but I'm close to changing my mind based on this experience.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Arcadia (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 16:28:07

Fred and Matt Jelly!!

Loving the Paul Tetley noises around here.

By the way, who's downvoting people for the simply expression of their political beliefs? 5 people downvoted heavyD for a comment in no way trollish or insulting. I hate 85% of downvoting, seriously.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Done (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 16:38:54

Fred Eisenberger and Brian McHattie - Not too difficult a decision this year. They are quite simply the best for their respective positions and have earned the right to retain office.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By paleale2 (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 16:40:53

Fred & Martinus........I think their collective vision for Hamilton dovetails nicely !

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Inhocmark (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 16:42:49

I think the Missus and I will be voting for Mayor Fred. I don't agree with everything he has to say or his entire platform, but I also feel he was probably the most genuiune of the big 3 candidates and you'd know what to expect.

In Ward 15 we'll vote for Judi Partridge. Ultimately it was slim pickings up here in Flamborough so the key was to find somebody versed enough in local issues but still knowlegable enough about Hamilton as a whole and Partridge seems to fit that bill.

As a suburban voter, my priority is to elect a slate that will take a global view of Hamilton but address some issues closer to home. It dismays me that despite the higher taxes (as a percentage) that we pay in Hamilton, I can not get reliable bus service into Downtown without going into Burlington. I recognize though that a strong Hamilton benefits us all that with a stronger commercial and industrial tax base that the city can afford to achieve its goals while keeping residential tax rates at an acceptable level.

Overall my vote is a balancing act between self interest and the collective good. My optimistic belief is that Mayor Fred is the choice for all of Hamilton as opposed to what I viewed as cheap pandering for the suburban vote by Di Ianni (with his unrealistic talk of no property tax increases) or Bratina (and his De-Amalgamation talk).

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Will (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 16:47:35

great comments Inhocmark! Partridge sounds like a great candidate, hopefully her attendance record will be better than McCarthy's.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 17:15:27

Partridge sounds like a great candidate, hopefully her attendance record will be better than McCarthy's.

LOL. that won't be a tough mark to beat.

I'm hearing good things about Partridge today. I should read up on her. Haven't really followed that Ward too closely. Man, all this Jelly/Martinus talk is killing me. I'm worried they are going to do some serious vote splitting in Ward 2 and we'll end up with neither.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By atlas (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 17:23:11

The travesty of the Ward 13 debate confirmed my choice--no one (though I wish there had been a ballot box to concientiously indicate this). I picked Butani for mayor, but will be satisfied enough if Mayor Fred returns.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 17:29:18

good overview from Joey Coleman here:

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id...

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mugrat (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 17:29:45

Tetley all the way!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Ward 3 needs the change.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By bob lee (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 17:36:17

hey atlas, tell us more! Glenn Robinson reads like a pretty good candidate.

And Ted Mitchell if you're still reading, what was the ABC fiasco?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 17:38:06

"My optimistic belief is that Mayor Fred is the choice for all of Hamilton"

That has to be a joke. I'm not saying vote for any of the big 3 but certainly, no matter what, don't vote for someone who the only way they know how to get votes is do the blame game on the Hamilton TigerCats for ineptness in communication and dialogue skills. Fred is the antithesis for what my parents and teachers tried to teach me - take at least some responsibility for something that has gone south that you are not only involved in but supposed to be the "leader" of.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 17:41:26

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By adam2 (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 17:51:43

Fred & Martinus. Look at the hand Fred was dealt from the previous mayor. He deserves another term.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Robbie K (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 17:54:09

@HamiltonFan, I would agree with you, the only problem is that the TiCats most certainly 100% "showed ineptness in communication and dialogue skills."

Some of us call a spade a spade. I suppose if you want someone to sugar coat something for you, then hey, vote for one of the other two dudes.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 17:58:24

I would be absolutely ashamed of myself if I voted for a man who cannot take some responsibility for something like the current PanAm Fred-driven stadium situation. To blame it 100 percent on the Hamilton TigerCats is juvenile in behaviour - at best.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By z jones (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:06:31

That's funny, I would ashamed of myself if my head was half as far up Mr Young's butt as your's.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:10:21

Exactly the type of response I would have expected from a bona-fide poster at RTH. Thank you z jones, you confirmed precisely my thoughts and perceptions of some posters here, as yourself.

