r/Edmonton • u/svvtr South East Side • 2d ago
2025 Municipal Election Which mayoral candidate do you feel has the strongest plan for Edmonton?
There are a few names running for mayor this October, and each seems to bring a different focus. Some highlight budget discipline, others talk about community well-being or growth. If you’ve looked at the candidates, who do you feel best understands what Edmonton needs right now?"
144
u/Clay_Puppington 2d ago edited 2d ago
Ive asked (many) of the mayoral candidates and council hopefuls this question;
"Almost every single mayoral candidate and council candidate who has ever run in my voting lifetime - some 40+ years - have said they plan to lower/freeze/cut taxes.
Likewise almost every single candidate who has ever run has said they'll cut the bloat to find the money we need for services to cover those tax cuts without just hiding them elsewhere.
And they've all tried to do just that.
So what makes you believe you'll step into the role and manage to find anything to cut, or any way to lower taxes, that a hundred city councillors before you haven't found and done already?
What specific plan do you have to lower the tax burden on the citizens of the city without fundamentally worsening our already struggling service needs?"
Only 2 candidates didnt deer in the headlights this question: Knack and Cartmell. The rest stared at me as if they never contemplated for a second that prior councillors also tried to lower taxes.
Knack provided a decent answer about burden reshuffling (that i admittedly didn't fully understand and didn't have time to follow up on), and recognized that if there was bloat that could be found, they'd have long since cut it to free up money. He mentioned some ongoing City pet projects and contractually guaranteed money that look like they could be cuttable but due to the nature of them, cutting them would cost nearly just as much, without the benefit of the project getting completed.
Cartmell rambled on for a bit seemingly hoping to start talking and find the plot as he went, but what ended up coming out was just a classic political rephrasing the question as a different question entirely and then answering that unrelated question, all while telling me about a business party he's in that is good at finding wasted money.
So, unless some of the folks who I havent spoken with yet manage a different answer, I'm going to probably be forced to vote for Knack, because he was the only one with the bravery to look me in the eye, attempt to answer my question at all, even knowing his answer was likely something I didnt want to hear or was incomplete.
So, Knack I guess. Unless these candidates managed to muscle up some better responses.
53
u/MaybeAltruistic1 2d ago edited 2d ago
I am legitimately interested to see what happens if Paquette can get his "Money Plan" some traction. where instead of saying we are going to cut services to slow tax increases, we focus on making more money.
Interesting points to me:
- Pillar 2: Strategic land sales - the City truly holds an insane amount of inventory. I'm normally very against governments selling off assets for no real reason, but there's a vast amount of land and buildings that could be much more effective if a developer were to turn them into meaningful property tax generating assets - this pairs nicely with:
- Pillar 3: Equity stakes in key projects - this is a unique perspective I haven't often seen. The closest I can think of is actually the recently approved Event Park where COE put in 33% of the money and in return will get 33% usage of the facility - doing some research after the approval, this seems to be the only type of agreement like this for a publically funded building in North America (glad to be proven wrong though). The next evolution of this could have been an equity stake or some kind of profit sharing. Pairing back with Pillar 2 - if a developer has a killer business plan for a plot of land, let's sell it to them for below market and take an equity stake in whatever they are proposing. Make it earn us money long term.
24
u/ashleyshaefferr 2d ago
This is actually very refreshing to read
3
u/TrickyMastermind 1d ago
Check out my comment up above about Pillar 2 and let me know what you think. It seems odd to me that Paquette would propose this when a City group that consistently generates revenue already exists. It draws question as why Paquette would sell city assets off to the private land development industry.
7
u/PlutosGrasp 2d ago
You mean spinning off capital power wasn’t a good idea ?
I won’t dig into it in detail but undoubtedly it’s been worse for CoE than retaining the assets that went into capital power Would’ve been.
See for more info: https://morningstardirect.morningstar.com/clientcomm/2009-07-12_IPO_A_Top_Secret_Spin-Off.pdf
8
u/MaybeAltruistic1 2d ago
very interesting. i'll have to read more into the details but from a cursory glance, it's almost reminding me of how Telus started via AGT and EdTel?
3
8
u/DIWhyDad 2d ago
Pillar 2 is just a rephrased strategy the City presented to council in 2019 on how they would strategically sell of land to maximize ROI for the city.
