Friday, March 19, 2010

Over the Hill . . . and down

I think it is time for Councillor Hill to make up his mind what he wants to be when he grows up. Four and a half months ago he fought a contentious election campaign against Carol Reynolds to represent Ward 1 in civic government. Now he is seeking the nomination to be the Liberal candidate for Saskatoon Humboldt (SP Mar. 19/10).

My first reaction was the cost to the local tax payer for a by-election in the unlikely event he won a federal election. He put an end to that by saying he was not required to give up one position in order to hold another. While that might be true, it doesn't mean he can adequately do either job at the same time. How can you respond to the concerns of your Ward 1 constituents when you are in Ottawa when parliament is sitting? I know he wouldn't misuse a federal constituency office by doing council work through that venue. How do you attend committee and council meetings when your in Ottawa? Would we have to pay for a big screen for a simulcast attendance? What is more annoying is double dipping he proposes to do. I personally don't think his services are worth a quarter of a million dollars.

I look for integrity in a candidate. During the civic campaign Mr. Hill was one of the six incumbents that stated if re-elected he would not increase taxes. That vote is around the corner. And I will be watching to see if his billboard advertising is included in the civic campaign disclosure statement due at the end of May.

As I live in Saskatoon Humboldt constituency I can only hope the Greens come up with a good candidate. Better yet add "none of the above" to the ballot and save taxpayers a bundle of money.

29 comments:

  1. Why stop at double dipping? He should seek a provincial nomination as well. How does an egomaniac like this think the voting public is that dense? Oh wait a minute we are that dense! Actually it would be good if he did get elected it's probably the only way we will get a change on council.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "I know he wouldn't misuse a federal constituency office by doing council work through that venue."

    That's quite the assumption, considering Hill's track record.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm happy! I held my nose and vote for Hill in the civic election and get to vote against him in the federal election!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Civic Mistress - I read the article and my interpretation was that Mr. Hill was simply stating a fact, not his preference for holding both positions. A poor quote perhaps, but not a damning indictment of his plans for the future.

    I somehow doubt he plans to pull a Pankiw and say he will keep both jobs if elected federally. :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. I didn't read the article in the paper the same way - I seriously doubt he would hold two positions at the same time. If you are going to criticize - at least be realistic.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think Darren Hill will make a great candidate for Saskatoon-Humboldt. He is a hard working councillor - how many others can claim to have started a full recycling system in their own ward?

    ReplyDelete
  7. bitter people should not be allowed near a keyboard or be allowed to blog.

    ReplyDelete
  8. How many others can claim to have been caught breaking election laws by removing signs during a provincial campaign?

    ReplyDelete
  9. How many others also can claim to have cheated election spending bylaws on campaign spending?

    ReplyDelete
  10. again - bitter people should not be allowed to post.

    ReplyDelete
  11. hey anon at 915am this is anon from 852pm dont steal my thunder i might get bitter jk.lol.

    ReplyDelete
  12. anon 852 - my apologies! you just put it so perfectly I had to borrow it - all the credit is yours! do not get bitter - it causes random idiot postings!

    ReplyDelete
  13. too true too true apology accepted

    ReplyDelete
  14. "again - bitter people should not be allowed to post."

    And habitual cheaters should not be allowed to run for elected office.

    ReplyDelete
  15. bitter people keep showing up on the Mistresses blog.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Let's not get the cart before the horse everybody. He is only going for the nomination.He would still have to actually win the election before he would have to face this issue. Considering where he is running it is very unlikely that he will get elected anyway(Trost and Pankiw are running in that area for a reason...)

    ReplyDelete
  17. "bitter people keep showing up on the Mistresses blog."

    bitter people = people who don't agree with me

    ReplyDelete
  18. Bitter people = people who do not like the fact that Darren has a record of not always following the rules.

    ReplyDelete
  19. anon 11:17am show this record.statements like this could end you in court.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Taking down signs during an election in which Darren admitted he was in the wrong.

    http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix/news/local/story.html?id=c314526c-eb67-430c-88d6-ba22dd0cfc43

    ReplyDelete
  21. Read the article - the signs were removed by the city as well the next morning . Hill simply errored by not reporting them and waiting for them to be removed. A rookie mistake albeit a very stupid one but not worthy of the constant bashing you give him on here! He represents my neighbourhood and we do not always agree but in the last 3 years I have had more communication and follow up from him than I have from all of the previous councillors combined.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "anon 11:17am show this record.statements like this could end you in court."

    If this unintelligible comment was meant to be a threat, you'd better let your lawyer do the writing for you, you ignorant, whiny twit.

    ReplyDelete
  23. The city has the legal right to remove the signs not a city councillor or any other individual.

    ReplyDelete
  24. anon at 908pm. sorry forgot the up in the sentence. ps not a threat just a observation.also why the name calling, that is what one does when one has a weak argument such as yours.now good nite and dont forget that bitter pill that runs your world.

    ReplyDelete
  25. ignorant, whiny twit = hypocrite who:

    a) calls people 'bitter' but complains when someone reciprocates; and

    b) threatens anonymous commenters with legal action and calls it "a observation".

    ReplyDelete
  26. here is the problem you are bitter, i think thats a spec of foam at the corner of your mouth as its flapping. also if you think your are anon. because you post that you are wrong once again i ask you where are the facts to your statement?where is this record of which you speak?lastly your math seems to lean a little to the left lapdog

    ReplyDelete
  27. "here is the problem you are bitter, i think thats a spec of foam at the corner of your mouth as its flapping. also if you think your are anon. because you post that you are wrong once again i ask you where are the facts to your statement?where is this record of which you speak?lastly your math seems to lean a little to the left lapdog"

    Seriously? This has got to be a joke, right? Who writes like that?

    But if this is a joke ... Bravo, sir, whoever you are. Absolutely hilarious. You almost had me fooled to think that I was conversing with a real person.

    Wow. You should write for Leno.

    ReplyDelete
  28. still no facts or records of which you speak off.typical diversion, attack the person not the argument in hopes that no one can see how weak it is.ps more a letterman person myself.

    ReplyDelete
  29. hahahahahaha! Whoo-hooo! Stop it! My guts can't take it anymore! hahahahahaha!!!

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.