Comment edited by HamiltonFan on 2010-10-25 17:10:44

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Robbie K (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:11:15

I suppose for some that would be reason enough to vote for someone else. Of course I like to vote people who do what they say. You may not agree with 100% of their platform, but at least you know what you do agree with will get accomplished, or at least attempted. Which is a lot more then can be said for most of politics how a days.

Fred always pushed WH, no secret. I guess if Bob "last second mind f**k" Young was running you would vote for him. Because you know EXACTLY what hes about? He had no issues with WH.. no wait.. yes he does (last minute). East Mountain seemed good.. no wait.. im pulling my funding (last minute).

And after the Stadium gets placed somewhere (or of course, NOT because that is all still up in the air), you need to live with your mayor for the other 3 and a half years.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:12:51

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Robbie K (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:13:03

I just made a Freddy Jelly sandwhich. For various reasons (putting aside the Stadium problem, as that was a cluster f for all involved).

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:13:40

To blame it 100 percent on the Hamilton TigerCats is juvenile in behaviour

And yet, 100% accurate

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:15:12

I just made a Freddy Jelly sandwhich

Wouldn't that be a Jellyburger?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:15:24

Keep living in a dreamworld my friend Jason, it's all good in la, la land as they say...

Comment edited by HamiltonFan on 2010-10-25 17:16:03

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:16:23

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:19:42

HamiltonFan, just out of curiousity, who did you end up voting for? I'm going to assume Tony Maronne due to Bratina's 17 positions on the stadium and DiIanni's refusal to give his opinion on the issue. But since we're all sharing our votes, I'm curious to hear from a voter like yourself who seems to have that one issue on your mind as we vote. I've been wanting to meet someone who was going to vote solely based on that issue, but I don't know anyone doing so, other than yourself.
I'm very intrigued.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By atlas (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:20:39

@bob lee It's true; Glenn Robinson does read OK on paper. It bothered me, however, that he actually READ most of his answers during the debate. Obviously, it's important to anticipate the questions and rehearse your answers, but he certainly didn't convey any ability to think on the spot. Not to mention the fact that his reading was extremely tedious. He did not engage in the debate. He also made very little contribution to the open forum portion. Mind you, I am not trying to pick on Glenn; in fact, he performed better than some of the other candidates.

I won't list all of my grievances, but as another example, Ron Tammer blatantly and purposely insulted his two-year-old granddaughter in his opening statement (even if it was meant as a joke, it failed MISERABLY). He also proposed to turn part of the Cootes Paradise area (where the abandoned greenhouses are, off Olympic Drive) into a baseball field.

It wasn’t just Mr. Robinson, or Mr. Tammer, all of the candidates had a poor showing in their own way. Overall, no one, including the incumbent Russ Powers, offered a confident, inspiring vision for Dundas. Most of the points brought up were minor and had little substance. I hope we see some fresh faces next time around.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By LauraF (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:21:04

The ABC fiasco Ted is referring to is the decision by Hamilton Health Sciences to turn McMaster University Medical Centre's ER to pediatric only. This will have very detrimental effects on the population's access to emergency care, as well as in-patient services. It also sets a precedent for a more private/public hospital structure.

The plan was titled "Access to Best Care", and was pushed through the LHIN with close to zero stakeholder or community consultation. Some councillors did try to raise awareness, but in the end the LHIN passed it.

Andre Marin (the Ombudsman) did a very in-depth review of the decision, and his report, the 'LHIN Spin" can be found here: http://www.ombudsman.on.ca/media/151950/...

Comment edited by LauraF on 2010-10-25 17:24:57

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:23:17

Jason, who knows who I voted for, I'm not going to share my decision with anyone on this site. That's my decision, like it my friend or lump it and the RTH people who run this site can discontinue my registration here if they so chose and you can call me any name you want in the book for not saying who I voted for. As Alice in Chains says "It's Your Decision".

Mr. Eisenberger might win, who knows. But I will rest fine, more than fine, knowing I didn't vote for him.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By seancb (registered) - website | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:24:24

Mayor I was torn between fred and bob for a long time. My quick summary of fred is that he is not bad for Hamilton, has some good ideas, is lacking any great ideas, and is too quiet and lame to garner much support from council. Meanwhile, bob is not bad for Hamilton, has some good ideas and a few great ones, and is too reactionary to garner much support from council.