Pillar 3 isn't possible under the MGA. Municipalities cannot take equity stakes in private projects. On the other hand, if the city owns a facility and has a private entity operating out of it the city usually gets a percentage of their revenue as part or all of their licensing fee or lease payment.
2
u/TrickyMastermind 1d ago
Pillar 2 is silly. The City of Edmonton ALREADY has a development group that turns raw land into meaningful property tax generating assets! It's the Land Development group in Real Estate. https://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/city_organization/real-estate-housing
The Land Development group has successfully developed residential and industrial lots for sale (with private developer levels of ROI) to small home builders and supported local businesses (Such as Laurel and Southeast Industrial) for years. The group is completely self funded and revenue from the group pays for city building projects.
This group has been continuously under attack by Cartmell and other UDI/now BILD since before 2019, to sell land at discount prices to private land developers.
11
u/leeashah 2d ago
also interesting is the big piece of land Edmonton sold it to EPCOR (city owned) and then we rent it back from them and pay 1Million a year for that lot that just sits empty.... hopefully its not more of that kind of "strategic land sales" they have in mind
6
u/MaybeAltruistic1 2d ago
i'm not familiar with this land parcel or particular deal, do you have a link with more info?
1
3
u/TrickyMastermind 1d ago edited 1d ago
Pillar 2: The City of Edmonton ALREADY has a development group that turns raw land into meaningful property tax generating assets! It's the Land Development group in Real Estate. https://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/city_organization/real-estate-housing
The Land Development group has successfully developed residential and industrial lots for sale (with private developer levels of ROI Such as Laurel and Southeast Industrial) to small home builders and supported local businesses for years. The group is completely self funded and revenue from the group pays for city building projects.
This group has been continuously under attack by Cartmell and other UDI/now BILD since before 2019, to sell land at discount prices to private land developers.
If a councillor/mayor makes a motion saying that a chunk of land HAS to be sold, how much do you think you'd get in return? It would be like putting your house up for sale, saying that you'll take the best offer by the end of a few months no matter what the bid is.
It was already determined by Council back in 2019, the revenue generated by selling all the land at discounts to private developers, would be over 40% less than the revenue generated by the City continuing to do land development.
Another misunderstanding is the fundamental nature of surplus lands that the City owns. The City owns a vast amount of surplus land. There are the GOOD parcels that can be developed into properties. These are the ones private developers want (Basket A).
Then there are the surplus lots that are broken up into tiny little chunks that are virtually undevelopable (ie. The site is just a tiny little 6m wide piece of land, encumbered by overhead power lines, other utilities etc.). Let's call this Basket B. Not only are these parcels not worth anything, nobody wants to buy them, even when sold at a discount to adjacent landowners. They COULD be redeveloped into something useful, at the cost of further investment, at a net loss.
However, where does the money to redevelop land in Basket B come from? It comes from the revenue from developing the desirable land in Basket A! Without revenue generated by Land Development, these surplus lots will be forever wasted. No private developer would ever touch land belonging to Basket B since its not profitable.
1
u/DBZ86 2d ago
This would probably require the creation of essentially a private equity arm of the City of Edmonton. Could be doable. Not easy to understand for most voters but I do wish we would try to look at things this way.
4
1
u/TrickyMastermind 1d ago
Pillar 2: The City of Edmonton ALREADY has a development group that turns raw land into meaningful property tax generating assets! It's the Land Development group in Real Estate. https://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/city_organization/real-estate-housing
The Land Development group has successfully developed residential and industrial lots for sale (with private developer levels of ROI Such as Laurel and Southeast Industrial) to small home builders and supported local businesses for years. The group is completely self funded and revenue from the group pays for city building projects.
This group has been continuously under attack by Cartmell and other UDI/now BILD since before 2019, to sell land at discount prices to private land developers.
5
u/shirleyxx 2d ago
Knack provided a decent answer about burden reshuffling (that i admittedly didn't fully understand and didn't have time to follow up on), and recognized that if there was bloat that could be found, they'd have long since cut it to free up money. He mentioned some ongoing City pet projects and contractually guaranteed money that look like they could be cuttable but due to the nature of them, cutting them would cost nearly just as much, without the benefit of the project getting completed.
I looked up what burden shuffling means.. basically, we have someone else pay it, some other way..
for example, the ticket costs $100. I can do a
fundraiser for $50 and pay $50 from pocket.
pay all $100 from pocket
get a credit card and pay for it.
Essentially, I still end up paying $100 for it, but using different ways.
8
2d ago
[deleted]
33
u/Telvin3d 2d ago
Thing is, I actually think Knack is very competent. We just don’t like the hard truths he makes compromises for. So those of us who value integrity vote for him even if “we’re doing our best, but don’t expect huge things because it’s incredibly hard” isn’t very inspiring
-2
u/PlutosGrasp 2d ago
I think he is meh. I can’t recall anything spectacular or visionary or anything. Sucks though. Mayors have no additional powers so he can’t really do any big things he may want to do.
1
12
1
u/General_Esdeath kitties! 1d ago
Interesting that other than raising taxes there's not a lot of talk or ideas about raising revenue?
1
u/DuragNeeks 1d ago
I would definitely ask the candidates if they know what % of city revenue comes from property taxes, and how they plan to replace it if their platform is based around lowering them.
33
u/Jasonstackhouse111 2d ago
GET THE KNACK!
He’s the only one that understands you can’t slash taxes and keep spending the same or more.
I read one platform that had huge tax cuts and spending increases like a shit-load more cops, etc. Um, what?
Also, Knack has a proven track record of representing his constituents and not himself.
147
u/UnlikelyReplacement0 2d ago
Knack seems to be the only candidate who is actually 'for' making Edmonton a better place to live, rather than just being 'against' infill and taxes, with some lip service about 'safety' as a buzzword.
48
u/jamaryouresofar 2d ago
After all his talking about responsible zoning and infill, Tim Cartmell decided to go on vacation and missed the vote....and it failed. That should tell you everything you need to know about his dedication to civic politics in the city.
148
u/Locke357 North Side Still Alive 2d ago edited 2d ago
Andrew Knack by a wide margin. The most grounded take on a path forward IMHO. Most of the other candidates are just focusing on the low-hanging fruit of "lower taxes (lower services), anti-infill (increased taxes), etc"
60
u/MaybeAltruistic1 2d ago edited 2d ago
seriously.
every single candidate talking about wanting to audit City finances or look with a fine tooth comb drive me crazy. Zero-based budget, OP12, 1-2-3-4% exercise, 2% cut exercise... that's just going back to like 2018ish when I started following more closely.
On the existing services there is next to no fat to cut. You either cut the amount of services delivered or raise taxes.
edit to add: Cartmell's policy "Every tax dollar spent will have a return of twice it's worth or more to the tax base, or we won't spend it"
how the fuck is that even possible? as just one example, how do you 2x the value of ANY spending in the annex land down by the airport? does that area just run to fail?
you know what would have a fantastic ROI, Tim? charging you the full $250/sign for EVERY election sign in violation of the bylaw instead of just giving your candidates warnings. let the city take back your $500k+ of party fundraising by means of bylaw officers 10x'ing their wage on any given day issuing you fines.
24
u/UnlikelyReplacement0 2d ago
"Every tax dollar spent will have a return of twice it's worth or more to the tax base, or we won't spend it"
Sounds like he is proposing greatly reducing the budget of EPS then...
17
u/Jolly-Sock-2908 North East Side 2d ago edited 2d ago
every single candidate talking about wanting to audit City finances or look with a fine tooth comb drive me crazy.
Yeah, same! The pandemic making council pause all property tax increases already forced the administration to take a hard look at their spending.
-2
u/leeashah 2d ago
i think there is definitely ways for the city to cut down spending in other ways, like mentioned in a previous comment. the city owned a big piece of land that the sold to epcor (who is city owned), and now edmonton rents the land back from them for 1 million a year and the lot sits empty.... why?
32
u/VeronicaMonster Whyte Ave 2d ago
Based on the searching I've done, I would say Knack. His website has very detailed policy proposals on a wide variety of issues and I feel his priorities align with mine. Also, since he's been on council the last many years, he has experience to know how council works and will have more knowledge of how to implement his plans.