In the end I went with non for a few reasons. First, he stood up against the aerotropolis. I can't understand Fred's vote on this, other than to assume he is either too dumb to see the huge problems with it, too "in" to vote it out, or too afraid of pussing people off to vote no. If he is going to continue playing it safe with tough decisions then I have no use for him. Second, I agree with many of Bob's positions on things such as rail and transit (I think the a line thing was a bit off but cooler heads will prevail), city hall, Lister, etc.

For ward 2, I went with jelly. He has worked the hardest for years already and has not even been in the running. He will challenge anyone he has to for the betterment of the city and I believe he will truly (and always) out the city above any and all personal motivations. Martinus has a good platform too but I fear that he will always be wary of taking any risks that might affect his political and business career. Down with career politicians. We need real citizens who care about the city making the big decisions on our behalf!

Bob and Jelly!!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:28:39

HamiltonFan, Your choice, I was merely asking. Thought maybe we could have a friendly election day discussion about it....

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By z jones (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:29:55

That's my decision, like it my friend or lump it and the RTH people who run this site can discontinue my registration here if they so chose and you can call me any name you want in the book for not saying who I voted for.

Paranoid much?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Robbie K (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:37:49

Don't Worry, all those Bob Young posters on his wall help him sleep fine, more than fine.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By rayfullerton (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 18:53:03

Fred for vision, Martinus for young professional

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 19:03:49

Comments with a score below -5 are hidden by default.

You can change or disable this comment score threshold by registering an RTH user account.

Comment edited by HamiltonFan on 2010-10-25 18:05:01

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Tr (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 19:38:19

I'm calling an eisenberger win. People I've encountered have been won over by his hands on approach, calling people with people not automated messages, hand delivering all flyers and talking to people about them if they so want, him apperently taking calls at the campaign office if they want to talk. It really impressed me and a lot of people I've run into. He is also the only candidate who we truly believe cares about this city with all his heart. Go Fred!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 19:48:37

Ryan, 2 things:

  1. I'm glad you finally got rid of that stupid circle on your twitter logo. We all want to see those boyish good looks.
  2. You mentioned on twitter that RTH traffic exploded today. Any official numbers??

Comment edited by jason on 2010-10-25 18:49:02

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 19:51:50

LOL. cool. Thx

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 20:05:06

power outages reported this evening at Limeridge Mall and Mayor Fred's office across the road. Fluke??

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Robbie K (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 20:23:53

From the Spec live update :

Earlya results down at city hall show Bratina in the lead.

Bratina 360
Di Ianni 342
Eisenberger 320

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Robbie K (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 20:25:29

Drew Edwards: COUNCILLOR WARD 2
Total
Number of Polls 16
Polls Reporting 1 6.3 %
Liban A. ABDI 21 2.18%
Marvin CAPLAN 87 9.02%
Paul CASEY 7 0.73%
John CASTLE 9 0.93%
Diane CHIARELLI 89 9.22%
Shane COLEMAN 25 2.59%
Ian DEANS 43 4.46%
Jason FARR 231 23.94%
Lloyd FERGUSON 22 2.28%
Martinus GELEYNSE 52 5.39%
Matteo GENTILE 15 1.55%
Erik HESS 68 7.05%
Pat IELASI 2 0.21%
Ned JANJIC 7 0.73%
Matt JELLY 126 13.06%
Hoojung JONES 71 7.36%
Dawn LESCAUDRON 3 0.31%
James NOVAK 60 6.22%
Charlie PIPE 8 0.83%
Kevin WRIGHT 19 1.97%

Monday October 25, 2010 8:25 Drew Edwards

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Robbie K (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 20:33:26

Correct, just giving the updates as they come..