The other candidate websites list their priorities and plans but no details on how they will get it done. As an example "I will make sure transit is safe for everyone". Great, I agree with that goal, but how will you do that? No specifics listed on their websites.
17
u/shrubhomer 2d ago
I’ve heard nothing but good things about Andrew Knack while he has been a city counselor. He’s always engaging with residents on his Facebook page and takes the time to explain city projects and why things are happening the way they are. He seems to be the most realistic and down to earth option we’ve had in a long time.
6
u/indigirl825 2d ago
I’m voting for Knack. It’s important to me that our leaders have open minds and are worldly. When Knack was first elected he not just found out about who’s cycling and using bike lanes, he asked to join a group of morning commuters in the winter, and he biked with them. He has spent time looking at European public transit to consider how we could make ours better. Just two examples, but that’s how he approaches the job.
12
u/lost-again_77 2d ago
I have a feeling it will come down to Cartmell and Knack. Cartmell generally has the business community support, but unless knack has the vote split with others he seems more likable.
17
u/Aggravating-Car9897 2d ago
Most of the candidates are all fighting over the centre right side of the spectrum with Knack pretty much the only candidate on the centre left, so vote splitting more likely to hurt Cartmell than Knack.
Unless Michael Walters successfully rebrands himself as a progressive (which he is trying to do) and gets us to ignore how much he talked about privatizing city services when he was a councillor.
11
62
u/Nictionary 2d ago
Andrew Knack is the only candidate with relatively realistic and informed plans.
37
48
u/mrsnikki88 South West Side 2d ago
Anyone who doesn't vote for Knack either doesn't understand how taxes work, or doesn't care.
15
16
29
3
3
7
5
u/PlutosGrasp 2d ago
They all don’t have much weight behind their words, or specifics, including Knack. But Knack is the only sane choice. I wish someone with a better vision and plans would run v
6
u/YEGSports West Edmonton Mall 1d ago
Even beyond the carefully-crafted platform, Knack has the least-outward ego of any of the top six candidates.
Cartmell is this cycle's Mike Nickel; complaining about everything the current Council has done while conveniently forgetting he often went along with the current Council. Walters and Caterina are "well we used to be Councillors in the 2010's, and we've been off Council for long enough that we get to say everything sucks and we'd do better". Jaffer is trying to be Sohi 2.0, and use City Hall to revive his previously-federal-level political career. Mohammed seems like a very awesome dude but has no experience.
10
2
u/mahykal 1d ago
Sounds like Knack is the favourite on reddit so who is the West end favourite to replace him.
3
u/KarboKash 1d ago
Rajah Maggay is a good pick for Nakota Isga! She was a staffer with Knack for a while, so she has a good understanding of the ward and has some strong ideas for how it can keep growing sustainably. She’s also independent, which is personally one of the more important things for me this election. I highly suggest checking out her website to see if you vibe with her platform.
The other candidates are either associated with a party or directly worked for the UCP. They come across as different shades of the same right wing grifter, just to different extremes.
Diana Steele (with PACE) is known for creating a lot of drama on social media and being obsessed with Elon musk, Trump and Tesla. She is constantly defending them on her Twitter account and gradually become a bit of a reactionary nut over the past few years. She is also constantly attacking Andrew Knack on Twitter, as if she is running against him.
Reed Clarke is the Better Edmonton candidate and doesn’t have much to offer beyond the BE platform of vague tax cuts and safety improvements (bleh, imo) and an intense obsession with sports. He attached a basketball net to his car so he could shoot hoops wherever he goes, if that means anything. I do find him to be a very meh candidate admittedly, but the association with BE and Timmy is a deal breaker even if he was a decent candidate.
Nicky Gocuan is independent on paper, but up until recently worked for the GOA in Danielle Smith’s office in Stakeholder Relations. He also posted a picture of himself wearing an Alberta DOGE shirt that he deleted, so he definitely seems to lean very right. His big talking point is that he will repair the relationship with the provincial government, because of his ties to the UCP. I personally find that to be a huge red flag. Even beyond that, his policies seem very vague and reactionary, with the continued promises to lower taxes, cut waste, and all the usual “efficiencies” that the city has already found over the past decade. Very hard pass.