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Robbie K (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 20:37:21

Rick Hughes: From Paul Morse covering Ward 2, where it seems out of the massive field of 19, two are battling it out based on early results:

Farr 1436
Jelly 1314

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By realitycheck (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 20:52:29

As reported on Hamilton SSP:


Bob BRATINA 13251 37.33%
Larry Di IANNI 10213 28.77%
Fred EISENBERGER 9509 26.79%

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Robbie K (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 20:58:14

Pretty early but I have no seen Freddies numbers improving much.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Tybalt (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:04:40

Yeah, this one looks in the bag for Bratina at this point. Ward 4 is the only one that is really outsized as reporting so far (they are 10/12 and most others are 30-50% in), and I can't see 4 moving Bratina's numbers up too much.

The Tybalt Decision Desk is declaring Bratina the winner.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Tybalt (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:06:05

Just in 101/207 http://old.hamilton.ca/clerk/election/20...

Bob BRATINA 22686 38.30% Larry Di IANNI 16780 28.33% Fred EISENBERGER 15483 26.14%

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By allantaylor97 (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:10:17

Thank goodness people didn't buy into Freds mess

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mrjanitor (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:13:31

What has Farr done to deserve Ward 2? Please let Matt take this!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By goodie (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:14:33

Comments with a score below -5 are hidden by default.

You can change or disable this comment score threshold by registering an RTH user account.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By allantaylor97 (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:15:41

Farr is a recognized name and Jelly is still considered a punk by many

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Michelle Martin (registered) - website | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:18:57

It looks like the incumbent is going to win in every ward that has an incumbent running.

Sigh.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:21:05

Wow. Let's look for some good news here:

  1. CHML can close up shop - their 'anyone but the incumbent' campaign clearly flopped. LOL
  2. We are getting something I never thought I'd see again after amalgamation - a mayor who lives at Walnut and Jackson, a downtown mayor.
  3. Larry lost.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:22:19

What has Farr done to deserve Ward 2?

Hamilton LOVES their media personalities. Remember Jennifer Mossop?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By derp (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:22:24

I love how the leader of the mayor underdogs is Baldasaro!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mrjanitor (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:23:11

Turbo,

One point true and one perceived as true, but still, what has Farr done for Ward 2?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By realitycheck (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:23:34

The Spec has declared Bratina Mayor-elect

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By bob lee (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:23:42

pork barrel politics at work. This is why our councillors have twice in the last year diverted discretionary spending into potholes and sidewalks.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By allantaylor97 (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:38:40

mrjanitor

Its not about what hes done or not done. Its about public image. As much as you love Matt Jelly a lot of people just see him as the guy with a beard and baseball cap swearing and carrying on. I know he's done a lot of good work but he's really rough around the edges and that usually doesn't sell to the mainstream. Jason Farr on the other hand is a known voice with a certain amount of respectability. Whether he's done anything or not isn't really important to everyone, its about a respected name, something that many feel Matt Jelly is not. You may disapprove of the feelings of the majority but as I've said often you cannot browbeat people into sharing your views. Hopefully this is a lesson learned for RTH and they can learn to listen to other viewpoints and reach consensus with a larger group of people or they are destined to wallow in the fringes. As much as I disagree with much f what you guys stand for I admire your passion and hope that you learn to work with all stakeholders rather that butt heads when you promote your ideas. Being so confrontational is the reason your candidate failed IMHO

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By derp (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:42:39

Hey, the pencil dispenser won!

I didn't vote for him, but not entirely disappointed.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Tybalt (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:42:55

The Spec were way behind me. Remember folks, you heard it here first, at RTH.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:43:20

Congrats to everyone who has ran for office in this election. Contrary to what I mentioned above that I wouldn't indicate who I voted for, the person I voted for for Mayor, LD, didn't get voted in.

Ryan, despite that I may not connect with you and everything you write, I just want to thank you and your staff for all the hard work you have put into this. I apologize if I may have ever come across that I don't respect all the work you have put into this and the site here, not at all. You work very hard even though I have some disagreements with you. But I will say your hard work has allowed this election to be a better one, more informed one for everyone voting and I thank you for that.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Tybalt (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:48:21

I also voted for Fred and Brian McHattie, as Jason did. But I welcome the Bob Bratina era.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mrjanitor (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:51:56

Turbo,

Not brow beating anyone and I always respect the democratic process. I am just getting tired of media personalities throughout Canada getting elected primarily on name recognition. But that's what the majority wants, that's what we have to work with.