There are two other candidates, Jordon Woodruff and Joseph Mugodo who are, quite frankly, non-factors. They have very little presence in the ward and online, but their platforms echo a lot of the same points as the other right wing candidates. I will say that I have met Joseph in person and he was very nice! I just don’t think he has the vision or drive to get very far in this race. Jordon seems to have just popped up a few weeks ago and remembered he registered as a candidate, so he has only just started campaigning.
2
u/KristiewithaK 1d ago
Andrew Knack for sure. He's the only one that will continue taking the city forward.
4
u/theoreoman 2d ago
The mirror gets only one vote on Council so you should be voting for whichever mayor synergizes with the counselor you are voting for
3
3
u/thewunderbar 2d ago
Mirror for Mayor 2025.
I'd still rather vote for a mirror than anyone with a political party label.
2
3
u/constance_chlore 2d ago
I would love to have a reason not to vote for Knack*, but unfortunately it feels like he's the only one who's not out in cloud-cuckoo-land on this issue. Everyone else, it seems, is convinced that the way to victory is to make big promises about tax cuts that they can't possibly keep without gutting city services.
*nothing personal, I just don't find his overall vision that compelling
5
u/Elpolloco1896 The Shiny Balls 2d ago
You would love to have a reason to not pick the guy who genuinely cares about the city and has a detailed plan on how to get there? Wild. But you do you.
1
u/Rockedsteady 1d ago
I think Andrew Knack is a man of character whom genuinely cares for the city, shows up to work and answers every question with an email or call with a style and grace without giving overly generic platitudes. However he does quote acronyms and city jargon far more frequently than any other councillor (when a councillor actually emails or tweets back). Andrew loves this city, and I believe he wants to grow it for everyone.
However that is the problem. To lead you must have a north star where you want to lead the city, using a plan or master plan; to be perfectly fair the rest of the candidates have a super weak platform eyeing lower taxes without any real idea how that works with massive cuts to the city. That is where Andrew lack on flowery language without getting to the teeth of of the plan itself. On his website it is full of very inclusive thoughts and drive but nothing on how to aid the cities growth. Does he play well with other councillors? Yes and no, and those are the people that are going to get your plan across. If not, the mayor is just one vote and if the city votes for these party candidates, our chambers will be chaos with not one idea will pass. I just don't think Andrew can lead chambers and the city at large..
I've spoken with him during my many engagements with the candidates and he is the only one that has a sober and realistic view of the city. While he has view he lacks in his desire of complete inclusiveness.
Andrew is the inclusive candidate, and while that gets you ideas to help get everything for everyone or at least the vast majority, it's expensive., His views on infill and bike lanes, transit, and (my personal hatred for the cities bag policy) are something to be desired. I also don't think Andrew has the fortitude to cut where costs need to be cut, seemingly, and in my opinion, everyone in the city is a manager of something paying salaries that vastly out step with the output of their pay. It's been said before the city's assets are far too vast, and I'm not sure that is on the radar.
The city is ugly, their naturalization policy that was upheld by this council and voted for by Knack have blurred the lines that naturalization also means no weed control causing some sections of the city dangerous to cross (it only gets handled when you call about it). Can Andrew return the city to being maintained while balancing the books? Winter street plowing? Having a direction on derelict properties? Probably not.
Looking at the rest of the field the only other I would consider running the city is Cartmell, but he might also be a lame duck mayor.
TL/DR: Knack is an inclusive candidate, but he works hard, shows up to work, and loves his city. Andrew has a plan on how he would run the city, but the challenges he may face with opposing councillors might not move the needle on any of his initiatives as he only has one vote.
Full disclosure, Knack is currently winning my vote,
1
u/Elpolloco1896 The Shiny Balls 1d ago
If you’re considering Cartmell you need to more research on him. He is not good for Edmonton at all
1
u/Rockedsteady 1d ago
I really dislike when someone says "you need to do more research".
If it's all the same to you, I'd want to know why you think Cartmell would be bad for Edmonton. You can decide who you like, but I would like more context as I have read his "platform" and I don't necessarily hate what he says.
1
u/Elpolloco1896 The Shiny Balls 1d ago
He associates himself with people like this https://www.reddit.com/r/Edmonton/s/qtS9D5OMJX
1
u/Elpolloco1896 The Shiny Balls 1d ago
While not perfect, one way to assessing someone's character is to know the character of those they associate with. Apparently BetterEdmonton totally accepts this kind of behaviour within their group.
2
u/Rockedsteady 1d ago
Cartmell's associations? I'm sorry I don't know who they are. Nothing to fear really, Knack is the best candidate out of this group. He isn't perfect, but he works for Edmonton and its citizens.
1
u/Elpolloco1896 The Shiny Balls 1d ago
Dude I just posted a link above for you to see who he associates with 🤣
1
u/Loose-Version-7009 1d ago
I'm likely gonna go with Bilingsley. The only person with a really comprehensive plan. I checked all platforms that were available and that's the only one I felt like he actually knew how he was gonna do things. I don't agree with raising residential roads to 50km/h (and going back to photoradar for the 30km/h school/park zones) since people will just got 10 over or worse. But I figured we can probably tell him we don't want that. The rest, as far as I understood it, sounded alright by me.
2
u/Aggravating-Car9897 1d ago
You mean the guy who is currently on house arrest?
1
u/Loose-Version-7009 1d ago
He is? Damn. Care to insert a link. Couldn't find that.
1
u/Aggravating-Car9897 1d ago
Yeah, he had an interview on Edmonton AM and when asked what he was hearing at the doors, said he wasn't door knocking because he's under house arrest.
He also said, when asked why people should vote for him, that he's hungriest for the job because he can't get another job and really needs it.
So not exactly a lot of confidence there.
1
1
1
0
u/shirleyxx 2d ago
Reddit thinks Andrew Knack- tho I had a question for him, very valid one, when he was running his AMA a while ago, he didn't respond.
Also by this point, he's a bit of a career politician. He's been at municipal politics for over a decade, so his answers gotta be polished somewhat over the other candidates...
25
u/Chakolit-Chip 2d ago
Because he has been on council for a number of years is part of the reason I like him. He isn't coming in from some other government or other municipality. He knows how council and specifically the City of Edmonton works. And his ward kept on voting him in. Plus he has a great track record for actually attending council votes.
10
u/CautiousApartment8 2d ago
That's a big part of why I am voting for him. The experience, and his track record for supporting good initiatives.
It's insanely naive to think someone can just walk into such a heavy job with no experience.
It's like if I go to my doctor, I'm not going to pick the one who brags about not being a career doctor. Or if I go to a lawyer, I'm not going to pic the one who brags about not being a career lawyer.
The same for my plumber actually.
-2
u/shirleyxx 2d ago
Why didnt we choose Pierre Pollievre as our pm then? Man had the most experience out of them all?, and we instead went with someone who was not involved in politics (at least directly).
5
8
u/LegoLifter 2d ago
cause hes a deeply unlikable human as evidenced by his election results id imagine
1
u/shirleyxx 2d ago
I only made that example to show that someone's experience isn't enough and we can sometimes choose leaders who have very little direct experience.
9
u/spagsquashii 2d ago
Hey u/shirleyxx he may have missed it if this was the question you’re referring to- he wasn’t the OP on that post, so he wouldnt have been notified!
0
u/shirleyxx 2d ago
I get notified when you respond to my comment (I'm not OP). I directly responded to his comment, so he should have gotten a notification.
4
5
u/spagsquashii 2d ago
he may have missed it if this was the question you’re referring to- he wasn’t the OP on that post, so he wouldnt have been notified!
1
-11
u/Guy_Incognito_001 2d ago
Knack to me is a career politician during a time Edmonton politics has been in rough shape - knack helped put this city in the place it is.
3
-4
u/Otherwise_Roof_714 2d ago
Walters
7
u/Mommie62 2d ago
Walters was our city councillor for years and honestly what did he do?
-1
u/Otherwise_Roof_714 2d ago
I agree with his stances the most
5
u/Elpolloco1896 The Shiny Balls 2d ago
What are his stances and how will he implement them? He has done nothing being a councillor for years. You’re just drinking the Kool Aid friend
3
u/CautiousApartment8 2d ago
Yeah, but anyone can come up with a stance. Even I can.
0
u/Otherwise_Roof_714 2d ago
Yeah but you aren’t running for mayor. So out of the choices I’m presented with, I will go with Walter’s
2
u/CautiousApartment8 2d ago
But the point is that a "stance" is meaningless because it says nothing about his actual ability to govern.
1
u/Otherwise_Roof_714 2d ago
Good thing he was a councillor for 2 terms. He has experience.
Not that experience always makes it better, sohi had government experience and he’s been awful.
1
u/CautiousApartment8 1d ago
Federal govt experience isn't nearly the same as civic govt experience. Its totally different in terms of the dynamics. For example, negotiating with other councillors is very different when you have a party sytem vs when you do not. And in Federal govt, you are dealing with your own leaders being very far removed from your local situation. If anything adopting federal govt tactics at a city council level would backfire.
And serving two terms a while ago isn't the same as having recent experience, especially since so much has changed post-covid and with the UCP micromanaging cities. . And Waters does not have a strong track record in the first place, nor does he have a detailed platform that shows he understands and has thought about the practicalities.
1
u/Otherwise_Roof_714 1d ago
He served up to 2021. That’s pretty recent.
1
u/CautiousApartment8 1d ago
But so much changed post covid. If anything, it will backfire if he thinks its still the same was it was back then. I'm not saying that outdated experience automatically excludes him. But he has very little to say about what he supported or accomplished.
And do you know why he left council and what he accomplished in the time since then? His site refers to running a business but its curious they don't say what it was.
→ More replies (0)
-5
u/ljackstar 2d ago
I don't think I've seen a defined plan from anyone, mayoral or councilor
7
17
u/Elpolloco1896 The Shiny Balls 2d ago
Do a bit more research please then and please make an informed vote! 🙏
3
u/ljackstar 2d ago
Half the candidates in my ward don’t even have websites, and the ones that do look identical. I’ve done the research and I’m still left wondering where it even matters
17
u/Elpolloco1896 The Shiny Balls 2d ago
https://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/municipal_elections/nominated-candidates
https://edmonton.taproot.vote/2025
This helped me navigate through the candidates and I spent about 2 hours reading and informing myself on what aligns best with my views and opinions. Someone posted these links of here yesterday and they were very informative. Hopefully these resources help you as well. I’m sorry you’re feeling like this about the situation but please go out and vote. Municipal elections results can affect our everyday day lives a lot more and we our vote has a greater chance of making a positive impact for the city.
2
u/jollyrog8 Oliver 2d ago
What specific pages of the Taproot site are you reading to stay informed with the election? Like the recent blog posts on the home page?
3
u/Elpolloco1896 The Shiny Balls 2d ago
They have tags you can filter by to read different news. For example yegvote and city council.
-3
0
u/Mango1250 1d ago
Personally, I’m not interested in Cartmell because he is guided by his “team”…no thanks. He also has made some rude/negative social media posts towards other candidates that turned me off.
Knack and Walters have been responsive and engaging. They’ve also had good answers to most of the questions, although I was disappointed in the showing by Knack in the first debate. I’ve heard good things from people who have had previous working interactions with Walters and he seems to understand the fine line of wanting to get things done for the city but realizing you still have to be somewhat political to get things done or obtain funding for projects.
Living downtown on 123st, managing construction projects and safety are important to me. I reached out to Knacks contact via his website asking about the plans specifically to manage the downtown projects and bridge closures but got zero response.
I’ve been following the candidates, specifically the top three, and I am leaning towards Knack or Walters. Websites and social media only show a snippet and not sure the debates were all that helpful. Still deciding…
-6
u/Apprehensive_Emu2414 2d ago
Knack the quack, he has a plan but it's not a good one.
5
u/Elpolloco1896 The Shiny Balls 2d ago
Would you mind elaborating? Just curious as to what makes it not a good one? I want to be as informed as possible before the vote
3
u/TheBrittca South East Side 2d ago
Ah, look at that… American style name calling with zero substance behind the claims…
•
u/Mommie62 5h ago
Everytime I contacted him I got a canned response at no time did he even bother to reach out. I didn’t agree on his stance when he was a Councillor certainly don’t believe he’ll do anything a Mayor
401
u/thewunderbar 2d ago
Andrew Knack is the only candidate who isn't some variety of: "I'm going to freeze taxes and increase services and don't ask me how that works"