Comment edited by mrjanitor on 2010-10-25 20:54:14

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By HamiltonBrian (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:57:25

Less than 40% turnout sucks. Maybe people REALLY have to be pissed to get out and vote.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By johnny p (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 21:58:02

the fact that incumbents won is disgusting and only means we need better education in Hamilton, because people sure are stupid here.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By allantaylor97 (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 22:01:48

mrjanitor

Recognizing the problem is the first step to solving it. You seem to have recognized that one needs name recognition to get elected but you still need to recognize that your crew here comes across as browbeating anyone opposing your views. When you get the second part you are on the way to getting some of the change you want. You'll never get it all but then again nobody ever has

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By realitycheck (anonymous) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 22:06:45

With 200 of 207 polls reporting, there are 133330 ballots cast for mayor. That is up from 2006, when a total of 125,239 votes were cast for mayor.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mrjanitor (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 22:06:59

My crew? You don't read my voting record here do you???

You really are a douche!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By allantaylor97 (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 22:11:50

Comments with a score below -5 are hidden by default.

You can change or disable this comment score threshold by registering an RTH user account.

Comment edited by turbo on 2010-10-25 21:16:20

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Meredith (registered) - website | Posted October 25, 2010 at 23:00:57

I'm good with the Bratina win. I don't think Farr really understands Ward 2, by any of his ward-related statements I've heard so far. That's democracy for you, though.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By RenaissanceWatcher (registered) | Posted October 25, 2010 at 23:57:36

Thanks to the staff at Raise The Hammer for your excellent post-to-post election campaign coverage.

It will be interesting to see how Mayor-elect Bratina approaches the stadium issue. His answer to the relevant campaign question on the RTH website is that the CPR lands should be used for purposes other than a stadium even if the funding shortfall can be overcome. And, during the campaign, he stated that city council was too quick to remove the Confederation Park site from the short list back in 2009. Might we therefore see a renewed push for a stadium at Confederation Park early in his term?

Comment edited by RenaissanceWatcher on 2010-10-25 22:58:11

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Fred Street (anonymous) | Posted October 26, 2010 at 19:54:17

HamiltonBrian: "Less than 40% turnout sucks. Maybe people REALLY have to be pissed to get out and vote."

There were seven Ward 2 candidates and an overall Ward 2 turnout of 12,767 in 1997's election.

Wikipedia tells us that "Voter turnout remained steady in 1997, amidst events such as Premier Mike Harris' Common Sense Revolution service cuts, the Plastimet Fire, and plebiscites on sm oking by-laws and a proposed c asino."

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By MAB (registered) | Posted October 30, 2010 at 11:08:38

Why do the Offical results for this election report/counted 207 Polling Stations in 2010(227 in 2006)when council prior to this election, approved to increase advanced polling stations by approximately 21 for this election? Apparently, our Ward alone, were officially counted as having 15 Polling stations when in fact we had an increase of 5. Check the stats in your ward. Are we missing votes?

SOME POINTS TO PONDER;

All of the incumbents won hands down in the Advanced Polls.

Just prior the election, council agreed to increase the polls costing 20,000 each. I do not think this includes the cost of labour, just the cost of the electronic voting devices.

The City had to scramble to find people to women/man these polling stations and train? them on the procedures that had changed from manual voting.

Prior to this election, council also moved to changed the Election date from November to October 25th, two weeks earlier. While at the same time introducing more advanced polling stations, with dates of voting early as 18 days before the election.

This all under the guise of improving voter turnout! From what I can see the increase was miminal. These last minute changes too me were in fact too the benefit of the incumbents.

Much of the media coverage was done after the advance polls. Cable 14, did not air many of the candidates debate until after the advance polls.

Candidates who withdrew in a few wards , still pulled votes - in the advanced polls.

Why is election day October 25th when you can vote weeks in advance?

Do the new tabulators reflect the true votes? Has and will the city perform an evaluation or check, by counting the manual cards, which are kept at the time of the vote.. and weigh in against this electronic voting device.

Comment edited by MAB on 2010-10-30 10:23:08

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By MAB (registered) | Posted November 05, 2010 at 10:14:41

Students voting twice: not right... they vote here or at home. Democracy one vote one person.. what is goihg on here... geez

Permalink | Context

View Comments: Nested | Flat

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to comment.

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds